Angélica Pigola, P. R. Costa, Isabel Cristina Scafuto, M. Mazzieri
{"title":"Why to research about innovation is challenge","authors":"Angélica Pigola, P. R. Costa, Isabel Cristina Scafuto, M. Mazzieri","doi":"10.5585/IJI.V9I2.20549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Innovativeness! Where is its place? Among several changes around the world because the pandemic of COVID-19, where would be the real place of innovation? Looking at years ago, we majority saw a technological perspective about innovation to attend demanding of business market. Today, we are sure that innovation assume and take new places socially and economically, which demanding for researchers’ additional skills and abilities to follow the dynamism of this scientific field. Researching about innovation become a challenge because it demands to put a deep effort to booster knowledge about its taxonomy, nature, definitions, mechanisms and theorical foundations. All researchers must provoke in their studies an enhancement of these basic perspectives about innovation in terms of keeping them alive or promote radical change to raise the evolution of innovation theory. Therefore, we run through these dimensions in the editorial to encourage researchers not to forget to contribute to some of these fields of innovation research. Taxonomy of innovation is presented in various ways in the literature. Eight different types are found including replication, redefinition, forward incrementation, advance forward incrementation, redirection, reconstruction, re-initiation, and integration (Agarwal & Verma, 2019). This information is relevant to give us how innovation offer a tong of possibilities for scientific research beyond of technological perspectives as we are seen nowadays. As definition, innovation would be seen like a process of interrelated activities to introduce and apply new ideas, processes, procedures, or device and systems designed to significantly benefit the individual, the group, the organization, or wider society (Cabrilo & Grubic-Nesic, 2013; Rogers, 1995). Innovation may refer to a process in which an organization must actively develop new knowledge to solve identified problems (Nonaka, 2005) highlights that it depends heavily on knowledge (Gavrilova et al., 2018). It brings a perspective that innovation demand more than technology existence, it demands people engaged, structure available and a huge level of goodwill, cooperation and applied knowledge. The mechanisms describe in the literature adopted a multidimensional analysis, however, to synthetize we adopt March (1991) who bring two forms of innovation mechanisms; exploitative and exploratory, which means innovation could be realized through the exploitation of existing knowledge and processes, or the exploration of new knowledge and processes (March, 1991). It means, to innovate require work with existence resources and pursue new ones when they are necessary. Innovation is also considered crucial in solving problems of social and economic inclusion and in improving health and environmental outcomes (Porter & Kramer, 2011; Tracey & Stott, 2017), and in this vein we highlight the main nature of innovation to assist people and enterprises to prosper in the world. In theoretical foundation, Schumpeter’s original innovation concept is indeed broad enough and encompass different sectors such as services and manufacturing (Drejer, 2004). Most innovation studies focus on technological innovation within manufacturing, reflecting that innovation theory has its roots in a time where manufacturing was still the major economic activity. A synthesis approach of service innovation appears in a sequence bringing to additional aspects of innovation (Coombs & Miles, 2000) and more recently the social innovation has been assuming new approach towards social and economic sustainability aspects combined (Mulgan et al., 2007). Developing innovation in the scientific field certainly requires specific talents. Taxonomy aggrandizes innovation possibilities, definitions offer likelihood to foster new perspectives, nature reminds that innovation is more than technology, mechanisms inform the requirements to innovate, and theoretical foundation exist to organize the history of innovation. Therefore, knowing about these perspectives can clarify how important it is to have an open and creative mind when we are expanding the history of innovation, by writing or by creating products and/or services. Diving into this challenge of researching innovation brings in its essence a relevant vision of the alignment between science and reality, joining forces for effective advances in innovation. Going beyond current research sources, escaping academic slush, and delving deeper into knowledge in search of real advancement. So, it requires resilience, discipline, partnerships, and continuous focus.","PeriodicalId":43121,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Innovation","volume":"9 1","pages":"215-218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5585/IJI.V9I2.20549","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Innovativeness! Where is its place? Among several changes around the world because the pandemic of COVID-19, where would be the real place of innovation? Looking at years ago, we majority saw a technological perspective about innovation to attend demanding of business market. Today, we are sure that innovation assume and take new places socially and economically, which demanding for researchers’ additional skills and abilities to follow the dynamism of this scientific field. Researching about innovation become a challenge because it demands to put a deep effort to booster knowledge about its taxonomy, nature, definitions, mechanisms and theorical foundations. All researchers must provoke in their studies an enhancement of these basic perspectives about innovation in terms of keeping them alive or promote radical change to raise the evolution of innovation theory. Therefore, we run through these dimensions in the editorial to encourage researchers not to forget to contribute to some of these fields of innovation research. Taxonomy of innovation is presented in various ways in the literature. Eight different types are found including replication, redefinition, forward incrementation, advance forward incrementation, redirection, reconstruction, re-initiation, and integration (Agarwal & Verma, 2019). This information is relevant to give us how innovation offer a tong of possibilities for scientific research beyond of technological perspectives as we are seen nowadays. As definition, innovation would be seen like a process of interrelated activities to introduce and apply new ideas, processes, procedures, or device and systems designed to significantly benefit the individual, the group, the organization, or wider society (Cabrilo & Grubic-Nesic, 2013; Rogers, 1995). Innovation may refer to a process in which an organization must actively develop new knowledge to solve identified problems (Nonaka, 2005) highlights that it depends heavily on knowledge (Gavrilova et al., 2018). It brings a perspective that innovation demand more than technology existence, it demands people engaged, structure available and a huge level of goodwill, cooperation and applied knowledge. The mechanisms describe in the literature adopted a multidimensional analysis, however, to synthetize we adopt March (1991) who bring two forms of innovation mechanisms; exploitative and exploratory, which means innovation could be realized through the exploitation of existing knowledge and processes, or the exploration of new knowledge and processes (March, 1991). It means, to innovate require work with existence resources and pursue new ones when they are necessary. Innovation is also considered crucial in solving problems of social and economic inclusion and in improving health and environmental outcomes (Porter & Kramer, 2011; Tracey & Stott, 2017), and in this vein we highlight the main nature of innovation to assist people and enterprises to prosper in the world. In theoretical foundation, Schumpeter’s original innovation concept is indeed broad enough and encompass different sectors such as services and manufacturing (Drejer, 2004). Most innovation studies focus on technological innovation within manufacturing, reflecting that innovation theory has its roots in a time where manufacturing was still the major economic activity. A synthesis approach of service innovation appears in a sequence bringing to additional aspects of innovation (Coombs & Miles, 2000) and more recently the social innovation has been assuming new approach towards social and economic sustainability aspects combined (Mulgan et al., 2007). Developing innovation in the scientific field certainly requires specific talents. Taxonomy aggrandizes innovation possibilities, definitions offer likelihood to foster new perspectives, nature reminds that innovation is more than technology, mechanisms inform the requirements to innovate, and theoretical foundation exist to organize the history of innovation. Therefore, knowing about these perspectives can clarify how important it is to have an open and creative mind when we are expanding the history of innovation, by writing or by creating products and/or services. Diving into this challenge of researching innovation brings in its essence a relevant vision of the alignment between science and reality, joining forces for effective advances in innovation. Going beyond current research sources, escaping academic slush, and delving deeper into knowledge in search of real advancement. So, it requires resilience, discipline, partnerships, and continuous focus.
创新!它的位置在哪里?在新冠肺炎大流行导致的世界各地的几次变化中,哪里是真正的创新之地?回顾几年前,我们大多数人都从技术角度看待创新,以满足商业市场的需求。今天,我们确信创新在社会和经济上占据了新的位置,这需要研究人员的额外技能和能力来跟上这一科学领域的活力。对创新的研究成为一项挑战,因为它需要深入努力,以提高对其分类学、性质、定义、机制和理论基础的了解。所有的研究人员都必须在他们的研究中激发对创新的这些基本观点的增强,以保持它们的生命力,或者促进根本性的变革,从而推动创新理论的发展。因此,我们在社论中贯穿这些维度,鼓励研究人员不要忘记为其中一些创新研究领域做出贡献。创新的分类法在文献中以各种方式呈现。发现了八种不同的类型,包括复制、重新定义、正向递增、前进-正向递增、重定向、重建、重新启动和整合(Agarwal&Verma,2019)。这些信息有助于我们了解创新如何为科学研究提供超越当今技术视角的多种可能性。根据定义,创新将被视为一个相互关联的活动过程,旨在引入和应用新的想法、过程、程序或设备和系统,以显著造福个人、团体、组织或更广泛的社会(Cabrillo&Grubic-Nesic,2013;罗杰斯,1995年)。创新可能是指一个组织必须积极开发新知识以解决已发现问题的过程(Nonaka,2005),强调它在很大程度上依赖于知识(Gavrilova et al.,2018)。它带来了一种观点,即创新需要的不仅仅是技术的存在,它需要人们的参与、可用的结构以及巨大水平的善意、合作和应用知识。文献中描述的机制采用了多维分析,然而,为了综合我们采用了March(1991),他带来了两种形式的创新机制;开发性和探索性,意味着创新可以通过开发现有知识和过程或探索新知识和过程来实现(1991年3月)。这意味着,创新需要利用现有资源进行工作,并在必要时追求新的资源。创新也被认为是解决社会和经济包容问题以及改善健康和环境成果的关键(Porter&Kramer,2011;Tracey&Stott,2017),在这方面,我们强调了创新的主要性质,以帮助人们和企业在世界上繁荣发展。在理论基础上,熊彼特最初的创新概念确实足够广泛,涵盖了服务业和制造业等不同部门(Drejer,2004)。大多数创新研究都关注制造业中的技术创新,这反映出创新理论植根于制造业仍然是主要经济活动的时代。服务创新的综合方法出现在一个序列中,带来了创新的其他方面(Coombs&Miles,2000),最近,社会创新在社会和经济可持续性方面采取了新的方法(Mulgan等人,2007)。发展科学领域的创新当然需要特定的人才。分类学强化了创新的可能性,定义提供了培育新视角的可能性,自然提醒创新不仅仅是技术,机制告知了创新的要求,并且存在组织创新历史的理论基础。因此,了解这些观点可以阐明,当我们通过写作或创造产品和/或服务来拓展创新历史时,拥有开放和创造性的心态是多么重要。深入研究创新的这一挑战,本质上带来了科学与现实相一致的相关愿景,共同推动创新的有效发展。超越当前的研究来源,逃离学术泥沼,深入研究知识,寻求真正的进步。因此,它需要韧性、纪律、伙伴关系和持续关注。