Knowledge Management Tools, Inter-Organizational Relationships, Innovation and Firm Performance

The business value of information technology is an enduring research question. This research provides new insights to better understand the mechanisms supporting this relation by analyzing the impact of knowledge management tools (KMTs) on the performances of business units involved in inter-firm collaborative innovation projects. We extend current literature by developing and empirically testing a model where: (1) the use of KMTs is affected by critical organizational variables, (2) KMTs can impact the innovation and financial performances of business units. We find that mutual trust and culture for change do not affect the extent of the use of KMTs, while collaborative experience and naturalness in using ICTs as substitutive of face-to-face contacts have a significant impact. Moreover, we show that a more intense use of KMTs has a direct positive effect on new product performance and speed to market, as well as on financial performance. Yet, only new product performance acts as an indirect conduit linking KMT use and financial performances. This article provides a discussion and perspectives of further research concerning the impact of KMTs on innovation practices in inter-firm collaborative environments.     

A compared R&D-based and patent-based cross impact analysis for identifying relationships between technologies

The planning of technological research and development (R&D) is demanding in areas with many relationships between technologies. To support decision makers of a government organization with R&D planning in these areas, a methodology to make the technology impact more transparent is introduced. The method shows current technology impact and impact trends from the R&D of an organization's competitors and compares these to the technology impact and impact trends from the organization's own R&D. This way, relative strength, relative weakness, plus parity of the organization's R&D activities in technology pairs can be identified.A quantitative cross impact analysis (CIA) approach is used to estimate the impact across technologies. Our quantitative CIA approach contrasts to standard qualitative CIA approaches that estimate technology impact by means of literature surveys and expert interviews. In this paper, the impact is computed based on the R&D information regarding the respective organization on one hand, and based on patent data representative regarding R&D information of the organization's competitors on the other hand. As an illustration, the application field ‘defence’ is used, where many interrelations and interdependencies between defence-based technologies occur. Firstly, an R&D-based and patent-based Compared Cross Impact (CCI) among technologies is computed. Secondly, characteristics of the CCI are identified. Thirdly, the CCI data is presented as a network to show the overall structure and the complex relationships between the technologies. Finally, changes of the CCI are analyzed over time. The results show that the proposed methodology has the potential to generate useful insights for government organizations to help direct technology investments.     

Foresight: A major tool in tackling sustainable development

For many decades, the concept of sustainability has been highly successful in public policies and even in the business world.¹ Nowadays, all initiatives must be sustainable and are primarily assessed on that criterion. However, the efforts made to construct specific methods dedicated to building sustainable strategies seem rather weak. Futurists themselves underestimate the relationship between sustainable development and foresight, even if they are talking about sustainable planning.² They remain generally unaware that foresight could be a major tool in tackling sustainability as well as one of the best methods of preparing sustainable strategies and policies.Indeed, one of the biggest problems in sustainability approaches is the simplistic way used to define the concept, for instance, by using only the very first part of the 1987 the Bruntland report Our Common Future and by limiting the fields of activity on sustainability to the three pillars of the OECD model: economy, social questions, environment.At the Copenhagen United Nations Climate Change Conference (December 2009), it seemed forgotten that sustainability is already an old issue in which futurists were heavily involved at the time of the United Nations Stockholm Environment Conference (1972), in the Limits to Growth Report, published by the Club of Rome (1972)³ and in the OECD Interfutures Foresight, spurred on by Jacques Lesourne (1978).⁴Since that time (forty years ago!) researchers and consultants have learned how to deal with the concept of sustainability, how to analyze it as an ultimate aim for society as a whole as well as a complex object that needs to be approached with adequate methods such as systemic analysis.As Christian Stoffaës said, the aim of foresight is sustainable development in a changing world. As a result, the ultimate aim of strategic foresight appears to be clear: it is sustainability. This article highlights that fundamental relationship as we see it today.⁵     

The future of the future: Strategic foresight in Latin America

With few differences in timing, future studies in Latin America were initiated with a linear conception of reality. Orchestrated with techniques such as the Delphi, future studies were supported by mathematical principles of probability. Several countries have surpassed this stage while moving into strategic foresight. Strategic foresight analyzes the future as a multiple reality. In other words, it means thinking differently and not reading reality in a linear manner. It means accepting that there is not one future but several futures and that one question could have more than one answer.This change has demanded a shift in mentality. The presence of the disciplines in universities is of vital importance. For example, the Technological Institute of Monterrey (Mexico) and the Universidad Externado de Colombia (Bogota) offer foresight and strategy programs at the graduate level.This article describes how different individuals, groups, agencies and institutions in Latin America have emerged thanks to the support provided by the science and technology governmental agencies of each country. The author provides examples from different countries including Colombia, Brazil, Chile and Mexico. Currently, strategic foresight is slowly gaining recognition and acceptance as a compass for productive sectors and as a generator of competitiveness.However, despite the contributions of strategic foresight, Latin American countries, with the exception of some of the above-mentioned countries, have struggled to take off into the future. The role of strategic foresight can become the driving force behind this awakening, if the challenge of linking global trends with local contextualization through scenarios is accepted.     

