The paper focuses on a key uniqueness of the simultaneous generation of social and business value - across science, technology and society - involving academics, businesses, policy makers, innovation intermediaries, NGOs and citizens that share and integrate assets in developing solutions to address economic and societal challenges.
By contrasting with a broad literature using the term ‘co-creation’ to denote close working relationship between actors, the paper outlines a conceptual framework explaining how the diversity of agents involved, their motivations and goals, and incentive structures in which they operate impact on science-based co-creation. This multidimensional perspective is discussed with regard to the scope of innovation, reach and types of values that are generated, and the distinctive features to be considered when both social and business value are at the core of collaboration.
Policy implications to support science-based co-creation are discussed with regard to the rationale for public interventions and the critical dimensions of policy implementation and assessment. It highlights that policy design aiming at supporting societal challenges through co-creation should address mechanisms to integrate tangible and intangible inputs, define suitable operational models and enhance specific capabilities and practices.
Пандемия COVID - 19 стала катализатором множественных изменений в сфере реального бизнеса как с точки зрения организации рабочих процессов, так и с точки зрения финансовых потоков, трудовых отношений, технологической модернизации, перехода на новые формы занятости. Изменение организующих рабочий процесс принципов, таких как учет рабочего времени и привязка к рабочему месту, показавших свою формальность в период самоизоляции, приведет к изменению перечня принципиальных для работодателя психологических и социальных компетенций работника. Одной задачей исследования эксперт ИСИЭЗ видят определение востребованных и перспективных компетенций с учетом pro et contra удаленной работы.
This article explores the utilization of public policies aimed at supporting industrial innovation, and, in particular, enterprises involved in industry-science cooperation. The aim is to investigate whether firms cooperating with universities or R&D organisations are more likely to be supported by the state and demonstrate higher innovation performance. The empirical analysis is based upon the results of a 2018 specialised survey on innovation-active high-tech and medium high-tech manufacturing enterprises in Russia and relies on the concept of ‘additionality’. Although the study results indicate that enterprises interacting with R&D performing organisations are more likely to be publicly supported, the recipients claim that the provided support rarely causes significant changes in their performance. Cooperating with R&D organisations and universities appears associated with mainly a general boost in the competitiveness of the enterprise. The paper provides evidence to suggest that support allocation in Russia is following a ‘picking-the-winner’ strategy. Combined with possible crowding-out effects, such a strategy may prove to be counterproductive for a country with a less well developed national innovation system.
The “policy mix” concept has gained popularity among science, technology and innovation policy communities over the past two decades in a context of growing policy complexity and need for policy evidence. Pressing societal challenges are also prompting governments to rethink policy making in order to better align public intervention across policy domains and leverage the transformative potential of system innovations. Governments faced multiple obstacles in implementing a policy mix approach in policy making and evaluation. Based on a comparative analysis of international STI policy repositories, a conceptual framework is proposed, as well as structuring principles and operational guidelines for mapping the composition of a policy mix, identifying interactions among components and translating the mapping into measurement. In that view, a range of new policy mix metrics is introduced. Finally, the discussion focuses on the need for moving towards a new data management paradigm and enlarging the measurement mix.
Despite the considerable increase in studies on international joint ventures (IJVs) and family business, the two research streams have yet to be systemically integrated. Family firms have unique characteristics that affect their involvement in IJVs differently from their non-family counterparts. Indeed, family firms face a paradox entailing a lower willingness to form IJVs, but a higher ability to govern them. Drawing on three distinct components of strategic agility (i.e., strategic sensitivity, leadership unity, and resource fluidity), we develop a theoretical framework that unravels this paradox. Specifically, we argue that strong emotional attachment reduces family firms' strategic sensitivity, creating a motivational gap with respect to forming IJVs. On the other hand, when family firms overcome this gap by making full use of their board of directors, they have higher levels of leadership unity and resource fluidity. These dimensions lead to a greater ability to govern the complexities of the relationship, hence reducing opportunistic hazards, and significantly increasing the odds of the long-term success of IJVs. We develop propositions for empirical studies, and offer implications and directions for future research.