衡量创新类型的挑战:系统文献综述

IF 15.6 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Innovation & Knowledge Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jik.2024.100620
Alina Stundziene , Vaida Pilinkiene , Mantas Vilkas , Andrius Grybauskas , Mantas Lukauskas
{"title":"衡量创新类型的挑战:系统文献综述","authors":"Alina Stundziene ,&nbsp;Vaida Pilinkiene ,&nbsp;Mantas Vilkas ,&nbsp;Andrius Grybauskas ,&nbsp;Mantas Lukauskas","doi":"10.1016/j.jik.2024.100620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Measuring innovation has long posed a significant challenge and has been the subject of extensive scientific research. Various definitions and measures of innovation exist, and each measurement approach faces limitations. This research aims to conduct a systematic literature review to expose the tendencies in measuring various types of innovation, thereby revealing different approaches, challenges, and limitations. This paper systemises and groups indicators, highlighting similarities and differences in measuring various innovation types. The systematic literature review includes 172 papers from the WoS Core Collection and Scopus databases, presenting innovation indicators across nine types of innovation: product, process, service, technological, management (or organizational, administrative), business model, supply chain, green (or environmental, eco), and open innovation. The analysis reveals that researchers often employ a broad range of indicators, many of which are not even closely aligned with specific innovation types. Accordingly, this paper offers recommendations for selecting indicators tailored to innovation type.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Innovation & Knowledge","volume":"9 4","pages":"Article 100620"},"PeriodicalIF":15.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The challenge of measuring innovation types: A systematic literature review\",\"authors\":\"Alina Stundziene ,&nbsp;Vaida Pilinkiene ,&nbsp;Mantas Vilkas ,&nbsp;Andrius Grybauskas ,&nbsp;Mantas Lukauskas\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jik.2024.100620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Measuring innovation has long posed a significant challenge and has been the subject of extensive scientific research. Various definitions and measures of innovation exist, and each measurement approach faces limitations. This research aims to conduct a systematic literature review to expose the tendencies in measuring various types of innovation, thereby revealing different approaches, challenges, and limitations. This paper systemises and groups indicators, highlighting similarities and differences in measuring various innovation types. The systematic literature review includes 172 papers from the WoS Core Collection and Scopus databases, presenting innovation indicators across nine types of innovation: product, process, service, technological, management (or organizational, administrative), business model, supply chain, green (or environmental, eco), and open innovation. The analysis reveals that researchers often employ a broad range of indicators, many of which are not even closely aligned with specific innovation types. Accordingly, this paper offers recommendations for selecting indicators tailored to innovation type.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46792,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Innovation & Knowledge\",\"volume\":\"9 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 100620\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Innovation & Knowledge\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444569X24001598\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Innovation & Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444569X24001598","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,衡量创新一直是一项重大挑战,也是广泛科学研究的主题。创新的定义和衡量标准多种多样,每种衡量方法都面临着局限性。本研究旨在进行系统的文献综述,揭示衡量各类创新的趋势,从而揭示不同的方法、挑战和局限性。本文对指标进行了系统化和分组,强调了衡量各种创新类型的异同。系统性文献综述包括 WoS Core Collection 和 Scopus 数据库中的 172 篇论文,介绍了九种创新类型的创新指标:产品、流程、服务、技术、管理(或组织、行政)、商业模式、供应链、绿色(或环境、生态)和开放式创新。分析表明,研究人员经常采用范围广泛的指标,其中许多指标甚至与特定的创新类型并不密切相关。因此,本文提出了针对创新类型选择指标的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The challenge of measuring innovation types: A systematic literature review
Measuring innovation has long posed a significant challenge and has been the subject of extensive scientific research. Various definitions and measures of innovation exist, and each measurement approach faces limitations. This research aims to conduct a systematic literature review to expose the tendencies in measuring various types of innovation, thereby revealing different approaches, challenges, and limitations. This paper systemises and groups indicators, highlighting similarities and differences in measuring various innovation types. The systematic literature review includes 172 papers from the WoS Core Collection and Scopus databases, presenting innovation indicators across nine types of innovation: product, process, service, technological, management (or organizational, administrative), business model, supply chain, green (or environmental, eco), and open innovation. The analysis reveals that researchers often employ a broad range of indicators, many of which are not even closely aligned with specific innovation types. Accordingly, this paper offers recommendations for selecting indicators tailored to innovation type.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.10
自引率
12.70%
发文量
118
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Innovation and Knowledge (JIK) explores how innovation drives knowledge creation and vice versa, emphasizing that not all innovation leads to knowledge, but enduring innovation across diverse fields fosters theory and knowledge. JIK invites papers on innovations enhancing or generating knowledge, covering innovation processes, structures, outcomes, and behaviors at various levels. Articles in JIK examine knowledge-related changes promoting innovation for societal best practices. JIK serves as a platform for high-quality studies undergoing double-blind peer review, ensuring global dissemination to scholars, practitioners, and policymakers who recognize innovation and knowledge as economic drivers. It publishes theoretical articles, empirical studies, case studies, reviews, and other content, addressing current trends and emerging topics in innovation and knowledge. The journal welcomes suggestions for special issues and encourages articles to showcase contextual differences and lessons for a broad audience. In essence, JIK is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to advancing theoretical and practical innovations and knowledge across multiple fields, including Economics, Business and Management, Engineering, Science, and Education.
期刊最新文献
Configurations of resourceful and demanding attributes of organizational culture in US hotels: An innovative approach using topic modeling and fsQCA Seeding young entrepreneurs: The role of business incubators Exploring the other side of innovative managerial decision-making: Emotions Addressing barriers to big data implementation in sustainable smart cities: Improved zero-sum grey game and grey best-worst method Contribution of female inventors to technological collaboration between high-tech firms and university in close proximity: Effect of innovative firm's characteristics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1