Search results

This chapter provides evidence on how young technology startups are employing intellectual property (IP) protection when innovating and competing in the United States. Although researchers and teachers of university technology transfer often think only in terms of patents and the Bayh-Dole Act, this chapter suggests that adopting a more nuanced view of IP rights is appropriate. After reviewing the primary non-patent types of IP protection available in the U.S. (copyright, trademark, and trade secret), we explain that while patents are often considered the strongest protection, for some entrepreneurs – particularly those operating in the U.S. software and Internet sectors – patents may be the least important means of capturing value from innovation. We present evidence from the 2008 Berkeley Patent Survey to demonstrate that IP is used by U.S. startups in very different ways, and to different effects, across technology sectors and other company-specific characteristics. Contrary to the common assumption in academic discourse, we show that different forms of IP protection often serve as complements, rather than substitutes.

The strategic management literature emphasizes the concept of business intelligence (BI) as an essential competitive tool. Yet the sustainability of the firms’ competitive advantage provided by BI capability is not well researched. To fill this gap, this study attempts to develop a model for successful BI deployment and empirically examines the association between BI deployment and sustainable competitive advantage. Taking the telecommunications industry in Malaysia as a case example, the research particularly focuses on the influencing perceptions held by telecommunications decision makers and executives on factors that impact successful BI deployment. The research further investigates the relationship between successful BI deployment and sustainable competitive advantage of the telecommunications organizations. Another important aim of this study is to determine the effect of moderating factors such as organization culture, business strategy, and use of BI tools on BI deployment and the sustainability of firm’s competitive advantage.

This research uses combination of resource-based theory and diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory to examine BI success and its relationship with firm’s sustainability. The research adopts the positivist paradigm and a two-phase sequential mixed method consisting of qualitative and quantitative approaches are employed. A tentative research model is developed first based on extensive literature review. The chapter presents a qualitative field study to fine tune the initial research model. Findings from the qualitative method are also used to develop measures and instruments for the next phase of quantitative method. The study includes a survey study with sample of business analysts and decision makers in telecommunications firms and is analyzed by partial least square-based structural equation modeling.

The findings reveal that some internal resources of the organizations such as BI governance and the perceptions of BI’s characteristics influence the successful deployment of BI. Organizations that practice good BI governance with strong moral and financial support from upper management have an opportunity to realize the dream of having successful BI initiatives in place. The scope of BI governance includes providing sufficient support and commitment in BI funding and implementation, laying out proper BI infrastructure and staffing and establishing a corporate-wide policy and procedures regarding BI. The perceptions about the characteristics of BI such as its relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, and observability are also significant in ensuring BI success. The most important results of this study indicated that with BI successfully deployed, executives would use the knowledge provided for their necessary actions in sustaining the organizations’ competitive advantage in terms of economics, social, and environmental issues.

This study contributes significantly to the existing literature that will assist future BI researchers especially in achieving sustainable competitive advantage. In particular, the model will help practitioners to consider the resources that they are likely to consider when deploying BI. Finally, the applications of this study can be extended through further adaptation in other industries and various geographic contexts.

Drawing on examples from the more developed realms of technology transfer and other “managerial professions” (Rhoades, 1998; Rhoades & Sporn, 2002) in the academy, this paper explores possible organizational sites for housing protocols for the measurement of the social value of individual innovations in higher education (that may enter the market or and augment or precede commercial valuation), and the possible implications of those different settings for the academy (particularly in terms of motivating more faculty to engage in more innovative and entrepreneurial activities). Organizational location matters. Organizational site is related to professional perspective and to the institutional outlook that attaches to various sorts of work in the academy. Five possible sites are explored, analyzing the dimensions of such locations from the experience of other “new” activities in universities. One type of site consists of an interstitial (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004), nonacademic, support unit of managerial professionals (neither faculty nor senior level administrators), as in an Office of Technology Transfer or an Office of Institutional Research. A second type of site would be an academic unit in which measurement tasks could be performed by faculty members. A third type of site would be a hybrid model that combines elements of the first two models, as in the case of entrepreneurship units in many universities. A fourth possible type of site would be to situate such activity in an intermediating association (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004) outside of the university, which mediates between public and private sectors, and that promotes various sorts of innovation and measurement as in the case of Educause and innovative information technologies. A fifth type of site would consist of establishing university extension units in the community, to provide services more directly to constituents, as traditionally was the model for agricultural extension in land grant universities. Each of the models has its owns benefits and challenges, its implications for what sorts of professionals would be doing the work and what they would see their principal function as being, and for the impact they would have on the academic workforce and the institution's direction.

Researchers continue to seek understanding of industrialization as a state managed process. How to create and implement new industries based on advanced knowledge is on the policy agenda of many advanced nations. Measures that promote these developments include national capacity building in science and technology, the formation of technology transfer systems, and the establishment of industrial clusters. What these templates often overlook is an analysis of use. This chapter aims to increase the understanding of the processes that embed new solutions in structures from an industrial network perspective. The chapter describes an empirical study of high-technology industrialization in Taiwan that the researcher conducts to this end. The study shows that the Taiwanese industrial model is oversimplified and omits several important factors in the development of new industries. This study bases its findings on the notions that resource combination occurs in different time and space, the new always builds on existing resource structures, and the users are important as active participants in development processes.

