Critical aspects of the new paradigm of Total Innovation Management –On a procedure for the evaluation of the Innovative Potential
Dan C. Badea,firstname.lastname@example.org CCMMM, Bucharest, Romania Alexandru Marin,email@example.com ALMA ENGINEERING Ltd., Bucharest, Romania Ioan Plotog,firstname.lastname@example.org University POLITEHNICA of Bucharest, Romania
The present paper makes a critical analyze of the concept of Total Innovation Management – TIM, with respect to thenovelty of this approach, to its domain of validity and to the present degree of its implementation in the real economicsystems. Consequently, the authors proposed an original and simple mathematical model for assessing the innovativepotential and offered certain practical correlations between human resources utilization “efficiency” and the number of patent application, considered as the output of the innovative production. We have also analyzed some specific data forthe Romanian country profile, with the purpose of highlighting the relative strengths and weaknesses in innovationperformance and its main drivers of innovation growth.
The concept of Total Innovation Management – TIM is desired to be a very modern and comprehensive one (Xu,2007 and Li, 2008). The scientific approach is alike in “mechanics” problems, when the position of a materialparticle is identified in a Cartesian reference system O-xyz by its spatial coordinates. So, a first axis regards theinnovation in all human activities, technological and non-technological ones, at the level of strategies, culture,organization, market etc. The second axis take into account the innovation process at the level of all personsimplicated in the specific processes of enhancing firms competences. Third axis considers innovation in every timeperiod of activity and at all organization levels of a company. In this moment, it is important to mention that thisapproach is relative non-scientific and not so rigorous, because the variables are empirical and dimensional non-homogeneous ones. Briefly speaking, the three above mentioned axis are: activities, people, time-space, all of thesebeing, in fact, the human and material resources and the way to organize them for running successfully an economicactivity.TIM is defined as the reinvention and management of an innovation value network that dynamicallyintegrates the conception, strategy, technology (including IT base), structure and business process, culture, andpeople at all levels of an organization. TIM aims to enhance the innovation competence of the company, createvalue for stakeholders, and sustain competitive advantage (Xu, 2007).Without denying the value of this new concept of TIM, mainly drawing on innovation theory, as well as ontwo distinct areas of recent research: core competence theory and complexity theory, there are several difficult toimplement theoretical and policy implications. As declared in intentions, TIM seems to be a “journey”, not a“destination”, towards enhanced firm competence, a rather long-term, competence-based management philosophyfor achieving sustainable competitive advantage involving all people at every aspect and level of organization at alltime and across all space. The associated ideas of synergy and holistic approach, well fitted for explaining thesudden transitions and the discontinuities in the nowadays economical processes, determined us to settle somerationale evaluations of the major components of the TIM framework.