Name Pham Nguyen Ngoc Phuong

SID S3878891
Lecturer Harlod DW
Course Code BUSM4553
Word Count 1410

AGRUMENTATIVE
ESSAY

1
 1. Introduction:
Innovation - a factor that is very much needed in modern economies, is described as
a progress that merges science, technology, economics and management which
aims to obtain and broaden the new ideas to its commercialization (Kogabayev and
Maziliauskas 2017). A perspective expressed by Tidd, Bessant and Pavitt (2005)
about innovation: “innovation is complex, uncertain, and almost impossible to
manage”. Nevertheless, though the realm of innovation is obscure, Desozoa et al.
2007 has defined the process of generating a successful innovation within only 5
steps. This paper is going to discuss Tidd et al. (2005) viewpoints, specifically about
the complexity and uncertainty of innovation, however, against the unmanageability
of innovation using a series of frameworks and theories.
2. Argument:
a. The relationship between creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship:
Creativity is defined as a process that generates novel and appropriate ideas in any
domain in a human life. Creativity is important due to its effectiveness and efficiency
in solving problems (Al-Ababneh 2020). Creativity will produce innovation, in which,
a successful innovation requires a good idea. There is a strong relationship between
creativity and innovation since it will seed innovative offerings, however, the link is
context-sensitive and multi-level in nature. Conversely, innovation and creativity is
different from each other by the implementation, not the generation of ideas
(Sarooghi, Libaers and Burkemper 2015).

Centrally characterised by innovation, entrepreneurship is also defined as a

combination of activities that are innovative, proactive and uncertainty-taking for the
aim of creating value at an organisation level (Ndubisi and Iftikhar 2012). Innovation
is an undeniable element to entrepreneurship since innovation is the value that they
offer to customers. Innovation is also adopted by entrepreneurs to solve unexpected
problems. This shapes the relationship between innovations and entrepreneurship
and business can maximise this correlation to achieve the most optimal outcomes
(Ulsu and Kedikli 2019).

2
To conclude, the relationship between creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship
can be described as figure 1 where ideas are generated, then take into action and
creating innovative offerings for customers

Figure 1: The relationship between creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship

(adapted from Botha 2011).

b. Factors related to creativity and innovation at individual & team level:

As a complex process that can enhance an organisation’s competitiveness,
individual innovation is a foundation for any firm that achieves high–performance.
Though innovation requires many factors and resources, creativity plays as the most
important determinant (Pratoom and Savatsomboon 2010).
According to Amabile (2012) componential theory of individual/team’s creativity,
there are 3 domains that can influence creativity: relevant skills, creativity process
and task motivation (Figure 2). Another determinant outside is that the social
environment also takes part in creating creativity. This theory specifies that creativity
will be achieved at the highest level when an intrinsically motivated person is
facilitated with domain expertise and creative thinking skills when working in a
creativity-supportive environment.

Figure 2: The componential theory creativity (adapted from Amabile 2012).

3
Pirola-Merlo and Mann (2004) also indicated the relationship between individual
creativity and team creativity whereas the creativity level of a team is determined by
each member’s creativity. Although, the final creativeness is more than the sum of
group members but also depends on the type of tasks and group structure, individual
creativity is a significant contributor that determines the team’s outcomes.
c. Factors related to creativity and innovation at organisational level:
The original componential theory of creativity presents a 5-stage process of how
innovation is shaped (Amabile and Pratt 2016).
Stage 1 which is the agenda setting stage which involves determining the aim or the
issue the organisation is trying to solve. This stage is heavily influenced by the
motivation to innovate, in which the leader’s behaviour concerning innovation will
reflect that aspiration.
Stage 2 regards activities including asserting specific goals, gathering resources and
instituting the work context. As a stage setting stage, it will decide the success of the
project. 2 factors that are influential to this stage are resources and skills.
Third stage is producing ideas in which any possibilities about the project are
generated. Stage 3 relies on the foundation of stage 1 and 2, however, the
implementation of the possibilities (stage 4) is also decisive to the effectiveness of
the creative and innovation process.
Stage 4 will present, assess and evaluate the possibilities generated in stage 3, the
best idea will be picked to develop in further stages. Besides the 2 factors which are
resources and skills, this stage directly depends on the motivation to innovate.
Last stage is outcome assessment which is the result of decision making in stage 4.
A feedback loop, in which the assessment may go back to a previous step of the
process, is a crucial component of the result assessment stage.

4
 Figure 3: the organisation innovation process (adapted from Amabile and Pratt
2016).
d. Factors related to innovation typologies:
Moore (2006) has divided innovation into 15 different types based on 4 zones,
product leadership zone, customer intimacy zone, category renewal zone and
operational excellence zone. Product leadership zone is in the growth phase where
its type of innovation requires heavy R&D in order to win market share and maximise
profits, also bring high risks. Customer intimacy zone is in the mature stage where its
innovation types are either using operational excellence to increase the offer's
profitability for the vendor or using customer intimacy to increase the offer's appeal to
the consumer. Operational excellence zone is also in the mature stage, its
innovations focus more on differentiation on the supply side more than the demand
size of the market which could lower costs and higher profit. In the end-of-life stage,
category renewal zone (Figure 4,5)

5
 Figure 4: Four innovation zones (adapted from Moore 2016)

Figure 5: Innovation types by zone (adapted from Moore 2016)

Another theoretical backdrop of innovative progress that contributes to the

development of new products. Figure 6 depicts the level of innovation through 3
horizons, the degree of newness will increase from horizon 1 to horizon 3. This
means that incremental innovation involves a low level of innovation where changes

6
are made based on existing products or services. Radical innovation is an invention
that disrupts the existence of a business model, however, due to the high level of
newness, radical innovation is difficult to adopt. On the vertical axis, it represents the
value-added of the invention. Eventually, the newer the invention, the more value is
added. Nevertheless, if the innovation is developed in a whole different fashion it will
become disruptive innovation (Ghandour 2020).

