How Innovation Can Help Business and Be a Factor for Growth, Research Proposal Example
Words: 3382Research Proposal
This research proposal is based on the innovation of marketing products in business. The science of innovation, which is linked to the knowledge base, is not in general developed by groups which are polarized by commercial objectives. It is a difference in the technology in that it is often associated with the process of invention, innovation and dissemination for the achievement of practical purposes of potential commercial interests, contrary to that material focused more generically the acquisition of knowledge (Goedhuys, 2012).
A direct consequence of this are the methods of managing for results and the rapid dissemination of results, and in another focuses on the best commercial exploitation of the same (Kopmann, 2015).
Attention should be focused on how to tackle projects of technology that are based on a set of activities as a whole; and on the commercial introduction of new products and processes derived from the acquisition of knowledge on the basis of the means employed (Clausen 2011).
Often in business organizations, it is difficult to find activities of innovation as defined above, however this is due to the fact that they are not performed in a systematic way and this hampers their identification. According to Love (2014), when these activities are clearly derived from a strategy previously adopted and promoted, management deals with, among other factors, the systematization of activities that have already been undertaken, thus increasing the capacity of innovation research in general and in particular in those technological areas of special interest to the sector.
However, the fact that many of these companies have not addressed in a systematic way the innovation technology does not mean that they cannot gain some custom-capacity for technological innovation. Often, they acquire this through the engineering that gave them a first stage of innovation through procedures such as modification of production methods, for example for the purpose of improving costs or to change certain features or functionality in certain products (Morgan, 2013).
Our hypothesis is that after conducting a survey analysis of innovation in management, can better understand what steps to take towards innovation.
The activities to be included in the innovation products of the systematic company shall take into account the company’s evolution and technological changes, but must also be selected in accordance with the corresponding innovation strategies adopted by the company. Strategies that acquires greater importance every day, constituting essential factors not only to the evolution of the enterprise, but also for its own survival, must be complemented by the own business strategy, defining markets and products, and with the organizational strategy geared to an optimization of the implementation of the same (Muller, 2012).
Considering innovative enterprises, Apple Company is a prime example to consider. Apple will unveil the details of their new phones’ ships insignia, and if everything goes as planned and the rumors are true, it will be called iPhone 6S and 6S Plus. But there is a marketing agency with headquarters in New York that did not agree with the alleged denomination of the next generation of devices of the company from Apple, and for this reason it has launched a special campaign for those of Cupertino which will eliminate the nickname of ‘6S’ and baptize the product directly as the iPhone 7. As to the agency in question is called 6S Marketing, a name that, according to the company itself, was chosen because its pronunciation sounds like success. The Agency launched the campaign both in social networks like in other formats, using the tag #WeAre6S with the highlight of its identity.
The BMW automotive company also has a strong marketing innovation strategy for their products. One example can be seen as BMW began their battle against Audi in which uses the strategy of comparison. In this marketing strategy BMW communicates the superiority of the product on its strongest competitor which in this case is identified explicitly. In this way the comparison helps to position the product in the minds of consumers. This type of daring advertisement allows greater remembrance and is more relevant than other non-comparative studies. Interestingly, this campaign was answered by Audi with another similar campaign.
The innovation strategy will help in particular at the time of making the selection of products to improve the development of the products or the implementation of processes, leading to improved possibilities of access to markets defined by corporate policy (Schamberger, 2013). One of the main competitive strategies which often shows technological innovation is a necessary and decisive factor is called “Time Based Competition”.
Innovation activities can be set in terms of product and market, but it is often more interesting to consider the strategy as the shape that makes the organization behave on the basis of the exploitation of their potential for innovation of technology and in consequence of its degree of innovation. According to Gao 92014), it is necessary to distinguish between six types of innovative strategies. These strategies are the assessment of competition, bargaining power, technological resources, target market, chain of command, and future of the industry.
