TOWARDS A CAPABILITY-BASED SERVICEINNOVATION MATURITY MODEL FOR SMESMr. Tadhg Blommerde12th June 2013Supervisor: Dr. Patrick Lynch
AGENDA The service innovation landscape Practical service innovation issues Literature evaluation The research imperative and question Theoretical perspective Maturity models A maturity model for service innovation capabilities Next steps and time line Proposed methodology Skills and personal and professional development Questions and comments
THE SERVICE INNOVATION LANDSCAPE(CSO, 2011)1926-2011 Persons at work by sector
THE SERVICE INNOVATION LANDSCAPE 4 out 5 jobs in services 78.1% of Irish jobs (90.3% of women) 38% growth in the last 50 years Ireland is responsible for 2.7% of global serviceexports 10th highest service exporter 1997-2007 gross value added in services trebled €34billion to 108 billion 40% of the jobs are „high skilled‟(Forfás, 2008)
THE IMPORTANCE OF INNOVATION TO SERVICES 10th most innovative of the EU27 59.6% of firms engaging in innovative activities Benefits of service innovation on an economic level:growth, competitiveness, employment, more rapidrecovery Estimated 5.3 billion spent by Irish firms oninnovation Gross value added by employees €78,000 in non-innovative and €139,000 for innovative firms Role of service innovation in cohesion policies(EuroStat, 2013; EuropeanCommission, 2013; Carney and Ryan,2010; CSO, 2012)
THE IMPORTANCE OF INNOVATION TO SERVICESAT FIRM-LEVEL Firm-level benefits such as competitiveness,responsiveness, enhanced market perception,greater retention, quality, efficiency, andfinancial rewards 98% of all firms are SMEs Service innovation encouraged by EuropeanUnion, Forfás, and organisations such asService Cluster Ireland and Innovation Voucherincentives(Ojasalo, 2009; Aas and Pederson, 2011)
PRACTICAL SERVICE INNOVATION ISSUES(Forfás, 2011; Power et al., 2010; Aizcorbe et al., 2009; Mankin, 2007; Ostromet al., 2010; Hogan et al., 2011; Sheehan, 2006; Gallouj and Savona, 2009;McDermott and Prajogo, 2012; Karniouchina et al., 2006)HistoricalmanufacturingfocusLack offormalisationWeak cultureand supportsInsufficientresearch
LITERATURE EVALUATION Despite existing articles on the subject over-dominance of manufacturing Mostly concerned with the larger organisation Difficulty in defining service innovation leads toissues with measurement Under-researched area(Power and Lynch, 2012; Vang and Zellner, 2005; Adams et al., 2006)
THE RESEARCH IMPERATIVE AND QUESTION What are the capabilities associated withsuperior service innovation processes, and howcan they be managed effectively to enhanceoverall innovativeness? Determine characteristics of effective serviceinnovation Assessment mechanism Evaluate and describe specific improvementinitiatives Evolutionary framework which accounts forcapability development
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE Resource-based theory and dynamiccapabilities theory Differences in firm performance over time Competitive advantage when VRIN anddeployed and configured correctly Exploit to maximum capacity thus enhancingthe innovative performance(Barney, 2007; Walsh et al., 2011)
MATURITY MODELS Develop and improve business processes The maturity levels range from low to high withincreased sophistication of processes Descriptive, prescriptive, comparative tool Embeds desired processes and support infrastructure No existing document meets the following criteria:evolutionary framework, focus on service innovation,follows resource-based logic, considers small andmedium enterprises(Ojasalo, 2012; Esterhuizen et al., 2012; Jochem, 2011; Essman, 2009)
MATURITY MODELS Existing maturity model literature is useful toidentify the stages/levels in a serviceinnovation maturity model Full composite attached to presentation Mini-composite indicates how the stageswere identified and named
MATURITY MODELS5. OptimisingService innovation is institutionalised through empowered staff and formalised processes. It is linked to the firm’s strategy and outputs lead to competitiveadvantage.4. MeasuredUnderstanding of service innovation in the context of the firm’s strategy. Consistent results through monitored processes.Improvement: Process Control3. DefinedConsistent and standardised service innovation processes, practices, and procedures.Improvement: Process Measurement2. ManagedBeginning to understand service innovation necessity. Inconsistent but attributable results.Improvement: Process Definitions1. Initial/Ad hocLow service innovation awareness. Short-term focus and inconsistent and unpredictable results.Improvement: Basic Management
A MATURITY MODEL FOR SERVICE INNOVATIONCAPABILITIES Research up to now Identification of the capabilities Capability table with common themesattached
NEXT STEPS Refine the maturity levels further Identify and determine which capabilities arepresent at which maturity levels Locate scales to measure capabilities withinmaturity levels
PROPOSED METHODOLOGY Mixed methods study Qualitative research used to refine model Quantitative research used to measure andtest
TIME LINEMilestone Duration DescriptionM1 Oct 2012-Dec 2012 Conceptualisation of research topic.M2 Oct 2012-January 2014 Literature review; completed in parallelwith other activities.M3 Jan 2013-Jun 2013 Research problemformulated/defined/refined.M4 Jul 2013-May 2014 Evaluation of research methodology.M5 Sept 2013-Dec 2013 Preparation and transfer to PhD register.M6 Sept 2013-Dec 2013 Qualitative component: Conduct primaryresearch and data collection. Maintainreflective diary.M7 Jan 2014-Apr 2014 Quantitative component: Conductprimary research including pilot studyand data collection. Maintain reflectivediary.
