Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

From capacity building to technological transformation Julian Pineres R. McS IIA, SPRU, University of Sussex PhD (c), CENTRIM, University of Brighton 11/25/10.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "From capacity building to technological transformation Julian Pineres R. McS IIA, SPRU, University of Sussex PhD (c), CENTRIM, University of Brighton 11/25/10."— Presentation transcript:

1 From capacity building to technological transformation Julian Pineres R. McS IIA, SPRU, University of Sussex PhD (c), CENTRIM, University of Brighton 11/25/10 Políticas de CTI e instrumentos de Transferencia Tecnológica hacia las PYME CURSO DE SISTEMAS DE INOVACCIÓN Y POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS

2 OUTLINE 1. Technological opportunities: problems of availability and accessibility 2. Insights behind firms’ technological learning and transformation 3. A view of capacity building and technological transformation 4. Technological trajectories and regimens: one fit all? 5. Concluding remarks 11/25/102

3 1. Technological opportunities: problems of availability and accessibility 11/25/103

4 Learning dynamics in organizations: The importance to understand how organizations learn in a given TS Universities Knowledge sources and labour supply Public bodies for the promotion of S&T + I Focal Firms Research result Financial flows Staff Financial flows Consulting and sciencitifc staff Financial flows Technological suppliers Research centres and specialise service business (Technical and managerial) Investments on specialise K&R Financial flows 1 42 Venture Capital Large firms - MNs Financial flows Returns Plus - value Staff Financial flows Research results Staff Consulting and scientific staff Source: Adapted from Orsenigo, 2004

5 Technological opportunities: knowledge production and diffusion in a given TS Knowledge from whoKnowledge diffusion mechanismType of knowledge essentially produced Governance mechanism University based- knowledgeLabour mobility Published papers Licenses Specialised formal training Direct Interventions (consultancy?) Joint / contract R&D Spin -off Non – market research based knowledge Networks Technological and Research centre based - knowledge Licenses Specialised non -formal training Direct Interventions (consultancy) Joint / contract R&D Spin -off Non – market research based knowledge Commercial applied knowledge Market (through third parties) Networks Consultancy groups based- knowledge Specialised formal training Contract assistant for technical and managerial implementations Blue print and operating instructions Commercial applied knowledge Market Technological suppliers based- knowledge Embodied technology and design Blue print and operating instructions Commercial applied knowledge Market Large firm based-knowledgeLabour mobility Licenses Non market applied Knowledge Hierarchies Networks Supplier costumer relation based - knowledge Commercial interaction Embodied technology and design Blue print and operating instructions Non market applied knowledge Hierarchies Sources: the author

6 Industry and Innovation: market and technology I x Industry-specific knowledge: Routines and managerial specific knowledge) T x MxMx Learning schemes -Imitation -Spin off from large firms -Spin off from Universities -Labour mobilization dynamics T x1 M x 1 Learning schemes (Tx1 - Mx1) -Training -Technological acquisition -Labour mobilization dynamics -Technical implementation -E&D – R&D Technical specific knowledge Market specific knowledge

7 A learning and capabilities perspective on Innovation studies 11/25/107 Studies on innovation have emphasized that: Learning and innovation differ substantially across industries and size of firms. The process is as important as the outcome to promote innovation External knowledge sourcing in general and collaboration in particular is essential to upgrade technological capabilities. One of the fundamental difference among firms within industries with regards to innovativeness is the firm innovation behaviour  Searching attitude  Perception of the technological alternatives and logical future developments  Sources of information, knowledge and resources for technological change  Expectations about returns of R&D  Appropriability conditions

8 Reasons to understand technological accessibility  It is important to understand the learning dynamics when outside and inside knowledge interact  It is important to understand the mechanisms that firms use to promote technological change.  It is important to understand which capacities the organizations needs and have in a given technological context  Which mechanisms are better used for each stage of capacity building Why?  Its important to allocate resources accurately  Its is important to increase the probabilities in which the effectiveness of technological transformation happen in organizations 10/12/10 8

9 2. Insights behind firms’ technological learning and transformation 11/25/109

10 Defining the complexity of learning in organizations: key issues and main arguments  Degree of knowledge explicitness – Codified and tacit knowledge (e.g. Nonaka, 1991; Zander and Kogut, 1995) – Knowledge ambiguity (e.g. Szulanski, 1996; Simonin, 1999)  Knowledge orientation process – Single and double loop learning (Argyris, C, 1974; 1976) – Exploitation and exploration (March, 1991)  Knowledge integration from external sources: inter-organizational learning – Governance and Trust (Mayer et al, 1995; Nooteboom et al, 1997; Roussau et al, 1998) – knowledge acquisition and knowledge accessing (e.g. Grant, 1996) – Methods for learning external knowledge, passive, active, interactive (Lane and Lutbakin, 1998) – Learning from a partner, Learning about the partner, Learning with the partner, (inkpen and Tsang, 2007; Inkpen and Currall, 2004) 10/12/10 The interrelated dynamics of intra-and inter-organizational learning processes in the context of co-funded R&D alliances 10