The organization can act as a technology leader thanks to the continuous introduction of new products and processes, thus acceding to new markets. It seeks the technological supremacy that permanently permits the marketing of new products. Part of the identification of new market needs is seeking ways to meet them; or, also, finding economically profitable applications on the basis of activities of R&D, but it is not necessarily expected that these needs are explicit on the part of the market. The strategy is offensive in the sense that intuits needs or the covers in the first place (Saebi, 2015).
The strategy allows the company to anticipate its competitors, aims to create a new market, which will require sustained efforts, continuous and concentrated, normally on the basis of the development of a set of technologies. Is seeks sustainable competitive advantages supported in specific developments of technology. Such a strategy requires multidisciplinary work teams in which is involved staff of the senior management, as well as marketing and production in addition to the unit itself that is focused on innovation technology. The interrelationships with production will become more intense as you move from the idea to the realization of a prototype. In addition, the marketing staff shall ensure that at all times takes into account the vision and predictable acceptance on the part of the market to which they are directed. To be a technological leader means taking a great risk, compensated by the high profitability that is reached with success (Boons, 2013).
This strategy is one that is adopted by the organizations that follow the technological leader and consequently assume the fact of not being the first in the market, but neither want to stay out of it. It allows companies to solve the specific risks of an offensive strategy that seeks to make radical innovations. To change, a company must optimize the functions of marketing, finance, and production in order to achieve competitive advantages that allow it to face the leader. This strategy often takes the economic leader of the market, with high market shares and uninterested in radical innovations that disturb the status quo achieved but by no means forgets the adopting of an attitude of constant surveillance that allows one to react adequately in time and form (Boons, 2013).
It tends to be sure that it will provide a clear value to the customer and that the products have a high growth potential. It addresses an imitation of the creative version of the technological leader and sells at a lower price and even higher if one can take advantage of its corporate image. A company must be able to react in a short time, and although it is resting on internal development capabilities of innovation technology, it often comes to license agreements and patents (Clausen, 2011).
Its technical competence will specialize in being able to improve the designs and take advantage of the initial errors of the leader for which support will be provided in the department of strategic marketing. In the box are set features of the strategy as a technological leader and follower, according to which they compete in markets by price or by differentiation. (Muller, 2012).
It is the main strategy that is followed by imitative firms that mimic the action of other companies, but is limited to certain environments that can be protected by various causes, such as tariff protection, social policies or policies that are particularly favorable in production costs. Businesses require a minimum degree of innovation, but they are competitive in the market that work thanks to certain degrees of protection, which usually occurs in the productive activities as may be low wages. This is a kind of protection that is commonly associated with the geographic location. The company that adopts an imitative strategy is not concerned with technological leadership and often lags far behind. Their interest in technology is often focused on areas of production technologies for cost savings (Kopmann, 2015).
The basic factors that tend to ensure the success of these companies are a combination of the following: have a captive market, have reduced labor costs and/or achieving a high degree of efficiency directive. Customers pay for the service provided to them by the value that is given to them. This is quality (Goedhuys, 2012).
There is an illusory price-prize of the monopolistic company that seeks to maximize benefits by increasing disproportionately the selling prices. This action, in fact, constitutes an invitation to enter the market to competing undertakings, and leads to maximizing instead of optimizing. It hopes to satisfy all users with the same product or service in spite of the fact that growth and development of the market allows the finding of segments with capacity to purchase and specific requirements. The opportunistic strategy often allow the entrance and growth in a particular market, or the meeting of the needs of a specific segment in which the technology that dominates provides special features for that specific segment (Love, 2014).
Once entered, innovators will take opportunities which companies neglected due to their traditionally established methods. This is the typical strategy in companies that depend to a large extent on subcontracting, which aspire to a technological autonomy which then allows a greater bargaining power and access to new markets (Goedhuys, 2012).
