7445_70-73_INNOVATION.qxd 16/9/08 14:16 Page 52
■INNOVATION
also collaborate to innovate within closed networks of But many hurdles still need to be overcome. European
fellow multinationals with a stake in the mobile space. studies indicate that the degree of internationalisation in
They realise that shared standards and effective innovative activities still lags well below the intensity of
co-operation to enable optimal global diffusion of the best internationalisation we can observe in sales or produc-
innovations from any one member of this innovation net- tion activities. The most internationalised companies are
work delivers significant cost benefits to the entire sector. still strongly rooted in the innovation systems of their
The global and European trend is inexorable, so home countries, instead of taking a more global, open
networking effectively with the right R&D networks for and interrelated perspective.
your kind of organisation is already very important, and Recent European economic reviews point to empirical
will be crucial in the future. Nowhere is this more evidence on changing drivers for international innovative
evident than in the European project landscape for both strategies. They suggest that although both demand
academic and commercial research organisations. motives (being close to local markets) and supply-
Through attending ICT events across Europe, one can related motives (access to key science and technology
see how the innovation paradigm has shifted towards resources) remain heavily intertwined, technology sourc-
user-centricity, and also towards open innovation. ing motives are becoming a major force for locating
This open, participative style of innovation is increas- R&D abroad.
ing the speed of innovation and probability of success, by It is a worrying sign that the EU is losing its attrac-
incorporating all stakeholders in a multi-disciplinary way tiveness for R&D investment relative to the US and
in the co-creation process. An example from the ICT other developing economies. Despite its underdeveloped
sector of this phenomenon is the OISPG group in regulatory framework for IP, China in particular is a new
Europe. It is developing a strategic roadmap for open hot spot on the list of prospective location sites for R&D.
innovation in knowledge-intensive services, including the The EU also lags far behind the US in its ability to
required technology and organisational development. attract highly skilled immigrants. The trend towards
Members of the OISPG group include senior industrial- delocalising R&D activities is increasing, but most R&D
ists coming from SAP, Intel, IBM, HP, Orange, BT, still occurs in the home market. The empirical evidence
Nokia, Philips and NESTA, all with considerable experi- suggests that although location of R&D is influenced by
ence in open innovation for products and services technology sourcing, being close to local markets remains
through international networks. important.
One of the first steps a smaller organisation can take Today, R&D in ICT is more equally distributed over
in collaborating in international research and innovation Europe than 10 or 20 years before. The strongest
could be to participate in a European framework project de-concentration could be found in telecommunications,
with international partners to whom they bring a niche which is largely due to the rise of the Nordic telecommu-
capability, and with partners who complement them in nications industry, and it may also be representative of
terms of area of operations, scale, location and market the fact that because of the open innovation already
positioning. These kinds of projects allow for open inno- referred to in this sector, innovative market power is
vation between partners protected by the terms of the being shared in order to grow the market for everyone.
consortium agreements to which all partners sign up. A second important de-centralisation trend is overseas
These projects can provide an SME with not only an research in the US. European companies increased the
introduction into a relevant innovation network, but also share of ICT patents invented in the US, as well as in
a solid means to internationalise. This is particularly true other European countries.
for those SMEs committed to building their research Which policy instruments can be used to make national
capability and reputation in Europe; that share a ‘porous’ knowledge infrastructure more attractive, both to
layer in terms of applied researchers with a third/fourth- attract new (foreign) industrial R&D investments and to
level academic institution; and that have sufficient work- retain existing ones? The analysis has indicated that an
ing capital to allow them to participate fully, providing integrated policy approach, using a variety of instru-
their working contribution to the project deliverables, ments in a consistent and coherent policy framework, is
while weathering the possibly lengthy grant payment required. Only a few countries have so far developed a
intervals over the term of the project. sufficiently integrated and coherent policy strategy to
A report sponsored by the EC, The Internationalisation attract R&D investments through addressing the issues
of Research and Development in ICT, analysed the theoret- which inhibit the enhancement of inward investments in
ical literature in this area and identified two main innovative capacity.
motives for enterprises to engage in overseas innovative It is often said that an idea without a timeline is just a
activities. The first motive is the need to adjust products dream and that some of the best ideas come from collab-
to the local needs of foreign markets and to provide orative situations. Innovation is rarely a result of solitary
global development services for customers. The second is activity. It is always better to have a solid 30pc of a gen-
the wish to access superior knowledge networks or locate uine innovation supported by a synergistic collaboration,
R&D units where systems or clusters of innovation pro- rather than 100pc of just an idea without the capacity
vide superior framework conditions. to execute.
72 Knowledge Ireland September 2008
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84