Essays on Innovation and Technology Assignment

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Innovation and Technology" Is a perfect example of a Management Assignment. For an organization to ensure success is achieved with its innovations, barriers to innovation have to be overcome. There are two aspects of the BIG process that help breakdown the barriers to innovation. These are having a systemic innovation process. involving different and experienced staff/professionals in the decision-making process According to Loewe & Dominiquini, an organization needs the correct process in order to succeed in being innovative. The process should be explorative and should allow divergence so that the new ideas are not just a repeat of the previous ideas (2006).

The process should also create individual ideas into bigger proposals before selecting ideas for further development. BIG has a systemic innovation process with four steps of finding, developing, and selling the ideas. The steps are; Generation of ideas, winnowing, refinement and capturing value. The first step allows divergence and is also explorative. It has six primary sources of generating information all of which are different and diverse. BIG gets ideas from; Hunts, professional investors, orphaned products and ideas, internets request programs, outsourced flow, and industry outreach.

Step three changes the individual ideas into bigger proposals for target companies. The selected idea is then sold to potential companies. The other barrier is the lack of time resources or staff. BIG’ s process indicates that the company hires experienced inventors and experts (a panel of industry experts) to help in the winnowing. In order to sell the best ideas to different companies, it has to get different opinions from different staff members. By employing qualified workers, the company is eliminating the lack of staff or human resources as a barrier to innovation. BIG has a systemic innovative process that encourages innovation and ensures experts are involved in its decision-making process for successful innovation.

It also hires experienced kid industry experts to help in the development of ideas.   Part B. (Word limit: 300: Word count: 299) The similarities and differences between the Lead User process and the BIG’ s process of product development are as follows: Similarities In both processes, there is laying the foundation. BIG’ s laying of the foundation is its first step of the process which is the generation of ideas that involves the collection of ideas from six different sources. The lead user laying of the foundation is meant for identifying the types of markets a company wants to target with a product. In both processes, a team of experts is consulted in decision making.

BIG consults experts at the winnowing stage and the lead user process requires consultation of the experts at the second phase where the determination of the trends is required and at the fourth phase where the final concepts for the development of the product are designed. Both processes involve identification of new ideas from a variety of sources, involve experts in decision making, and produce refined results based on organizational concepts (Preston, 2009; Stephan & Ashok, 2001). Differences Lead user’ s research is based on target markets and levels of innovations while BIG’ s process is based on researching ideas on an already established market (the kid’ s industry).

References

BIG Idea Group, 2009, BIG Client Services, Retrieved on 20th Dec, 2009 from:

http://www.bigideagroup.net/services/

Inventors Spot, 2009, Big Idea Group, Retrieved on 21st Dec, 2009 from:

http://inventorspot.com/resources/big_idea_group_2942

BIG Idea Group (BIG) b, 2009, BIG Idea Group Social Media Release: Big Idea

Group’s Microbusiness Hunt Seeks Innovative Products for New Ventures, Retrieved on 21st Dec, 2009 from:

http://www.pitchengine.com/bigideagroup/big-idea-groups-microbusiness-hunt-seeks-innovative-products-for-new-ventures/35135/

Christensen, C., Layton, M. and Michael, O., (2000), Meeting the Challenge of

Disruptive Change, Harvard Business Review, pp.66-76.

InnoCentive, 2009, All About Innocentives, Retrieved on 21st Dec, 2009 from:

http://www.innocentive.com/mission-and-values.php

InnoCentive b, 2009, How InnoCentive Works, Retrieved on 21st Dec, 2009 from:

http://www.globaldevelopmentcommons.net/files/How%20InnoCentive%20Works.pdf

Loewe, P. & Dominiquini, J., 2006, Overcoming the Barriers to Effective Innovation,

Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 24-31, Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Retrieved on 20th Dec, 2009 from: http://www.ttmp.com/pm/Overcoming%20barriers.pdf.

OSRI, 2009, Oil-spill-response Prize and InnoCentive FAQs: What services does

InnoCentive Provide?, Retrieved on 21st Dec, 2009 from:

http://www.pws-osri.org/programs/prize/InnoCentive%20FAQ.pdf

Preston, D., (2009), Step by Step Through the lead User Process, Global Sustainable ICT

Management. Retrieved on 21st Dec, 2009 from:

http://homepages.uel.ac.uk/u0329296/stepbystep.html.

Stephan, T. & Ashok, N., 2001, Product and Process Concept Development Via the Lead

User Method, Technology and Innovation Management, McGraw-Hill Irwin, Boston, pp. 509-516.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us