TIME LINEM8 June 2014-Sep 2014 Analysis & interpretation of data.M9 Oct 2015 Revision of work to date in parallel withother activities.M10 Nov 2014-Jan 2015 Primary Research Findings.M11 Feb 2015-March 2015 Preparation of Discussion Chapter.M12 April 2015-May 2015 Preparation of Conclusions.M13 June 2015 -Oct 2015 Final write-up of thesis includingdirections/recommendationsfor future research.M14 Oct 2015 Thesis submission.M15 Dissemination: Dissemination of findings will be ongoing throughout theprocess; attendance at special interestgroups andacademic conferences/colloquia willallow for dissemination ofthe research concept in order to generatefeedback.
SKILLS AND PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT Age and circumstances mean that I have alot to learn Generic skills (70 hours) Research skills, writing Time management, long deadlines whichrequire constant self-motivation andenthusiasm, seriousness and respect Interest in dissemination
RESEARCH DAY•Debut as aresearcher•Feedback andcomments•New experience, butenjoyable
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research colleagues RIKON Staff And particularly to Dr. Pat Lynch for theopportunity and guidance
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS “Essentially, all models are wrong, but someare useful”- George Box
REFERENCESReference listAas, T. H. and Pedersen, P. E. (2010) The firm-level effects of service innovation: A literature review, International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 759-794.Adams, R., Bessant, J. and Phelps, R. (2006) Innovation management measurement: A review, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 21-47.Aizcorbe, A. M., Moylan, C. E. and Robbins, C. A. (2009) Toward Better Measurement of Innovation and Intangibles, Survey of Current Business, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 10-23.Camisón, C. and Monfort-Mir, V. M. (2012) Measuring innovation in tourism from the Schumpeterian and the dynamic-capabilities perspectives, Tourism Management, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp.776-789.Carney, P. and Ryan, M. (2010) Measuring firm-level innovation: A review of the literature and survey design [Online]. Available at:http://www.innovationfoundation.ie/Irish%20Innovation%20Index%20Background.pdf (Accessed 06.06.2013).Christensen, C. M. and Overdorf, M. (2000) Meeting the challenge of disruptive change, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78, No. 2, pp. 66-76.CSO (2011) This is Ireland. Highlights from the census 2011, part 2 [Online]. Available at:http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/census/documents/thisisirelandpart2census2011/This%20is%20Ireland%20Highlights,%20P2%20Full%20doc.pdf (Accessed 06.06.2013).CSO (2012) Community Innovation Survey 2008-2010 [Online]. Available at: http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/multisectoral/2010/comminn0810.pdf(Accessed 02.03.2012).Esterhuizen, D., Schutte, C. S. L. and du Toit, A. S. A. (2012) Knowledge creation processes as critical enablers for innovation, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 32,No. 4, pp. 354-364.EuropeanCommission (2012) The smart guide to service innovation [Online]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/regional-sme-policies/documents/no.4_service_innovation_en.pdf (Accessed 06.06.2013).EuropeanCommission (2013) Innovation Union Scoreboard [Online]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/files/ius-2013_en.pdf (Accessed 05.06.2013).EuroStat (2013) Seventh Community Innovation Survey Highest proportions of innovative enterprises in Germany, Luxembourg and Belgium [Online]. Available at:http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/9-11012013-AP/EN/9-11012013-AP-EN.PDF (Accessed 02.03.2013).Forfás (2008) Catching the wave - A services strategy for Ireland [Online]. Available at: http://www.forfas.ie/media/forfas080912_services_strategy.pdf (Accessed 05.10.2012).Forfás (2011) Analysis of Irelands innovation performance [Online]. Available at: http://www.forfas.ie/media/forfas110323-Analysis_of_Irelands_Innovation_Performance.pdf (Accessed06.06.2013).
REFERENCESGallouj, F. and Savona, M. (2009) Innovation in services: a review of the debate and a research agenda, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 149-172.Hamel, G. (2006) The why, what, and how of management innovation, Harvard business review, Vol. 84, No. 2, pp. 72-84.Hogan, S. J., Soutar, G. N., McColl-Kennedy, J. R. and Sweeney, J. C. (2011) Reconceptualizing professional service firm innovation capability: Scale development, Industrial MarketingManagement, Vol. 40, No. 8, pp. 1264-1273.Karniouchina, E. V., Victorino, L. and Verma, R. (2006) Product and Service Innovation: Ideas for Future Cross‐Disciplinary Research, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 23,No. 3, pp. 274-280.Kuczmarski, T. D. (2000) Measuring your return on innovation, Marketing Management, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 24-32.Mankin, E. (2007) Measuring Innovation Performance, Research Technology Management, Vol. 50, No. 6, pp. 5-7.Nijssen, E. J., Hillebrand, B., Vermeulen, P. A. M. and Kemp, R. G. M. (2006) Exploring product and service innovation similarities and differences, International Journal of Research inMarketing, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 241-251.Ojasalo, J. (2012) Modeling in Service Innovation: 10 Propositions [Online]. Available at: http://www.iiis.org/CDs2011/CD2011IDI/DEMSET_2011/PapersPdf/DM770DB.pdf (Accessed21.02.2013).Ostrom, A. L., Bitner, M. J., Brown, S. W., Burkhard, K. A., Goul, M., Smith-Daniels, V., Demirkan, H. and Rabinovich, E. (2010) Moving Forward and Making a Difference: ResearchPriorities for the Science of Service, JOURNAL OF SERVICE RESEARCH, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 4-36.Sheehan, J. (2006) Understanding service sector innovation, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 49, No. 7, pp. 42-47.Vang, J. and Zellner, C. (2005) Introduction: Innovation in Services, Industry and Innovation, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 147-152.Wang, C. L. and Ahmed, P., K. (2004) The development and validation of the organisational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor analysis, European Journal of InnovationManagement, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 303-313.Weissenberger-Eibl, M. and Koch, D. J. (2007) Importance of industrial services and service innovations, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATION, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 88-101.