Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine conditions for and initial results of granting state aid for innovation clusters in the Republic of Serbia.

This paper is based on primary research data and secondary sources of scientific information. Due to interpretation of legal acts, a normative method was adopted.

There is a legal and institutional framework for granting state aid to innovation clusters in the Republic of Serbia. It is important because state aid distorts competition and may reduce economic growth if it is not controlled and moderate. Serbian state aid for innovation clusters is more than moderate so less than 1 per cent of Serbian businesses are joined within innovation clusters.

The legality and effects of granted state aid are not explored. Requests for access to agreements signed with and reports submitted by beneficiaries remained unanswered.

Few studies examine the topics discussed in this paper; legal issues concerning government intervention's effect on the economy are often neglected. This paper explores legal regulations, procedures, and confinements of state aid for innovation clusters as a measure of economic policy.

Research models and practices change rapidly. While evidence of such changes includes cross-campus collaborations and multi-authored scholarship, faculty development opportunities also signal what is to come. In this case study, authors representing diverse disciplines examine what faculty development programs reveal about the future of academic research. The authors offer an analysis of faculty support programs across the country as a foundation, and then provide an examination of initiatives in place at their four-year regional comprehensive institution in the United States. The authors then report on the outcomes of these programs for research productivity, with a focus on opportunities that were available to all faculty across the university. Finally, the authors offer perspective on the future of academic research based on findings from examining these programs. The authors suggest that the future of research will focus on (1) collaborative design(s) of research-related support, (2) support structures and programs that encourage and facilitate cross-campus and interdisciplinary research collaborations and sharing, (3) incentive for integrating areas of research with teaching and service, and relatedly (4) programs that encourage faculty to span academic research with industry or community partnerships and collaborations, especially ones that can generate revenue or produce future research, development, or funding streams.

All three Baltic countries – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – share common features, similar history, and took similar steps to establish an external evaluation of their science base. Even though the three countries have similarities in terms of their geography, size, economic structure, development and demography, they demonstrate differences, for example Estonia is often considered to be ahead of Latvia and Lithuania in terms of the economy and development. So, do the Baltic countries share similarities or differences from the point of research management and administration?

This study aims to investigate the evolution of eight Asian countries’ innovation policy instruments during three economic development phases. Another goal is to examine common and different policy instruments of Japan, Korea and China, which have already reached the post-catch-up stage, to provide lessons to less-developed and developing Asian countries.

This study uses a qualitative research methodology, in particular a narrative approach. For triangulation, this paper uses a wide range of secondary data. The authors selected eight Asian countries by using various criteria, including income level and market size, and examined each country in terms of innovation performance and evolution of innovation policy instruments. The evolution of innovation policy in each country is investigated during three economic development phases: pre-industrialization, industrialization and catch-up and post-catch-up.

The findings show, first, that a higher research and development (R&D) expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), R&D activities dominated by private research organizations and more vigorous patent activities by residents than nonresidents are the most critical factors for becoming a high-income country. Second, innovation policy should be suitable for attaining aims, which are different at each economic development stage. Third, seven lessons from three prosperous Asian countries are crucial for economic development: securing political stability; increasing R&D expenditures; facilitating the acquisition, diffusion and internalization of technology; encouraging government–industry–university collaborations; using the selection and concentration strategy; changing the governmental role from regulator to facilitator; and establishing a legal framework.

It is difficult to find research that systematically compares three or more Asian countries’ innovation policies over the long term. This study fills this gap and helps scholars and field workers increase their understanding of innovation policy in eight Asian countries. It also contributes to providing lessons for practitioners that could help developing and less-developed Asian countries establish a suitable innovation policy for each economic development stage.

The purpose of this paper is to devise a scorecard providing a suite of indicators that give innovation managers a value-oriented, fast but holistic view of open innovation (OI) adoption in their organisations.

The theoretical framework is built after a thorough review of OI literature. The managerial tool is developed from the theoretical framework, constructing indicators that can be easily generated by processing data within information systems of companies.

The scorecard provides a multi-dimensional conceptualisation of OI adoption in organisations, investigating environment, collaboration and importing/exporting mechanisms. Six indicators are defined: innovation funds, OI employees, collaboration costs, collaboration revenues, importing costs and exporting revenues.

The devised tool enables the assessment of openness through objective and available data, systematically updated within the information systems of companies and, hence, easily exploitable by innovation managers. In order to meet such conditions, several aspects emerged from the literature review, although relevant, were left out.

Three dashboards can be derived by exploiting the information available in the scorecard. With the use of such tools innovation managers can both assess the open behaviours of their companies – identifying the trajectories to follow in order to improve performance – and benchmark different OI practices either inside or outside the organisation.

