A Proposal for a Standard With Innovation Management System

Christos Apostolakis, José Carlos Rodríguez and Mario Gómez
management it is also very possible to include other opportunities in education such as how well
lessons from previous experiences can be utilised in a way that is beneficial for these universities
(Sandler, 2010). In this respect, innovation in entrepreneurship is an important area that needs to be
explored further.
In attempting to define entrepreneurial innovation Hindle (2009: 75) contends that “innovation is the
combination of an intensive process and an entrepreneurial process to create new economic value for
defined stakeholders”. Moreover, he believes that most definition issues with innovation and
entrepreneurship are “correctable” because innovation is a dual process: it is about invention – the
creation or discovery of new knowledge – and how this can be implemented. Further on, with regard
to implementation of this entrepreneurial type of innovation recent research in academic and
employee entrepreneurship has identified the key role of knowledge spillovers in the formation of new
ventures and subsequent growth of industries and regions (Agarwal et al, 2007). It seems as if
innovation although not easy to be defined remains a critical educational element in promoting
entrepreneurship.
Snadler (2010) argues that universities are amongst the most successful organisations in providing
entrepreneurial education in a distinct and rigorous way reflecting real-life needs as well. Perhaps the
most critical factors that one could claim refer to attitudes towards entrepreneurship that are
developed amongst academics and students. The principle explanation for this is that university
constitutes a unique entity and its attitudes against entrepreneurship are defined by a number of
factors e.g. type of education, teaching methodologies, role models and reward systems (Guerrero
and Urbano, 2012).
The question then that comes up is: What sort of theoretical approach is necessary in order to
establish development of entrepreneurial innovation within a university context? The aim of the next
section attempts to answer this question: to shed light on which might be a preferable approach
appropriate for the occasion. A resource-based view is qualified in taking this explanatory role, as it
can be seen below.
3. A resource-based view model for entrepreneurial innovation
System perspectives on organisational resources recognise that resources are normally incorporated
in a system of assorted resources and that the contribution of a resource to creation of value depends
on the rest of them in the same system (Sanchez, 2003). Additionally, the strategy field recognises
the significant influence of organisational characteristics on performance. This recognition is
incorporated in what it is called “the resource-based view” of an organisation’s strategy. This is a
renewed version of a focus on the so-called idiosyncratic characteristics of an organisation that
contribute to its competitive advantage (Nham and Hoang, 2011; Warren, 2008). According to Barney
and Hesterly (2012: 84) resource-based view is “a model of firm performance that focuses on the
resources and capabilities controlled by a firm as sources of competitive advantage”. In this context,
resources are defined as all those tangible and intangible assets which are controlled by an
organisation and utilised for its strategic purposes. In addition, capabilities can be defined as the part
of these resources that can be used in order for the organisation to take full advantage of its overall
resources. Moreover, Rumelt (2011) asserts that there are exogenous changes that can drive the
performance of an organisation normally by use of innovation. This consists of exploitation of a wave
of change which normally establishes new grounds for the organisation’s performance. There has
been a series of reasons that explain the development of the resource-based view. Lynch (2012) for
example refers to the disturbing organisational performance that couldn’t align with the applicability of
strategy approaches towards achievement of competitive advantage. He emphasises on all these
factors than keep an organisation at an individual company level rather than being depended on the
corporate level or on the cyclicality of the industry. Another major issue required to be explained is the
ability by an organisation to identify these resources that can offer a return potentially linked with
exploiting the firm’s resources and capabilities. The VRIO framework has been developed in order to
question each source and define its validity. In answering this question it is necessary to answer the
questions about rarity, imitation and organisational capability as elements that indicate operation by
an organisation in such a manner that it could exploit the full potential of its resources (Barney and
Hesterly, 2012; Lynch, 2012; Nham and Hoang, 2011). In Barney’s analysis an organisation’s
resources should meet the above mentioned conditions in order to sustain its competitive advantage:
18