创新检查的经验:对丹麦46家公司的案例研究

Jørn Johansen, Mads Christiansen
{"title":"创新检查的经验:对丹麦46家公司的案例研究","authors":"Jørn Johansen, Mads Christiansen","doi":"10.1002/spip.431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During a 2-year period DELTA has performed 46 Innovation Checks in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) with great success. In addition to reported benefits experienced by the companies, the Innovation Checks have given us extensive knowledge of the companies' difficulties in having success with innovation in relation to the following five topics: product, processes, production, eBusiness (use of IT for business proposes), and marketing. \n \nThis paper presents the method behind the Innovation Checks and conclusions reached from this important project carried out in cooperation with the Confederation of Danish Industry (DI). \n \nThe main conclusions are: \nCompanies don't have the necessary time to invest in innovation. \nCompanies lack a business strategy that includes innovation. \nWithout the time and focus, innovation will be ad-hoc rather than a mastered discipline. \nAn Innovation Check does help companies with innovation here and now, but without a mastered innovation process it is likely to become a one-off event. \n \n \n \nThis paper presents our experience from data and observations collected during the Innovation Checks. As the population is fairly small (46 companies) (Figure 1) the results are to be taken as observations and guidelines rather than scientific facts. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.","PeriodicalId":379836,"journal":{"name":"Softw. Process. Improv. Pract.","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experience with Innovation Checks: a case study with 46 companies in Denmark\",\"authors\":\"Jørn Johansen, Mads Christiansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/spip.431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During a 2-year period DELTA has performed 46 Innovation Checks in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) with great success. In addition to reported benefits experienced by the companies, the Innovation Checks have given us extensive knowledge of the companies' difficulties in having success with innovation in relation to the following five topics: product, processes, production, eBusiness (use of IT for business proposes), and marketing. \\n \\nThis paper presents the method behind the Innovation Checks and conclusions reached from this important project carried out in cooperation with the Confederation of Danish Industry (DI). \\n \\nThe main conclusions are: \\nCompanies don't have the necessary time to invest in innovation. \\nCompanies lack a business strategy that includes innovation. \\nWithout the time and focus, innovation will be ad-hoc rather than a mastered discipline. \\nAn Innovation Check does help companies with innovation here and now, but without a mastered innovation process it is likely to become a one-off event. \\n \\n \\n \\nThis paper presents our experience from data and observations collected during the Innovation Checks. As the population is fairly small (46 companies) (Figure 1) the results are to be taken as observations and guidelines rather than scientific facts. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.\",\"PeriodicalId\":379836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Softw. Process. Improv. Pract.\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Softw. Process. Improv. Pract.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/spip.431\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Softw. Process. Improv. Pract.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/spip.431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

在两年的时间里,DELTA在中小企业(SME)中进行了46次创新检查,取得了巨大的成功。除了报告的公司所经历的利益外,创新检查还使我们广泛了解了公司在以下五个主题方面取得创新成功的困难:产品,流程,生产,电子商务(使用IT进行业务建议)和营销。本文介绍了创新检查背后的方法以及与丹麦工业联合会(DI)合作开展的这一重要项目得出的结论。主要结论是:公司没有必要的时间投资于创新。企业缺乏包括创新在内的商业战略。没有时间和重点,创新将是临时的,而不是一门精通的学科。创新检查确实可以帮助企业进行创新,但如果没有掌握创新过程,它很可能成为一次性事件。本文介绍了我们在创新检查期间收集的数据和观察的经验。由于人口相当少(46家公司)(图1),结果将被视为观察和指导方针,而不是科学事实。版权所有©2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Experience with Innovation Checks: a case study with 46 companies in Denmark
During a 2-year period DELTA has performed 46 Innovation Checks in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) with great success. In addition to reported benefits experienced by the companies, the Innovation Checks have given us extensive knowledge of the companies' difficulties in having success with innovation in relation to the following five topics: product, processes, production, eBusiness (use of IT for business proposes), and marketing. This paper presents the method behind the Innovation Checks and conclusions reached from this important project carried out in cooperation with the Confederation of Danish Industry (DI). The main conclusions are: Companies don't have the necessary time to invest in innovation. Companies lack a business strategy that includes innovation. Without the time and focus, innovation will be ad-hoc rather than a mastered discipline. An Innovation Check does help companies with innovation here and now, but without a mastered innovation process it is likely to become a one-off event. This paper presents our experience from data and observations collected during the Innovation Checks. As the population is fairly small (46 companies) (Figure 1) the results are to be taken as observations and guidelines rather than scientific facts. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信