The scorecard allows innovation managers both to carry out a cost-benefit analysis, evaluating if their organisations are effectively and efficiently generating outputs from OI with the committed resources, and to identify a virtuous circle between the company’s commitment and reputation, joint development, and innovation market opportunities.

Despite the support of digital technology, there is a high degree of ambiguity and fluidity in the boundaries of digital products. This is because the addition of distributed innovation entities has an impact on the scope and scale of digital product innovation. Building upon the knowledge orchestration perspective, this study aims to construct a theoretical model, comprising distributed innovation, knowledge reorchestration and digital product innovation performance, and discuss the moderating roles of intellectual property protection and knowledge exchange activities.

Using a sample of 362 Chinese science and technology enterprises, the scholarship’s framework and hypotheses were tested using regression and bootstrap analysis.

The results confirm that distributed innovation positively enhances enterprises’ digital product innovation performance; knowledge reorchestration plays a partial mediating role in the linkage amongst distributed innovation and digital product innovation performance; and intellectual property protection and knowledge exchange activities negatively and positively moderate the mediating role of knowledge reorchestration amongst distributed innovation and digital product innovation performance, respectively.

This empirical scholarship explores the effect mechanism of intellectual property protection, knowledge exchange activities and knowledge reorchestration on the linkage amongst distributed innovation and digital product innovation performance. This paper expands the theoretical application of distributed innovation, knowledge orchestration and other related theories in the context of the digital economy and further provides a policymaking reference for the improvement of enterprises’ digital product innovations.

This study aims to investigate the impact of brain drain on government AI readiness in EU member countries, considering the distinctive governance characteristics, macroeconomic conditions and varying levels of ICT specialists.

The research employs a dynamic panel data model using the System Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) to analyze the relationship between brain drain and government AI readiness from 2018 to 2022. The study incorporates various control variables such as GDP per capita growth, government expenditure growth, employed ICT specialists and several governance indicators.

The results indicate that brain drain negatively affects government AI readiness. Additionally, the presence of ICT specialists, robust governance structures and positive macroeconomic indicators such as GDP per capita growth and government expenditure growth positively influence AI readiness.

Major limitations include the focus on a specific region of countries and the relatively short period analyzed. Future research could extend the analysis with more comprehensive datasets and consider additional variables that might influence AI readiness, such as the integration of AI with emerging quantum computing technologies and the impact of governance reforms and international collaborations on AI readiness.

The theoretical value of this study lies in providing a nuanced understanding of how brain drain impacts government AI readiness, emphasizing the critical roles of skilled human capital, effective governance and macroeconomic factors in enhancing AI capabilities, thereby filling a significant gap in the existing literature.

This research fills a significant gap in the existing literature by providing a comprehensive analysis of the interaction between brain drain and government AI readiness. It uses control variables such as ICT specialists, governance structures and macroeconomic factors within the context of the European Union. It offers novel insights for policymakers to enhance AI readiness through targeted interventions addressing brain drain and fostering a supportive environment for AI innovation.

Case information was mainly acquired through interviews with Richard Gammans, chief operating officer. Dr Gammans was a visiting professor at Fayetteville State University for a year, and two of the case authors developed personal friendships with Richard. Interviews were conducted over a two-year period as the accelerator got started. In addition, one author conducted a team-building session with the management team and one of the bio-startup researchers. An interview was also conducted with Clayton Duncan, chief executive officer, to gain his agreement with developing the case.

The Accele website included a write-up on each of the pharmaceutical startup companies. The write-up included a company summary, description of the science (disease and cure), the size of the market, results from testing, regulatory considerations and intellectual property. A literature review was conducted as the basis for the information on the pharmaceutical industry.

This case is about a biopharmaceutical accelerator founded in 2011 by two senior executives with experience in both large pharmaceutical companies and running biotech startup companies. The founders were successful in raising capital to start their first venture capital fund which they used to invest in four biotech startups. All four startups were working in very different disease areas. For example, one developed a drug to help with hearing loss that the department of defense was funding. Another of the startups discovered drug candidates that attack antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Biopharmaceutical accelerators were relatively new. They differed from business incubators because they invest in the startups and provide operational support, but the degree of support provided varies across accelerators. The Accele BioPharma accelerator operated in virtual, network type of organization, and Accele BioPharma provided primary strategic and operational management for the startups. The challenge in this case is to identify how the leaders managed the virtual network, and what additional resources were needed so that the management team could expand their ability to assist startups to get drugs approved by the food and drug administration.

This case is suitable recommended for undergraduate/graduate strategy, undergraduate/graduate organizational behavior, entrepreneurship and health-care management courses.

The objective of this chapter is to suggest some ideas for creating an ecosystem that can foster Global Services based on long-term public policies. These policies should prioritize the creation and attraction of talent, the development of telecommunications infrastructure, the encouragement of entrepreneurial ventures, investment in innovation, and alignment of tax regulations, among other strategies.