This situation is often encouraged by the customer itself, as is usually the case for a large company, which tends to focus on its core activities and wants to delegate certain productive aspects and even design to companies with which it maintain business links. A strategy based on making what is always the same and in the same way is usually followed, unless the market or specific customer imposes new modes or features. (Morgan, 2013)
It is often characterized by having products that from the functional point of view do not evolve until they have been altered by standard new features that require new designs, but for which the degree of knowledge is already so widespread, it is requiring few innovation strategies. Their survival is often based on their economically competitive features, by having a local monopoly. Innovations in this strategy at most relate to adoptive innovations of processes generated in another place but available equally to the entire industry, without going to the corresponding fairs (Gao, 2014).
Research Questions and Objectives
How can an organization create innovation to entrepreneurship using innovation strategies?
The objective of entrepreneurship from an organization can be attributed to many reasons. Most of this pursuit is dependent on the size of the organization and realistic expectations. Many entrepreneurial organizations seek out opportunities for innovation. There are various reasons as to why entrepreneurial organizations would want to seek innovation. After a careful analysis, it can be reasonably assumed that there are four primary reasons for this seeking of innovation by any entrepreneurial organization. (Kopmann, 2015)
If an organization settles for what they already have as far as the success of their current status of entrepreneurship, then this may cause them to fall behind with the continuously changing economy. The economy as well as information technology is always expanding and innovating. This means that organizations, including entrepreneurial organizations, must keep up with such advances and innovations in technology and the economy. The organization can only do this by innovating every part of their organization, including their entrepreneurship. (Clausen, 2011).
Organizations, especially for profit organizations, are in business to generate revenues so that they can collect the profits. A drive for innovation in entrepreneurship would surely assist in boosting revenues for an organization if they are successful in this. This is because the larger a business is, the greater their opportunities for income are. Expanding on the entrepreneurial level gives an organization more opportunities to reach out to larger sums of the consumer market (Clausen, 2011).
It is common for businesses to form partnerships. This may come in the form of a merger or an acquisition. A merger occurs when two businesses form an equal partnership, forming their two businesses into a brand new one. An acquisition may occur when one business buys out and assumes ownership over another business, though it is still a kind of business partnership. This may be another major reason for an organization to want to seek innovation on the entrepreneurial level, to build partnerships with other business that can benefit them financially as well as economically. This may also give them an opportunity to innovate on an international level. If an organization is able to reach out to a global consumer market, then their net worth is likely to be well in the billions. This is a desired goal for any organization in the field of business (Clausen, 2011).
Many organizations seek innovations in entrepreneurship with the aspirations of going public. This would be a big step for any organization. What this means is that the organization would become a publically traded company on major global stock exchanges. This would open up a percentage of their equity to the public that could then be bought and traded by investors in the investor market. The stocks of that percentage would be available for sale and trade on either the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) or NASDAQ. Going public is an important step for an organization. They are now being watched under a microscope by federal authorities, primarily the Securities and Exchange Commission or (SEC). This would mean that the organization would have to tighten up their regulations and practices to prevent any fraud or unethical behavior because the public investors now carry risks based on the decisions of the organization. However, being under so much pressure is usually worth it for most organizations that can be successful as a publically traded company because they have the financial support of their investors (Boons, 2013).
How can we research methods for innovation in products?
We may conduct primary research through survey questionnaires. This is an effective research method because it allows for the study of the consumer market directly. It also opens opportunities to analyze trends in the consumer market and what the best approach is towards innovative marketing strategy. Collecting a random sample set from consumers in any given industry to participate in the questionnaire is ideal for innovation in entrepreneurship.
What is the independent variable? The dependent variable?
The independent variable of this research strategy is the participants of the survey. The dependent variable is the questions that comprise the questionnaire.
With regards to the research project schedule for the methodology, the most effective way to approach an innovative project is through use of a Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) and a Critical Path Method (CPM). The PERT and CPM methods are basically oriented to time in the sense that both lead to the determination of a program of time. Although the two methods were developed almost independently, both are strikingly similar. Perhaps the most important difference is that originally the estimates in time for the activities is accounted for in CPM and probable determinants in PERT. Now PERT and CPM really understand a technique and the differences, if any, are solely historical. In forward, both are referred to as techniques of “programming of projects” (Saebi, 2015).
