Is there a generic innovation process?

Tidd, Bessant and Pavitt (2001) argue that if you look closely enough, there is a generic pattern of stages in the innovation process. Similarly, Christensen and Raynor (2003) maintain that, "Though the outcomes of successful innovations appear random, the processes that result in their success often are not."

Tidd, Bessant and Pavitt add that the pattern of stages needs to be modified according to different contexts. So what are the different contexts? And how do these affect what firms do as they manage this process?

+ Sector

Different sectors have different priorities and characteristics. For example, scale intensive or science intensive. Does R&D need to be close to, or in, the intended country-market? Can R&D be carried out far away from intended country-markets? Does R&D need to be linked to universities? Is the emphasis on science-based innovation or business/management innovation?

+ Size

Small firms don't have access to the same resources as large firms. May need more linkages.

+ National System of Innovation

Innovation in firms occurs in a broader national context that may or not be supportive to innovation. For example, financial markets, government policies, tax breaks to promote innovation, national culture etc.

+ Industry Life Cycle

Different stages of industry life cycle emphasize different aspects of innovation. For example, is the industry in a pre- or post-dominant design stage? Is the emphasis on product innovation, process innovation, channel innovation? (Channel innovation is one that is often overlooked.)

+ Degree of Novelty

Is the innovation incremental (more of the same/sustaining) or disruptive? This one is a particularly important consideration since you cannot manage incremental innovations in the same way as you manage disruptive innovations. An ability in one area is -- at the same time -- a disability in another.








innovation management in Asia