Search results

The Cyclic Innovation Model is applied to a new process for the production of fine chemicals and pharmaceuticals using a combination of ionic liquids and supercritical carbon dioxide. This multi-value innovation combines economic growth with environmental concerns and social value. The most important obstacles in the implementation of this new technology are the successful life cycle management of current production plants, the linearity of current innovation thinking, and a perceived high risk of adoption.

Innovation models should give insight into the success and failure of generating new business. Considering the high degree of complexity, it is proposed to view such models at different levels of abstraction. It is also proposed to make feedback an essential property of the process model. The result of this line of thinking is an integrated environment for the creation of new business. In this multi-layer environment, innovation is positioned as the interconnecting activity between the development of new technology and business, and the involved process model is represented by a circle of change.

In order to understand today's innovation models, we need to look at the historical development of these models. This chapter describes the succession of the R&D management generations and discusses the innovation models in each generation (Section 2). The shortcomings of these models and the requirements for improved versions are summarized in Section 3. In Section 4, we will explain why new models of innovation should be circular and multi-layered.

Donald Stokes’ approach to map the names of prominent scientists onto adiagram showing their impact on fundamental science and applied science is adopted and expanded to illustrate the dynamic interactions of the four nodes of the Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM). Tagging names of prototypical role models onto the four nodes and cycles of CIM increases the meta-level understanding of the fundamental concepts depicted by this innovation model. It also serves as a tool to validate the completeness of the model.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the future‐orientation of the Dutch innovation system and formulate recommendations to improve it.

The approach takes the form of in‐depth interviews with Dutch experts who are sufficiently independent to formulate relevant, interesting, and deviating opinions.

Dutch managers are quite reluctant to look at the future. They seem to favor the short term above the long term.

Consulting additional experts might yield more and more validated results.

Dutch companies should do more about turning a future vision into concrete decisions and actions.

It is necessary to appoint a specific Minister for Innovation and the Dutch government should support the entire innovation process and not just the beginning.

This is the first analysis of the future‐orientation of the Dutch innovation system.

Innovation requires change, i.e. change in the way we think and the way we act. These changes may be small or big. Fig. 1 schematically shows our business development view on this matter (Berkhout, 2005).

The ability to predict the market potential of product concepts at an early stage is of great importance to many organizations. In terms of Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM), this activity occurs in the lower right part of the cycle. Standard approaches to predict the market potential like concept testing and need assessment, and the assumptions that are required to use these methods will be described in Section 2. A problem is that these assumptions are usually not met in the case of products based on breakthrough technologies. Alternative approaches will be described in Section 3. How market analysis can benefit from using CIM will be discussed in the last section.

The duration of an innovation process, from new idea to new business, may take many years. This makes it necessary to incorporate a vision of the future. The Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM) shows that aspects such as multiplicity (looking at multi-fold futures) and multidimensionality (looking at different aspects of the future) should be taken into account. Looking at the different actors involved in CIM, the future should be researched with an open mind (meaning that the transition path to the future should be kept wide open) and different time horizons should be taken into account.

Thixomolding® refers to a new technology to mold a magnesium alloy in elaborate forms. The actors that introduced this technology in the Netherlands first operated on a regional level. With the support of the Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM), the innovation system was able to evolve by developing new innovations, although initially Class 1 and 2 type of innovations. In the future, the Thixomolding® innovation system will compete on a European scale, and it is expected that products will be developed for many different industries.