C10326 Creative Intelligence And Innovation: Assessment Answer

Open innovation and co innovation in companies

Today in many companies, there is a huge hunger for social innovations. All aspects of the social sphere need updating. Traditionally, it was considered and considered that the social sphere is very conservative. People get used to living in certain conditions and are afraid of change even where they are most needed (Bogers, Chesbrough, and Enkel, 2016). Secondly, almost all innovations in the social sphere are accepted without taking into account the positions of the citizens themselves. Unfortunately, we have not learned how to interact with people and prepare them for innovative changes.

For example, how difficult is the process of transition to electronic media. Just because many, especially older people, do not have the simplest computer skills. Sometimes they do not even know how to turn it on. Therefore, the computer literacy program for the elderly has not come about by chance. Until we teach citizens how to use the benefits of innovation, we will meet on their part to resist any changes (Chesbrough, 2017).

Over the past three years, about 200 projects have passed through the Center for Social Innovations. But one of the first areas in which innovative changes began was healthcare.

Implications for strategy and the business model – where is value being created and captured

Innovations in the field of health care are carried out in the form of the creation of new technologies, medical devices, drugs, medical methods, or organizational processes that are being introduced into the production of goods or the provision of services. From the perspective of innovation management, it is advisable to distinguish the following types of innovations in the field of health care (Chesbrough, Vanhaverbeke, and West, 2014):

Medical technological innovations that are associated with the emergence of new methods (methods, techniques) for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment based on existing drugs (equipment) or new combinations of their use;

Organizational innovations that implement an effective restructuring of the health care system, improving the organization of labor of staff and org. management structure. Economic innovations that ensure the introduction of modern methods of planning, financing, stimulating and analyzing the activities of healthcare institutions (Chesbrough, and Brunswicker, 2014).

Information and technological innovations aimed at automating the processes of collecting, processing, analyzing information flows in the industry;

Medico-pharmaceutical, medical-technical innovations, which are a type of medical technological innovations, but suggesting, as an imperative, the use of new medicines (technical systems), competitive in price and basic parameters of medical efficiency.

Food and process innovations in the health care system include those that encompass as a system for preventing and treating a disease, rehabilitating patients, creating fundamentally new drugs, new medical equipment and equipment, new information, accounting, management and other benefits that contribute to improving the quality of medical services, etc.

In the field of investment in medical innovations, the Company specificity is such that the state is the main investor in advanced medical technologies. For the successful development of medicine, it is necessary to have the right combination of clear state guarantees to the population and equal rights of all market participants, regardless of their form of ownership (Chesbrough, Lettl, and Ritter, 2018). As for the possibility of partial investment in innovative technologies, it is constrained, on the one hand, by insufficient information support, and on the other, by the lack of clear government guarantees and preferences.

Openideo & the Solute Healthcare Challenge

As noted in the National Report “Innovative Development - the Basis for Modernizing the Company Economy”, Company, which is switching to the modern model of economic growth, maintains an unacceptably low level of innovative activity for a world power.

New goals related to the stimulation and infrastructural support of the development of science and innovations, as before, are not fully implemented, their legislative and law enforcement support is imperfect, and, moreover, is delayed or postponed for an indefinite period of time. It is disturbing that the effect of innovation activity is almost imperceptible across the country, there are no close, constant and productive contacts between science and business, effective functioning of the national innovation system as a whole (Manzini, Lazzarotti, and Pellegrini, 2017).

Elimination of the main problems in the development of science, education, and innovation requires significant resource and time costs. However, delaying their resolution is fraught with not only the conservation of the current situation, but also the quite possible degradation of all the basic elements of the innovation cycle. Insufficient financing hinders the implementation of effective innovation projects, thereby reducing the overall level of innovation activity in the economy.

It should be noted that the developments created by domestic enterprises and universities are insignificantly in demand. This is primarily due to insufficient financing of health care and the legislative insecurity of domestic developments. Further development of this with

Co-Creation & Collaboration Through OpenIDEO

To introduce the Open Innovation is the existence of virtual innovation intermediaries like Health subsidiaries.  Through its Market place, and with minimal resources in relation to other systems, organizations remain connected to this external knowledge network so necessary for the implementation of open innovation.

The open innovation model, is an "alternative and complementary path to knowledge management in its different stages". The new logic implied by the introduction of this concept in the public and private sectors fosters the diffusion of R & D & I. It is, therefore, a priority to promote access to knowledge.