This chapter considers the role of technology transfer intermediaries (TTIs) in the processes of innovation in networks involving universities, research and development centres, and business firms from an international perspective. A diversity of types of TTIs is recognised in terms of their particular interests in the operation of innovation processes and the conditions they impose in transactions involving intellectual property. It will identify the various objectives of sponsoring stakeholders as differentiating the missions and accountabilities and, in turn, determining the focus and roles of different types of TTIs and the interactions and networking between them, both formal and informal.

In discussion, the chapter will propose that the significance of systemic influence on the processes of technology transfer and innovation should be researched at two levels. At the micro-level of personal interactions, examining how systemic influences shape tacit knowledge transfer between and learning by individuals engaged in research and innovation processes. Second, at the level of national cultures, examining the ways in which the cultural context institutionalises patterns of innovation and technology transfer networking.

Understanding when entrants might have an advantage over an industry’s incumbent firms in developing and adopting new technologies is a question which several scholars have explained in terms of technological capabilities or organizational dynamics. This paper proposes that the value network—the context within which a firm competes and solves customers’ problems—is an important factor affecting whether incumbent or entrant firms will most successfully innovate. In a study of technology development in the disk drive industry, the authors found that incumbents led the industry in developing and adopting new technologies of every sort identified by earlier scholars—at component and architectural levels; competency-enhancing and competency-destroying; incremental and radical—as long as the technology addressed customers’ needs within the value network in which the incumbents competed. Entrants led in developing and adopting technologies which addressed user needs in different, emerging value networks. It is in these innovations, which disrupted established trajectories of technological progress in established markets, that attackers proved to have an advantage. The rate of improvement in product performance which technologists provide may exceed the rate of improvement demanded in established markets. This mismatch between trajectories enables firms entering emerging value networks subsequently to attack the industry’s established markets as well.

To provide an in-depth survey and review of innovation in library and information services (LIS) and to identify future trends in innovative research and its practical application in the field.

An in-depth review and summation of relevant literature over the last twenty years, along with an analysis and summary of the other papers in the volume.

Innovation in library and information work varies between the evolutionary and the discontinuous. A taxonomy of innovatory approaches to development and provision in the sector is provided, along with a detailed listing of the key elements of successful and not-so-successful innovative practice.

The work is dependent on existing literature rather than direct empirical work. However, because it draws together all major aspects of the topic, it has the potential to be used as a springboard for further generic studies and also specific programmes of work.

The need for innovation in LIS will be ever more pressing. The present chapter provides a necessary and rigorous overview of the necessary elements required for success in this area. It will be useful as a reference tool for intending researchers in library and information provision in a wide range of environments.

Because the chapter brings together a substantial body of information on the topic of innovation, it provides a comprehensive study of major developments and likely future trends in the field.

This chapter examines the significance of green innovation and technologies for sustainable business in Asia, focussing on the issues and challenges confronted by contemporary sustainable business models. The concept of sustainable development is introduced, which seeks to minimize negative impacts on ecosystems and preserve the environment for future generations. This chapter's methodology entails a comprehensive review of existing literature and research on green innovation, green technology, and sustainable business models in Asia. The expansion of ‘green’ energy is directly proportional to the global demand for energy resources. Understanding how green innovation influences a company's capacity for sustainable development is essential for identifying the factors that influence sustainable business models and their economic consequences. Green innovation practices encompass a variety of factors, including government regulations, preferences, supplier competence, and consumer concerns. Green technologies, such as green human resource management (HRM) practices and green innovation practices, play a crucial role in attaining sustainable development by conserving energy, protecting the environment, and enhancing business efficiency. Businesses that adopt green innovation acquire a competitive edge and enhance their performance. This chapter emphasizes the importance of green innovation research and application for business stability in Asia, where sustainability and green concepts are acquiring momentum. Customer, government, and societal pressures further emphasize the significance of green innovation in businesses. For the success of ecological innovation practices, collaboration and knowledge-sharing among various stakeholders are crucial. The adoption of green innovation practices is influenced by external environmental impacts, stakeholder pressure, and organizational support. Green technology innovation, which concentrates on resource conservation, energy efficiency, and environmental protection, is crucial to the sustainability of a business. This chapter concludes by emphasizing the importance of business sustainability in achieving environmental and economic goals and assuring sustainable corporate development. Long-term success requires an understanding of the process of value creation, delivery, and capture within sustainable business models.

For at least the last 10 years, the Russian authorities have been declaring the need to move to an innovative path of economic development. The government actively initiates and applies various instruments and measures to promote innovation. However, the effectiveness of the Russian innovation policy is still in question. The chapter examines the evolution of state policy to foster innovation growth in Russia since 2000 and describes some sets of achievements and problems for different stages of this policy. In addition to analysis of changes in the innovation sphere at the macro-level, we discuss the primary motivations and limitations at the micro-level (firm level). As a result, the critical institutional barriers to innovation-based growth are revealed. In the same time, certain successes have been achieved in some sectors, and we consider various opportunities to improve Russian technological and innovation policy.