The future of foresight—A US perspective

The growing interest in business, government, and other organizations and users of futures research in the next ten to thirty years implies that the interest is largely to promote better strategic thinking and planning. Popular in the current futures lexicon is ‘strategic foresight’. This article characterizes, as best the author can, the key characteristics of strategic foresight, under whatever name it occurs, by American futurists. The most central characteristic of American futurists and their approach as practiced around the world is eclectic flexibility in methods and techniques. The American approach is illustrated by the author's own decades of work for organizational clients.     

Learning towards system innovation: Evaluating a systemic instrument

In this paper we develop an analytical framework for studying learning processes in the context of efforts to bring about system innovation by building new networks of actors who are willing to work on a change towards sustainable development. We then use it to evaluate two specific intervention programmes carried out by a self-proclaimed ‘system instrument’. The framework integrates elements from the Innovation Systems approach with a social learning perspective. The integrated model proposes essentially that these kinds of systemic instruments can serve to enhance conditions for social learning and that such processes may result in learning effects that contribute to system innovation by combating system imperfections. The empirical findings confirm the assumption that differences in learning can be explained by the existence or absence of conditions for learning. Similarly, the existence or creation of conducive conditions could be linked to the nature and quality of the interventions of the systemic instrument. We conclude that the investigated part of the hypothesised model has not been refuted and seems to have explanatory power. At the same time we propose that further research is needed among others on the relation between learning, challenging system imperfections and system innovation.     

A real options reasoning approach to hybrid vehicle investments

Long term increases of petrol prices and the threat of a global climate change have created in the automotive industry a new competitive environment based on the development of more sustainable technologies. Using the real option reasoning lens we provide a theoretical framework to better account for the technological and market uncertainties and irreversibilities that impact the investment and innovation decisions of automotive firms supporting the development of more sustainable vehicle technologies. We investigate the case of hybrid vehicles in a transitional perspective by insisting on their potential to influence the dynamic shaping of investment decisions of firms in the car industry. We consider the hybridization strategy as intra-project and inter-project compound growth options to manage the flexibilities and irreversibilities of investment decisions during the transition process. We provide four different-sometimes conflicting-strategic rationales structuring the investment efforts of firms in hybrid vehicles and illustrate them with numerous examples from the automotive industry.     

Developing transition pathways for a low carbon electricity system in the UK

This paper describes the approach to developing transition pathways for a low carbon electricity system in the UK, being pursued in a major new inter-disciplinary research project. The project aims (a) to learn from past transitions to help explore future transitions and what might enable or avoid them; (b) to design and evaluate transition pathways towards alternative socio-technical energy systems and infrastructures for a low carbon future; and (c) to understand and, where appropriate, model the changing roles, influences and opportunities of large and small ‘actors’ in the dynamics of transitions. The paper describes the approach, which builds on the work of Dutch researchers on transitions and transition management using a multi-level framework of niches, socio-technical regime and landscape, as well as on other parts of the innovation systems literature. It also describes its application to several outline transition pathways to a low carbon energy system in the UK. The pathways embrace both the evolution of the physical and institutional infrastructure changes and the roles of both large actors, e.g. multinational energy supply and distribution companies, national governments, major investors, and small actors, e.g. households, innovators and entrepreneurs.     

Future memories

Although the concept of foresight is now widely used by Anglo-American writers, the Romance-language countries have continued to refer to the concept of la prospective or prospectiva since the early 1960s. Despite cultural differences, the two concepts are very similar. Nevertheless, the author argues that prospective is closer to strategic foresight. The prospective attitude does not wait for change and then react; it aims to master expected change (preactivity) and to induce a desired change (proactivity). Preactivity is what guides all approaches to future studies, forecasting, scenario planning and foresight. Proactivity is more voluntarist, and aims to bring about the desired changes by means of strategic planning. This leads to a hopeful message: We just have to rethink the problems to move forward. The author highlights the enduring relevance of several key thinkers ranging from Saint Augustine and Seneca to Gaston Berger and Igor Ansoff. He emphasizes the importance of a collectivity's thinking together about the future and taking action. Overall the article pleads for rigor yet some common sense explains the utility of participatory foresight with simple tools (morphological analysis, prospective workshops). In conclusion, this article emphasizes two symmetrical errors: ignore the existence of a hammer when in front of a nail or consider every problem a nail because you have a hammer!