11 Defining the complexity of learning in organizations: key issues and main arguments  Level of learning and knowledge integration process: from the individual to the organization – Information distribution, interpretation and organizational memory (Hubert, 1991) – Preparation, acquisition, assimilation and improvement (Kim, 1997) – 41 framework: a.intuiting, interpreting, b. interpreting, integrating, c. integrating, institutionalizing (Crossan et al, 1999)  Deliberative and non-deliberative learning – Learning by doing (e.g. Epple, Argote and Devadas, 1991) – Intent to learn (Chen et al, 2003; Tsang, 2002 ) – learning strategy (Mintsberg, 1990; Inkpen and Tsang, 2007) – Wiliness and ability to learn (Lin et al, 2009)  Learning and degree of change: driver or enabler? – Capabilities transformation: retirement, refreshment, replication, redeployment, recombination and renewal (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003) – Technical fitness (Teece, 2007) – Modification of routines (e.g.Feldman and Pentland, 2003; Feldman, 2000) 10/12/10 The interrelated dynamics of intra-and inter-organizational learning processes in the context of co-funded R&D alliances 11

12 3. A view of capacity building and technological transformation 11/25/1012

13 11/25/1013 Modes of knowledge sourcing Knowledge orientation process Type of component Knowledge Features of knowledge based production: the framework foundations

14 Learning dynamics in organizations: The importance to understand how organizations learn 11/25/1014 It refers to the efforts that organizations make to enable a learning process. It might be considered as learning process interface. They are collective activities through which the organization systematically generates and modifies its operating routines in pursuit of improved effectiveness. (Zollo and Winter (2002). A similar concept was defined by Nelson and Winter (1982), they identified the learning schemes as ‘search routines’. Generic examples: Learning schemes (construct of learning) Specialized training Engineered and scientific expertise Equipment and license acquisition: Technical and Managerial implementation process R&D and E&D

15 11/25/1015 ‘Learning schemes’ can also be defined as the underlying mechanisms for capacity building (Narayanan et al, 2009). Learning dynamics in organizations: The importance to understand how organizations learn R&D and E&D Specialized training Engineered and scientific expertise Equipment and license acquisitions Technical and Managerial implementation process Learning schemes 1 1 Interactive Influence Modes of knowledge sourcing 2 2 Passive Active Governance Complementarities 3 3 Reflection Assimilation Integration Learning-knowledge process 4 4 scope Knowledge Resources Capabilities Routines Outcome Efficiency Efficacy Innovativeness Strategy Structure Individual agency Source: the author Explicatory factors 5 5 Effectiveness

16 From learning to capacity building 11/25/1016 Modes of knowledge sourcing PassiveActiveInteractive Knowledge orientation process Explorative Inventive capacity (IC)Absorptive capacity (AC) Exploitative Formative capacity (FC) Transformative capacity (TC)Connective capacity (CC) Source: the author adapted from Lichtenthaler and Lichtenthaler, 2009 and Lane and Lubatkin, 1998 Organizations over their lifetime develop different levels of capacities according to the effective use of a variety of “learning schemes” Capacity it might be defined as the firm’s ability to effectively combine its internal knowledge with the external one to enhance and/or modify their operation routines. The external knowledge enter to the organization accordingly to its attitude to it.

17 Dimensions of the technological transformation: effectiveness and consistency 15 Learning schemeExpected ScopeExpected OutcomeCapacity level Engineering expertise Internal practice Training Enhancing the knowledge in practice of doing something (learning by doing) EfficiencyFormative Capacity External training Hired engineered or professional expertise Consultancy for planning the tech. orientation Technical and managerial Implementation Product design modifications Equipment acquisition Enhancing of capabilities. There are changes whether on the existing knowledge or resources Efficacy (productivity – cost efficiency – value added) Transformative capacity Collaborative Technical and managerial implementation Collaborative product design modifications The collaborative use of equipment and laboratories Connective capacity internal scientific expertise Highly specialized equipment licenses acquisition Hired scientific expertise Contract research with Universities or research centres E&D / R&D Movement towards other capabilities and routines InnovativenessInventive capacity Collaborative E&D / R&D Collaborative acquisition of highly specialized equipment Collaborative acquisition of licences Movement towards other capabilities and routines InnovativenessAbsorptive capacity Source: the author

18 11/25/1018 Towards enhancing the core competence: Formative capacities Towards Market Opportunity driven: Transformative and connective capacity Towards strategic focus: inventive capacity Towards innovative oriented: absorptive capacity Direction of the technological transformation Strategic focus Innovative oriented Core competence Market opportunity driven Market diversity Technological heterogeneity Related Divergence RelatedDivergence *Dashed lines represent possible trajectories ???