Assessing open innovation as an organizational innovation strategy

As this definition suggests, there are two aspects to opening corporate innovation. The first is the "external" aspect, in which ideas and external technologies are introduced into the company's innovation process. The second aspect refers to the "intentional exit of knowledge" so that the new ideas and technologies of the company are tested with external agents such as, for example, beta clients.

As a strategy, Open Innovation implies that an organization does not seek to depend only on its own experience and resources to innovate (whether in new products and services, business models, processes, etc.). On the contrary: it uses multiple external sources to promote innovation, such as feedback from its customers and participation with other companies.

Open innovation strategies

Companies that embrace this strategy assume that talent and knowledge is widely distributed, and that no company can generate high-impact innovation on its own. Therefore, Open Innovation has a more participatory and decentralized approach to innovation. An illustrative case is Google: in just 20 years they have acquired between 200-300 projects, startups and companies to boost their own development, being that the first of these occurred only 3 years after its founding (Tucci, Chesbrough, Piller, F. and West, 2016).

A successful case is the company Techstars, which develops global entrepreneurship events under the wing of companies such as Ford, Amazon and General Electric. These companies determine the focus of the event and then benefit from accelerating the process of ideation and prototyping thanks to the projects that originate there.

Currently, many areas of modern medicine require serious technological equipment. The implementation of modern technologies in domestic institutions of practical health is hampered, including due to the lack of effective mechanisms for admitting these technologies to the market. Thus, innovations can be technical, imply the development or improvement of products or processes, or administrative ones, i.e. be aimed at improving the organizational structure and management processes and implementation of work (West,  Salter, Vanhaverbeke, and Chesbrough, 2014). Such innovations can often be carried out independently of each other. However, in some cases, the implementation of innovations in one area may depend or even require innovations in another. Innovations always mean a jump to a new area or an attempt to implement an innovation. In this regard, the results of innovation activities do not always become apparent immediately. On the contrary, the path to perfection can be paved for a long time, making many experimental attempts, both successful and not entirely successful.

Conclusion

This moment in Company has components necessary for the development of innovative medical technologies: investors, companies importing foreign innovative developments, and inventors. The unity of science, education and practice should provide healthcare not only with fundamentally new methods of diagnostics and treatment of various diseases, but also with modern methods of quality management in health care (West, and Bogers, 2014). A continuous progressive process of updating medical technologies, providing increased efficiency Nia and prevention, and requires the formation of an adequate financial provision targeted research programs on priority directions of development of medicine. The organizational and technical conditions for the implementation of education require particular attention, especially for institutions providing general secondary schooling in rural areas and small towns of the country. Secondary vocational education needs to be given special attention, which should train specialists capable of integrating into new and new technologies. The restructuring of higher education is aimed at preparing highly qualified professionals who combine training with the implementation of research projects.

References

Bianchi, M., Croce, A., Dell'Era, C., Di Benedetto, C.A. and Frattini, F., 2016. Organizing for Inbound Open Innovation: How External Consultants and a Dedicated R & D Unit Influence Product Innovation Performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(4), pp.492-510.

Bogers, M., Chesbrough, H. and Enkel, E., 2016. Special issue on open innovation in the digital age. R&D Management, 46(S2), pp.706-707.

Chesbrough, H., 2017. The Future of Open Innovation: The future of open innovation is more extensive, more collaborative, and more engaged with a wider variety of participants. Research-Technology Management, 60(1), pp.35-38.

Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J. eds., 2014. New frontiers in open innovation. Oup Oxford.

Chesbrough, H. and Brunswicker, S., 2014. A fad or a phenomenon?: The adoption of open innovation practices in large firms. Research-Technology Management, 57(2), pp.16-25.

Chesbrough, H., Lettl, C. and Ritter, T., 2018. Value Creation and Value Capture in Open Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(6), pp.930-938.

Manzini, R., Lazzarotti, V. and Pellegrini, L., 2017. How to remain as closed as possible in the open innovation era: the case of Lindt & Sprüngli. Long range planning, 50(2), pp.260-281.

Tucci, C.L., Chesbrough, H., Piller, F. and West, J., 2016. When do firms undertake open, collaborative activities? Introduction to the special section on open innovation and open business models. Industrial and Corporate Change, 25(2), pp.283-288.

West, J., Salter, A., Vanhaverbeke, W. and Chesbrough, H., 2014. Open innovation: The next decade.

West, J. and Bogers, M., 2014. Leveraging external sources of innovation: a review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), pp.814-831.