The Obscure Process of Innovation Assessment: A Report of an Industrial Survey

A. C. A. França, E. Peixoto, Bruno Falcão, Cleviton V. F. Monteiro
{"title":"The Obscure Process of Innovation Assessment: A Report of an Industrial Survey","authors":"A. C. A. França, E. Peixoto, Bruno Falcão, Cleviton V. F. Monteiro","doi":"10.1145/2961111.2962634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context - Software companies should track innovation as rigorously as core business operations. For that, the assessment of innovation projects is a critical process, in particular to make their innovation initiatives funded. Objective - In this article, we aim to evaluate the need for more practical measurement tools, by checking the agreement of very experienced analysts, from the industry, about the innovation degree of four actual software projects. Method - We conducted a survey with eight business analysts, using a combination of the Three Horizons Model and the Gartner's Hyper Cycle for emerging technologies as a frame of reference. Results - In general, the level of agreement about the innovation degree in the projects was very low. Looking at the cases in isolation, it is possible to suggest reasons for the low level of agreement between the evaluators. Conclusions - Our data support the fact that innovation is an activity difficult to characterize and even more difficult to measure, and the need for practices to achieve better intersubjective agreement for innovation assessment became evident in this work.","PeriodicalId":208212,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2961111.2962634","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context - Software companies should track innovation as rigorously as core business operations. For that, the assessment of innovation projects is a critical process, in particular to make their innovation initiatives funded. Objective - In this article, we aim to evaluate the need for more practical measurement tools, by checking the agreement of very experienced analysts, from the industry, about the innovation degree of four actual software projects. Method - We conducted a survey with eight business analysts, using a combination of the Three Horizons Model and the Gartner's Hyper Cycle for emerging technologies as a frame of reference. Results - In general, the level of agreement about the innovation degree in the projects was very low. Looking at the cases in isolation, it is possible to suggest reasons for the low level of agreement between the evaluators. Conclusions - Our data support the fact that innovation is an activity difficult to characterize and even more difficult to measure, and the need for practices to achieve better intersubjective agreement for innovation assessment became evident in this work.
创新评估的模糊过程:一项产业调查报告
软件公司应该像跟踪核心业务运营一样严格跟踪创新。为此,对创新项目的评估是一个关键的过程,特别是要为他们的创新计划提供资金。在这篇文章中,我们的目标是通过检查行业中非常有经验的分析师对四个实际软件项目的创新程度的一致意见,来评估对更实用的度量工具的需求。方法-我们与8位商业分析师进行了一项调查,使用三个地平线模型和高德纳新兴技术的超周期作为参考框架。结果-总体而言,对项目创新程度的认同程度非常低。孤立地看待这些案例,有可能提出评估者之间意见不一致的原因。结论-我们的数据支持这样一个事实,即创新是一种难以描述的活动,甚至更难衡量,并且在这项工作中,实现更好的创新评估主体间协议的实践需求变得明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信