19 From learning to capacity building and technological transformation 11/25/1019 Source: the author Learning schemes Years Engineering expertise Internal practice Training External training Hired engineered or professional expertise Consultancy for planning the tech. orientation Technical and managerial Implementation Equipment acquisition Increase in the technological learning efforts Core competence Market opportunity driven Absorptive capacity internal scientific expertise Highly specialized equipment licenses acquisition Hired scientific expertise Contract research with Universities or research centres E&D / R&D Strategic focus Collaborative E&D / R&D Collaborative acquisition of highly specialized equipment Collaborative acquisition of licences Innovative oriented Realize capacity Potential capacity Realize capacity Potential capacity Connective capacity Collaborative Technical and managerial implementation Collaborative product design modifications The collaborative use of equipment and laboratories Formative Capacity Transformative capacity Inventive capacity T0T0 T o + i T1T1 T 1’ T 1 + i T2T2 T 2 + i T3T3 T 3 + i n Explicatory features (multilevel framework) Individual related feature 1.Agency Organization related feature 1.Structure 2.Strategy Learning scheme related feature 1.Governance 2.Complementarities Explicatory features (multilevel framework) Individual related feature 1.Agency Organization related feature 1.Structure 2.Strategy Learning scheme related feature 1.Governance 2.Complementarities Dimensions of technological transformation 1.Direction. Technological heterogeneity and market diversity 2.Consistency of the technological learning trajectory 3.The pace and rate of the transition process 4.Effectiveness of the technological learning trajectory (knowledge assimilation and transformation) Dimensions of technological transformation 1.Direction. Technological heterogeneity and market diversity 2.Consistency of the technological learning trajectory 3.The pace and rate of the transition process 4.Effectiveness of the technological learning trajectory (knowledge assimilation and transformation)

20 3. Technological trajectories and regimens: one fit all? 11/25/1020

21 SYSTEMIC RATIONALITIES FROM A NON- SYSTEMIC APPROACH  MAKE SENSE OF THE STAGE OF THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF AN SPECIFIC TECHNOLOGICAL AREA…..  Technological opportunities  Research institutes and Universities capacities  MAKE SENSE OF THE EXTENT OF THE DEGREE OF TURBULANCE OF THE INDUSTRY….  Different technological regimes pursue different paths to innovation  Technological trajectory  Firms’ capacities  MAKE SENSE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL CONDITIONS….  Mitigating failures of the innovation system 11/25/1021

22 SYSTEMIC RATIONALITIES FROM A NON- SYSTEMIC APPROACH COMPLEMENTARY CAPACITIES AND ROLE OF  The Universities….  The Research Centres…..  The public bodies….. 11/25/1022 An understanding of the subject is as important as the understanding of the object for change……

23 Technological landscape: appropriability conditions opportunities, agents capacities and their interactions 11/25/10 Which are the conditions of the technological system when it is at its initial stage of development? Low level of technological opportunities Uncertain direction of the technological trajectory Overlapping functions (TS functions) Low levels of learning capacities High degree of turbulence (entrances and deaths) Low concentration / dispersion Price driven competence

24 11/25/1024 Concluding remarks: some reflections to discuss  Within the Colombian context many technological systems (TS) are in a initial stages of development. Therefore those TS lagged behind from the technological frontier. S&T and Innovation systems should be technological oriented? (industry?)  Under the previous circumstances actors are at different levels of capacities. This level of diversity implies some kind of flexibility from the policy perspective and understanding of different type of management practices.  Which kind of incentives should be undertaken under this conditions? which are the expected outcomes and scopes? Incentives for capacity building? (to whom? firms, universities, research centres?). E.g Collaborative programs may successfully leverage some firms technological transformation? (behaviour) in some industries but not that of others.  This perspective also suggests that firms within a giving industry are at different development stages having also different levels of capacities. Which capacities should be addressed from a public body? Who should support the initial stages of capacity building (e.g. Formative and transformative capacities).  From a policy perspective this approach suggests that innovation support programs should differentiate also the expected outcome and scope from agent to agent while there are certain level of standard capacities?. The contribution of a giving actor is different within the system, however from an strategic point of view a public body should take into account a systemic perspective.


Download ppt "From capacity building to technological transformation Julian Pineres R. McS IIA, SPRU, University of Sussex PhD (c), CENTRIM, University of Brighton 11/25/10."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google