PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2018 | 92 | 2 | 294-308
Article title

Determinants of effective creation of ideas within an enterprise on an example of a start-up organisations

Authors
Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
Technology environment is known for dynamic changes and a general lack of stability, which causes difficulties in researching it and determination of any common substantive values. This paper addresses these challenges and its whole argument is based not only on the known literature, but also on clear examples from history which are chosen to support some of the arguments. A key aspect of this study is comprehensive empirical research that combines indirect observation of the start-up community and environment with in-depth interviews with various participants in the process of innovation within technology companies. Interviewing and gathering information from people working and setting up innovative projects at different stages of development allowed for identifying some universal values shared by all participants of the process. The research has been summarized and the results presented in four models explaining the general method for creating effective ideas within start-up type organisations. Study presents a new approach to thinking about sparking, creating and managing process of innovation. It helps to understand determinants of effective creation of ideas within a company.
Year
Volume
92
Issue
2
Pages
294-308
Physical description
Contributors
author
  • College of Management and Finance, Kozminski University, 57/59 Jagiellonska Str., 03-301 Warszawa, Poland
References
  • [1] Blank, S. G., & Dorf, B. (2012). The startup owner's manual: The step-by-step guide for building a great company. K&S Ranch, Incorporated.
  • [2] Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis (Vol. 248). London: Heinemann.
  • [3] Cain, S. (2012). The rise of the new groupthink. The New York Times, 15.
  • [4] Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
  • [5] Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment valuation: Tools and techniques for determining the value of any asset. John Wiley & Sons.
  • [6] Hughes, T. P. (2004). American genesis: a century of invention and technological enthusiasm, 1870-1970. University of Chicago Press.
  • [7] Khurum, M., Fricker, S., & Gorschek, T. (2015). The contextual nature of innovation–An empirical investigation of three software intensive products. Information and Software Technology, 57, 595-613.
  • [8] Jemielniak, D. (2014). Common knowledge?: An ethnography of Wikipedia. Stanford University Press.
  • [9] Jolly, V. K. (1997). Commercializing new technologies: getting from mind to market. Harvard Business Press.
  • [10] Kavadias, S., & Sommer, S. C. (2009). The effects of problem structure and team diversity on brainstorming effectiveness. Management Science, 55(12), 1899-1913.
  • [11] Le Bas, C., Mothe, C., & Nguyen-Thi, T. U. (2015). The differentiated impacts of organizational innovation practices on technological innovation persistence. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(1), 110-127.
  • [12] Lee, V. H., Leong, L. Y., Hew, T. S., & Ooi, K. B. (2013). Knowledge management: a key determinant in advancing technological innovation? Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(6), 848-872.
  • [13] Lundvall, B. Å. (2009). Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. African journal of science, technology, innovation and development, Volume 1, Issue 2 & 3, Pages 10-34
  • [14] Montuori, A., & Purser, R. E. (1995). Deconstructing the lone genius myth: Toward a contextual view of creativity. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35 (3), 69-112.
  • [15] Nordfors, D., Sandred, J. and Wessner, C. (2003). Commercialization of Academic Research Results, VFI 2003:1, Vinnova, Stockholm.
  • [16] Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation: A Handbook For Visionaries, Game Changers, And Challengers Author: Alexander Osterwalder, Yves. (p. 288). Wiley.
  • [17] Pełka, W. (2013). Living Labs as a Form of Innovation Development. Management and Business Administration. Central Europe Vol. 21, No. 4(123), 139-152.
  • [18] Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42 (7), 305-310.
  • [19] Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Random House LLC.
  • [20] Rogers, M. (1998). The definition and measurement of innovation (pp. 1-27). Parkville, VIC: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research.
  • [21] Ruttan, V. W. (1959). Usher and Schumpeter on invention, innovation, and technological change. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 596-606.
  • [22] Schat, S. (2012). Quiet: The Power of Introvert in a World That Can’t Stop Talking. Brock Education Journal, 22 (1).
  • [23] Schmookler, J. (1962). Economic sources of inventive activity. Journal of Economic History, 1-20.
  • [24] Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (Vol. 55). Transaction Publishers.
  • [25] Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles (Vol.1, pp.161-74). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • [26] Solo, C. S. (1951). Innovation in the capitalist process: A critique of the Schumpeterian theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 417-428.
  • [27] Thomas, S. P. (2012). In Praise of Introversion. Issues in mental health nursing, 33(11), 717-717.
  • [28] Whitfield, P. R. (1975). Creativity in industry. Penguin Books.
Document Type
article
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.psjd-94fd8572-3520-46db-b713-68885bdfdd81
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.