The programming of projects for PERT-CPM consists of three basic phases the planning phase starts decomposing the project in activities. The time estimates for these activities are determined then and is built a network diagram (or arrows) where each one of their bows (arrows) represents an activity. The full arrows diagram gives a graphical representation of the interdependencies between the activities of the project. The construction of the arrow diagram as a planning phase, has the advantage of studying the different jobs in detail, suggesting perhaps improvements before the project is actually run. It will be more important to its use in the development of a program for the project (Saebi, 2015).
The programming phase is to build a diagram of time that displays the times of initiation and termination for each activity as well as its relationship with other project activities. In addition, the program must indicate the critical activities (depending on the time) that require special attention if the project is due to be completed in a timely manner. For the non-critical activities the program must show the clearance times that can be used when such activities are delayed or when one needs to efficiently use limited resources (Saebi, 2015).
The first thing to do to constitute a PERT chart is to organize a list, as complete as possible, of all the activities that constitute the work or project. To do this it is necessary that the person who is going to make the PERT/CPM carefully consider the project and to use the information of all the other people who are related to the same, such as engineers, technicians, manufacturers of materials, assemblers, teachers and any other auxiliaries that can provide an information (Gao 2014).
After a PERT chart, we must number the events. The most correct way to do this is the following: Is numbered each event, jumping from one to another in the direction of the arrows that represent the activities, taking care not to renumber none, without which all other that precede it in the diagram have already been numbered. Thus, before we must enumerate an event, we must verify how many arrows go into it (Love 2014).
Once developed, the diagram is clear on the sequence of activities and can be passed to the programming of the same. For this, it is necessary to know the duration of the various activities. Usually, they cannot be set with accuracy, since there are many factors that bring random characteristics with them. (Saebi 2015).
The final phase in the administration of projects is control. This includes the use of the arrow diagram and the graph of time to make periodic reports of progress. The network can therefore be updated and analyzed and if it is necessary to identify a new program for the the project. In conclusion, a PERT chart can reasonably assure the success of an innovative project (Saebi 2015).
Boons, F., Montalvo, C., Quist, J., & Wagner, M. (2013). Sustainable innovation, business models and economic performance: an overview.Journal of Cleaner Production, 45, 1-8.
Clausen, T., Pohjola, M., Sapprasert, K., & Verspagen, B. (2011). Innovation strategies as a source of persistent innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, dtr051.
Gao, H., Hsu, P. H., & Li, K. (2014). Public equity markets and corporate innovation strategies: Evidence from private firms. Available at SSRN 2407075.
Goedhuys, M., & Veugelers, R. (2012). Innovation strategies, process and product innovations and growth: Firm-level evidence from Brazil.Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(4), 516-529.
Kopmann, J., Kock, A., Killen, C. P., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2015, February). The Role of Innovation Portfolio Management in the Nexus between Deliberate and Emergent Innovation Strategies. In 21st International Product Development Management Conference (IPDMC). EIASM.
Love, J. H., Roper, S., & Vahter, P. (2014). Dynamic complementarities in innovation strategies. Research Policy, 43(10), 1774-1784.
Morgan, K. (2013, July). Regional innovation strategies: the challenge of collaboration and governance. In conference Local Economic Growth: Recession, Resilience and Recovery, Cambridge UK (pp. 11-12).
Müller, R. M., & Thoring, K. (2012). Design thinking vs. lean startup: A comparison of two user-driven innovation strategies. Leading Through Design, 151.
Saebi, T., & Foss, N. J. (2015). Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions. European Management Journal, 33(3), 201-213.
Schamberger*, D. K., Cleven*, N. J., & Brettel, M. (2013). Performance Effects of Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation Strategies and the Moderating Role of External Innovation Partners. Industry and Innovation,20(4), 336-356.
Time is precious
don’t waste it!