Interpreting the sources of market value in a capital goods market: R&D management in industrial sensors

This paper presents an integrated model for evaluating purchasers' perceptions of science-based products. The model combines a new approach to benchmarking, known as technometrics, that provides a quantitative profile of a product's key attributes, with direct and indirect methods for measuring buyers' perceptions regarding the relative importance of product attributes as a source of value. A new measure for the demand orientation is proposed, which shows the extent to which a product's 'supply' of characteristics matches the 'demand' for them in the market place. The model is illustrated using several types of industrial pressure sensors. The paper also demonstrates how the integrated model may be made effective for quality function deployment (QFD) during the R&D phase.     

Spillover effects and the science base of innovations reconsidered: an empirical approach

When quantifying spillover effects among technologies and between science and technology one faces the problem that clear-cut measurement procedures are difficult to define and to validate. The well-known approach by indexing certain outputs (patent documents) grasps only parts of the complex and feedback innovation-oriented processes. However, recently, new promising lines of research for understanding technological externalities have been embarked upon. New measurements of the science-technology-innovation interface are presented from three different aspects. First, the overall properties of technological spillover and, second, of science involvement in innovations are presented on a world-wide scale. The third main section of the results provides a panoramic view of scientific involvement in technology in terms of a country comparison. The contribution attempts to add quantitative evidence for an evolutionary understanding of the externalities between public science, latent public technology and private innovation.     

Personal attitudes in the assessment of the future of science and technology: A factor analysis approach

In 1996, the second German Delphi study (“Delphi '98”) was started. The Delphi '98 is a two-round Delphi expert survey being conducted by the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI) on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Education, Research, Science, and Technology (BMBF). The study was published in February 1998, and is now getting into its implementation phase. Its inherent focus is on the development of science and technology in 12 thematic fields in the next 30 years. To arrive at a better understanding of the influence of personal attitudes towards general developments in natural environment and society, the respondents were asked in the first round of the Delphi survey for their personal opinion towards several megatrends concerning the natural environment, economic, sociological, and political developments. Over 2,300 answers led to a very solid database, which gives insights into the general attitudes of the German R&D experts. On some topics, there is a high consensus, whereas in others, opposite opinions coexist. These results may serve as the database for a factor analysis leading to the identification of five different expert types. This paper examines the crucial question of whether different patterns in assessing the future development in science and technology by expert types can be observed. In general, it turned out that differences in personal attitudes towards megatrends do not influence the estimation of developments in science and technology. However, differences exist in specific topics and the distribution of the five experts types among the respondents differs significantly in the 12 fields.     

National Technology Foresight Activities Around the Globe: Resurrection and New Paradigms

This contribution summarizes recent experiences in government or national technology forecasting which are now often termed “foresight.” While the methodological tool kit changed from mathematical models to more qualitative scenarios or visions, the Delphi method has become the backbone of foresight projects. Recent national activities, being dealt with in this special issue, are compared in terms of their comprehensiveness, their science versus industry orientation, and their analytic versus action-oriented targets. Although some of these are ongoing, we can discern several new foresight paradigms. From the perspectives of sociology and political sciences, foresight elements seem to be the means of communication (or the “wiring up”) for the negotiating systems of the society. From an economics and management point of view, foresight is helpful for benchmarking and for initiating feedback processes between future demand and present day investment in research and development. From a cultural point of view, the resurrection of foresight in the 1990s seems to be related to growing globalization and at the same time the recognition of national or regional innovation systems. Finally, in terms of international affairs supranational foresight seems to become a new venture.     

Current Foresight Activities inCentral Europe

During the early 1990s, technology foresight has become much more widespread. First pioneered in the United States and later in Japan, it has now spread to continental Europe. One of the first engagements in modern national foresight occurred in the Netherlands. The task is to identify the areas of strategic research and the emerging generic technologies likely to yield the greatest socio-economic benefits. The decentralized foresight approaches are less holistic than elsewhere and are concerned with selected areas. In Germany, parallel approaches have been adopted for looking systematically into the longer-term future of science, technology, the economy, and society. In an era characterized by ever fiercer global economic competition, and with the burden of unifying two different science systems and over-stretched public expenditure budgets, the German governments on federal and state levels and indeed the public are coming to expect more direct economic and social benefits from science in return to their investment. Decentralized types of foresight are also observed in Austria, whereas in Hungary the first attempts to arrive at a foresight program seem to be modelled after British experiences.     

Foresight in innovation policy: Shared visions for a science park and business–university links in a city region

Many car manufacturers recognize fuel cell vehicles as future substitutes for conventional cars with internal combustion engines. According to press releases and brochures, different strategic approaches of the automobile companies to fuel cell technology can be identified. These strategies match to a high degree the market entry strategies known from strategic marketing literature. A system dynamics model that reflects the beginning innovation process and the strategic approaches of a pioneer (first to market), an early follower (early to market) and a late follower (late to market) has been built. It examines the future prospects of the car manufacturers’ strategies in three different scenarios, which illuminate possible future developments of external influences like politics or fuel infrastructure.     

The links between competitiveness, firms' innovative activities and public R&D support in Germany: an empirical analysis

Industrial competitiveness is becoming an increasingly important issue. In years of recession, some companies perform worse on domestic markets or lose export shares. Most investigations of the competitiveness of nations are based on macro-economic data. But a country is not much like a business. This paper tries to provide a new answer based on science and technology indicators and econometric analysis, Competitiveness is studied on the micro-economic level for a sample of 161 domestic or foreign-owned companies located in westem Germany. Zieir competitiveness is measured by two indicators: the trading result (i.e. either the net profit or loss) and the export share of (local) production. Statistics on investment and patents do not sufficiently explain competitiveness, but the scientfic potential of the firms significantly explains the competitiveness, but, it seems to be the science base of technological activities that determines competitiveness. Public subventions facilitate scientific and technological activities in industry. It is particularly interesting to note that government support is oriented towards the science base of the client companies.     

Knowledge transfer in an innovation simulation model

To understand the development of innovation processes in these knowledge-driven economies, one needs to focus on underlying processes of creating and sharing new knowledge. In this paper, an evolutionary simulation model is used to achieve some insights into these innovation processes. The model is based on the one hand on rules about market performance, investments and R&D strategies, and on the other hand on a model concerning knowledge creation (the ability of firms to create knowledge through intramural R&D efforts and the ability to discover and absorb new developments from basic academic research and competitors) and knowledge transfer based on an exponentionally expanding pool of (not necessarily new) knowledge of innovations in the own sector, but also from external sources. It is demonstrated that the imitative firm can be economically more successful but this strategy may prove to be superior only after a long time span.     

Technological progress and market growth: An empirical study based on the quality-ladder approach

This paper develops an extended version of the quality-adder model by allowing for heterogeneous markets. Based on this model, it presents an empirical analysis of innovation-based growth at the market level using a technometric measurement concept. It can be shown that a growth-promoting effect due to technological progress in a particular single year is observed after between 2 and up to 7 years. This is true not only for highly innovative markets but also for those in which fewer R&D resources are invested.