Creativity and Innovation Models Study

: Creativity and Innovation Models

UNIV 3331 Foundations in Creativity and Innovation
Dr. Oscar Gonzales

Creativity and Innovation Models
Models of creativity and innovation began emerging in the late 1940s and early 1950s. As the industrial revolution evolved and the desire for increased economic efficiency grew, organizations realized that to be innovative there had to be a deployment of the employees creative abilities (Godin, 2008). There are now hundreds of hundreds of innovation models including, open innovation, closed innovation, semi-open innovation, triple, quadruple, and quintuple helix modelsthe list goes on. For the sake of everyones sanity, we will discuss only those models that relevant today.

Open & Closed Innovation Models
In an open innovation setting companies are encouraged to acquire outside sources of innovation to improve product lines and shorten the time required to bring products or services to market. Releasing internally developed innovation that may not fit the company’s business model is made available to the public domain for anyones use.

The advantages of open innovation are that organizations can engage larger and more relevant audiences to test ideas. Organizations can improve their brand value by engaging the end user and establish partnerships with like innovative partners. However, some of the challenges with open innovation are unclear goals, misreading the audience, ineffective processes, and lack of commitment from partners that can be costly and ultimately derail projects (Isomaki, 2018).

In a closed innovation setting, processes leading to innovation are tightly controlled. The internally developed intellectual property is kept within the company until the new product is released on the market. There is no idea sharing or collaboration with outside sources of innovation which can limit and stifle creativity overall.

Semi-open innovation is a hybrid strategy to develop new knowledge and innovation with interaction limited to a few participants. This method is utilized most often when the industry is specific and geographically limited.

Figure 1 – Closed, semi open and open innovation framework Source: Adapted from Hirsch-Kreinsen & Jacobson (2008, p. 56)

Figure 2. Open and Closed Innovation. Adapted with permission from Viima Solutions Oy (2018). Open Innovation Framework.

Triple, Quadruple, and of Innovation

In the past, innovation and creativity were viewed as linear processes conducted in stages that resulted in a product or service and ended there. Innovation today is dynamic, interdependent, and interconnected by people, science, and technology with a continuous feedback loop that works to keep all stakeholders informed. The innovation process has evolved and is scaled for continuous improvement, evolution, and repurpose.

In the 1990s, Etzkowitz and Loet Leydesdorff introduced the Triple Helix Model of innovation (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1995). The of innovation refers to a set of interactions designed to stimulate and generate innovative products or services between 1) academia, 2) industry, and 3) governments, ultimately to foster economic and social development. It did not take long for the model to evolve beyond the three helix. For example:
The Quadruple Helix model added a fourth component, society, to the existing innovation framework of interactions between 1) academia, 2) industry, 3) government.
The Quintuple Helix innovation model morphed it even further to include, 1) academia, 2) industry, 3) government, 4) civil society, and 5) natural environments of society.

References

Daher, N. (2016). The Relationships between Organizational Culture and Organizational Innovation. International Journal of Business & Public Administration, 13(2), 115. Retrieved from http://outlaw.odessa.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=122076853&site=eds-live
de Ftima R. R., A., dos Santos, I. C., & Vieira, A. M. (2018). Semi-open Innovation: an Approach to the Innovation Typology. Future Studies Research Journal: Trends & Strategies, 10(1), 5581. Retrieved from http://outlaw.odessa.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=129744639&site=eds-live
Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The triple helix — university-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development (January 1, 1995). EASST Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 14-19, 1995. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2480085
Godin, B. (2008). Innovation: The History of a Category. Working Paper No. 1, Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation, Montreal: INRS. 62 p. Retrieved from http://www.csiic.ca/PDF/IntellectualNo1.pdf
Hilka Vier Machado, Fbio Lazzarotti, & Fernando Fantoni Bencke. (2018). Innovation models and technological parks: interaction between parks and innovation agents. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, Vol 13, Iss 2, Pp 104-114 (2018), (2), 104. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242018000200104
Isomaki, A. (2018, November 29) Open Innovation What it is and how to do it [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.viima.