IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v116y2022ics0166497222000426.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects

Author

Listed:
  • Klessova, Svetlana
  • Engell, Sebastian
  • Thomas, Catherine

Abstract

The assessment of the advancement of technological innovations at their development stage is a difficult task, but important to judge on the performance of innovation projects. Assessments have so far been made by assessing technical characteristics, subjectively, or by counting patents. This paper proposes an approach to assess the advancement of market-upstream innovations directly and objectively, through the advancement of their technological maturity. On this basis, also the innovation performance of larger projects that were put in place to progress one or several innovations, can be assessed. The paper presents an exploratory qualitative multi-case study of 54 innovative technologies at different maturity levels, that were developed in 5 market-upstream large technological research and innovation projects with mostly engineering and IT dimensions, funded by the European Union’s Research and Innovation Programmes under its sub-programme “Leadership in Enabling and Industrial Technologies”. From extensive documentation and data from interviews, a refined technology readiness scale and a scoring method that reflects the increase in the required efforts to advance the maturity of the innovations is developed. The findings provide groundwork for future research on market-upstream innovation and how the innovation performance of projects can be measured at the early stages of the innovation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Klessova, Svetlana & Engell, Sebastian & Thomas, Catherine, 2022. "Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:116:y:2022:i:c:s0166497222000426
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497222000426
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102495?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. Lazzarotti, Valentina & Manzini, Raffaella & Mari, Luca, 2011. "A model for R&D performance measurement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 212-223, November.
    3. Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Ardito, Lorenzo & Savino, Tommaso, 2018. "Maturity of knowledge inputs and innovation value: The moderating effect of firm age and size," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 190-201.
    4. Hung, Chia-Liang, 2017. "Social networks, technology ties, and gatekeeper functionality: Implications for the performance management of R&D projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 305-315.
    5. Gault, Fred, 2018. "Defining and measuring innovation in all sectors of the economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 617-622.
    6. Mannak, Remco S. & Meeus, Marius T.H. & Raab, Jörg & Smit, Alexander C., 2019. "A temporal perspective on repeated ties across university-industry R&D consortia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    7. Wanda Peters & Steven Doskey & James Moreland, 2017. "Technology Maturity Assessments and Confidence Intervals," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 188-204, March.
    8. David Birchall & Jean-Jacques Chanaron & George Tovstiga, 2011. "Innovation performance measurement: current practices, issues and management challenges," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-00651176, HAL.
    9. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    10. Aguiar, Luis & Gagnepain, Philippe, 2017. "European cooperative R&D and firm performance: Evidence based on funding differences in key actions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1-31.
    11. Arroyabe, Marta F. & Arranz, Nieves & Fdez. de Arroyabe, Juan Carlos, 2015. "R&D partnerships: An exploratory approach to the role of structural variables in joint project performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 623-634.
    12. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    13. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "Twenty challenges for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 432-450.
    14. Weiping Tan & Jose Ramirez‐Marquez & Brian Sauser, 2011. "A probabilistic approach to system maturity assessment," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 279-293, September.
    15. Konstantinos C. Kostopoulos & Yiannis Spanos & Klas Eric Soderquist & Gregory Prastacos & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2019. "Market-, Firm-, and Project-Level Effects on the Innovation Impact of Collaborative R&D Projects," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(4), pages 1384-1403, December.
    16. Elliot Bendoly, 2014. "System Dynamics Understanding in Projects: Information Sharing, Psychological Safety, and Performance Effects," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 23(8), pages 1352-1369, August.
    17. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    18. Torrisi, Salvatore & Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Harhoff, Dietmar & Hoisl, Karin & Mariani, Myriam, 2016. "Used, blocking and sleeping patents: Empirical evidence from a large-scale inventor survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1374-1385.
    19. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Nätti, Satu & Pikkarainen, Minna, 2021. "Orchestrating for lead user involvement in innovation networks," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    20. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    21. Francesco Aiello & Lidia Mannarino & Valeria Pupo, 2020. "Innovation and productivity in family firms: evidence from a sample of European firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 394-416, May.
    22. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cai, Ying & Lin, Jun & Zhang, Ruxin, 2023. "When and how to implement design thinking in the innovation process: A longitudinal case study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Svetlana Klessova & Sebastian Engell & Catherine Thomas, 2022. "Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects," Post-Print hal-03636260, HAL.
    2. Seo, Hangyeol & Chung, Yanghon & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2017. "R&D cooperation and unintended innovation performance: Role of appropriability regimes and sectoral characteristics," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 66, pages 28-42.
    3. Svetlana Klessova & Sebastian Engell & Catherine Thomas, 2022. "Dynamics of couplings and their implications in inter-organizational multi-actor research and innovation projects," Post-Print hal-03690108, HAL.
    4. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    5. Lee, Young Hoon & Kim, YoungJun, 2016. "Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the Triple Helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 93-105.
    6. Rossi, Federica & Caloffi, Annalisa & Russo, Margherita, 2016. "Networked by design: Can policy requirements influence organisations' networking behaviour?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 203-214.
    7. Jacqueline Tsz Yin Lo & Calvin Kam, 2021. "Innovation Performance Indicators for Architecture, Engineering and Construction Organization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-25, August.
    8. M'Chirgui, Zouhaïer, 2009. "Dynamics of R&D networked relationships and mergers and acquisitions in the smart card field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1453-1467, November.
    9. Daniel Nepelski & Vincent Roy & Annarosa Pesole, 2019. "The organisational and geographic diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research networks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 359-380, April.
    10. Manning, Stephan, 2017. "The rise of project network organizations: Building core teams and flexible partner pools for interorganizational projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1399-1415.
    11. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    13. Dolata, Ulrich, 2014. "Märkte und Macht der Internetkonzerne: Konzentration - Konkurrenz - Innovationsstrategien," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2014-04, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    14. Hala Abou-Ali & Mohammed Belhaj, 2008. "Cost Benefit Analysis of Desert Locusts Control: A Multicountry Perspective," Working Papers 801, Economic Research Forum, revised 01 Jan 2008.
    15. Meda Andrijauskiene & Daiva Dumciuviene & Alina Stundziene, 2021. "EU framework programmes: positive and negative effects on member states' innovation performance," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 16(3), pages 471-502, September.
    16. Elias G. Carayannis & Luca Dezi & Gianluca Gregori & Ernesto Calo, 2022. "Smart Environments and Techno-centric and Human-Centric Innovations for Industry and Society 5.0: A Quintuple Helix Innovation System View Towards Smart, Sustainable, and Inclusive Solutions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 926-955, June.
    17. Moussa, Bachar & Varsakelis, Nikos C., 2017. "International patenting: An application of network analysis," The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 48-55.
    18. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & van den Oord, Ad, 2008. "Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1717-1731, December.
    19. Xiaoke Zhang, 2022. "Understanding innovation policy governance: A disaggregated approach," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 303-329, May.
    20. João José M. Ferreira & Cristina I. Fernandes & Vanessa Ratten, 2016. "A co-citation bibliometric analysis of strategic management research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 1-32, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:116:y:2022:i:c:s0166497222000426. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.