Figure 6: Innovation by level (adapted from Ghandour 2020).

e. Arguments:
Mentioned againTidd, Bessant and Pavitt (2005) perspective about innovation:
“innovation is complex, uncertain, and almost impossible to manage”, I agree that
innovation is sophisticated because it takes many forms from product, process to
strategy, many types and many levels (Lahrour and Maaninou 2018). The
interactions of innovation determinants such as technical knowledge, culture, and
contextual circumstances also shape the complexity process of innovation (Simeone,
Morelli and Gotzen 2021). I also agree on the instability of innovation which root from
the unpredictable changes from natural causes, miscommunication or any
modifications in the environmental components. The complexity and uncertainty of
innovation also leads to the failure of it, thus, entrepreneurs require innovation
management strategies in order to achieve success (Kabir 2019). These
characteristics argue against the unmanageability of innovation in Tidd et al
viewpoints. Indeed there exists many strategic management practices to control
innovations (Oke 2007). In fact, the factor that surpasses the manageability of an

7
organisation leader is creativity. As creativity is divergent thinking and is needed at
any dimension of an organisation, there is no scope that can define the scheme of
creativity (Gurteen 1988)
3. Conclusion:
Innovation is a complex and insatiable process that requires the contribution of many
factors. One major contributor of innovation at both individual/team and
organisational level is creativity. However, creativity is not enough, the innovation
development process also needs other steps including verifying new ideas, testing
and implementing to choose the most effective idea. There is also a vivid relationship
between creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship where each component
influences the others. Additionally, because of innovation’s sophistication, innovation
is also divided into 4 clusters and each will have their own distinctive features and
goals. As an entrepreneur, they should be able to have strategic management
practices for innovation to increase the organisation effectiveness. To conclude, I
favour Tidd’s et al (2005) viewpoint about how innovation is complicated and
unpredictable, however, argue against how innovation is uncontrollable while
creativity is the boundless factor.
4. References:
Al-Ababneh M (2020) ‘THE CONCEPT OF CREATIVITY: DEFINITIONS AND
THEORIES’, International Journal of Tourism & Hotel Business Management, 2(1):
245-249

Amabile T (2012), Componential Theory of Creativity, Harvard Business School,

accessed 26 November 2022. https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/12-
096.pdf

Amabile T and Pratt M (2016) ‘The dynamic componential model of creativity and
innovation in organisations: Making progress, making meaning’, Research in
Organisational Behaviour, 36: 157-183, doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001

Botha M (2011) ‘Corporate entrepreneurship orientation and the pursuit of innovating

opportunities in Botswana’, Acta Commercii, 1(11), doi: 10.4102/ac.v11i1.147

8
Desouza K, Dombrowski C, Awazu Y, Baloh P, Papagari S, Kim J and Jha S (2007)
‘The Five Stage of Successful Innovation’, MIT Sloan Management Review, 8(3)

Ghandour A (2020 'managing Innovation Process in the Real Estate Sector: Case
study from UAE’, International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13(12)

Gruteen D (1988) ‘Knowledge, Creativity and Innovation’, Journal of Knowledge

Management, 2(1)

Kabir M (2019) Innovation: Knowledge-based social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave

McMillan

Kobagayev T and Maziliauskas A (2017) ‘The definition and classification of

innovation’, Holistica, 8(11): 59-72, doi: 10.1515/hjbpa-2017-0005

Lahrour J ad Maaninou A (2018) ‘The management of the innovation: A complex

process’, IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 20(8):32-37

Moore G (2016) Dealing with Darwin : how great companies innovate at every phase
of their evolution, Capstone, Chichester

Ndubisi N and Iftikhar K (2012) ‘Relationship between entrepreneurship, innovation

and performance: Comparing small and medium‐size enterprises’, Journal of
Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 14(2): 214-236, doi:
10.1108/14715201211271429

Oke A (2007) 'Innovation types and innovation management practices in service

companies’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27:664-
587, doi: 10.1108/01443570710750268

Pirola-Merlo A and Mann L (2004), ‘The relationship between individual creativity

and team creativity: aggregating across people and time’, Journal of Organisational
Behaviour, 25(2)

9
Pratoom K and Savatsomboon G (2010) ‘Explaining factors affecting individual
innovation: The case of producer group members in Thailand’, Asia Pacific Journal
of Management’, 29: 1063-1087, doi: 10.1007/s10490-010-9246-0

Sarooghi H, Libaers D and Burkemper A (2015), ‘Examining the relationship

between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organisational, cultural, and
environmental factors’, Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5): 714-731, doi:
10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.12.003

Simeone L, Morelli N and Gotzen A (2021) Shaping smart for better cities:
Rethinking and Shaping Relationships Between Urban Space and Digital
Technologies, Academic Press, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-818636-7.00001-9

Ulsu Y and Kedikli E (2019) ‘THE IMPORTANCE OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND

INNOVATION MANAGEMENT IN TERMS OF MODERN BUSINESSES’,
International Journal of Academic Value Studies, 5(1):1-11

10