1. Openness towards culture and innovation Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff 25 th May, 2004 Hauptseminar: Innovation, change & decision making in international organisations Prof. Dr. Jürgen Beneke SS 2004

2. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff IIntroduction IIGlobal innovation a. Innovative regions and global hubs b. Patentation in Germany, Japan and the United States c. Innovation in biotechnology and genetic engineering IIIInfluences on innovation a. Sociocultural influences i. Biotechnology and genetic engineering ii. Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan b. Social-philosophical and theoretical approaches i. Innovation policy: Private industry versus planned economy ii. The human being as an innovative factor iii. Karl Popper: The social technique of small steps and the innovative society IVConclusions and discussion Structure

3. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Innovative regions and global hubs http://www.undp.org/hdr2001/popupmap.html Technology hubs: 1. Silicon Valley, US 2. Boston, US 3. Stockholm, Sweden 4. Israel […] 19. Bavaria, Germany 27. Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany 37. Saxony, Germany

4. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Patentation in Germany, Japan and the United States  Share in international patents worldwide between 1982 and 1992  USA: 28%  Japan: 23%  Germany: 18%  Leading positions:  Japan: Micro-electronic industry  USA: Genetic engineering industry  Germany: Environmental technology

5. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Innovation in biotechnology and genetic engineering  Germany: Reservations towards biotechnology  USA: Heading for leading position  Japan: Highest awareness of biotechnology in the world

6. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Sociocultural influences Biotechnology and genetic engineering  Germany:  High governmental registrations  Projects are realised abroad  Pure research is loosing ground  Japan:  Highest support worldwide  Growing need for improved regulations  Government forces research aggressively

7. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan United States  „Triumphant individual“ 1 as an ideal of American society  Small hierarchical barriers  Efficient organization of the whole innovation process / 1: Bleicher, K. (1989), Chancen für Europas Zukunft. p. 94. Frankfurt.

8. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan Europe  Group 1: Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal  Group 2: Germany, Austria, Belgium  Group 3: France, United Kingdom  Group 4: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Netherlands

9. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan Europe: Innovation share

10. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Innovative regions and global hubs http://www.undp.org/hdr2001/popupmap.html Technology hubs: 1. Silicon Valley, US 2. Boston, US 3. Stockholm, Sweden 4. Israel

11. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan Europe: Gross Domestic Product per capita

12. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan Europe  Driving forces for innovation in Europe:  High receptiveness to new ideas  Well-developed equity

13. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan Japan  Styles of management  Bottom-up management  Suggestions by workers to improve work process and quality of production  Evolutionary management  Voluntary efforts of middle-level managers to develop new products  Strategic management  Companies‘ top management

14. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Business mentalities in the United States, Europe and Japan Japan  Characteristics of management structures:  Strong centralization  Motivation incentives concern social status

15. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Social philosophic and theoretical approaches The government‘s role in the innovation process  Interdependences between political and economic system  Economy of central planning has failed to equal successes of public industry  Protectionist government according to principles of economic liberalism creates best atmosphere for successful innovation process  Bureaucracy is worst promoter of innovations  Governmental deregulation and decentralization for successful innovation process

16. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Social philosophic and theoretical approaches The human being as an innovative factor  Human being remains independent  Sociocultural background is not unchangeable

17. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Social philosophic and theoretical approaches Karl Popper: The social technique of small steps and the innovative society  Which social technique leads to the most innovative society?  Utopian social technique:  All human efforts aim at establishing the ideal society  A society‘s innovation policy serves to achieve this goal  Efforts of generations have no use for themselves  Low motivation for innovation

18. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Social philosophic and theoretical approaches Karl Popper: The social technique of small steps and the innovative society  Which social technique leads to the most innovative society?  Social technique of small steps  Interest in the present time and not in an utopian future  Innovation policy of human beings refers to themselves  Mistakes as an integral part of innovation processes  Gradual improvements constitute developement of mankind  High motivation for innovation

19. 25 th May, 2004Dirk Schmittchen & Dennis Wolff Conclusions  Different innovation behaviour is existing  Sociocultural differences influence innovation behaviour, e.g.:  Focus on individualistic efforts in the United States  Equitable societies in Northern Europe  Company as important social entity in Japan  But: simplified thinking must fail due to general factors, e.g.:  Governmental regulation  Human being as an individual  Level of a society‘s equity, privacy and liberty