Mapping the Big Green Challenge - The Skills & Learning ...

56 Chapter 6 - Proposed Innovation ProcessesHowever this has still tended to be seen in terms of demand for products with particularcharacteristics to which innovators then respond.A more distinctive approach has explored the extent to which innovation can be seen as adistributed process which crosses the boundaries of any individual organisation. This has beenexplored via the distinction between closed versus open innovation: that is the degree to which theinnovation process rests with one organisation or is shared between different actors. Chesbrough(2003) explores this primarily from the perspective of the innovative firm, discussing the significanceof incorporating inputs from external actors and allowing the development of nascent ideas outsidethe firm. This may involve changed business models to facilitate these processes.Other writers (e.g. Von Hippel, 2006) have focused more centrally on the role of users (those whobenefit directly from using a product or service) in the innovation process rather than producers(whose benefit comes via selling the innovation). This can range from users cooperating in thedevelopment of an innovation (such as in the open source software movement) through to the morediffuse ways in which the forms of take up, rejection and use of technologies by users can shapetheir further development (Oudshoorn & Pinch, 2003). This end of the discussion merges into morecomplex models of adoption than are found in the traditional innovation literature.These approaches do not signal a lack of interest in inventors or entrepreneurs but rather stress theneed to understand their location in a wider network, requiring analysis of their roles andrelationships with other actors. Beveridge & Guy (2005) discuss these issues in relation to mediainterest in individuals termed, ‘eco-preneurs’, promoting green innovations.These ideas are explored in relation to BGC proposals through the use of the concept of ‘openness’which gives an indication of the extent to which actors apart from the Challenger group had acreative input to the innovation proposed (i.e. beyond simply interaction with others in relation toits adoption). The other actors in the network can make a variety of contributions includingspecialist, technical knowledge, design or production skills, or modifying the proposal to a particularcontext. As noted above these categories of knowledge input are not necessarily held by distinctactors who are formally qualified or located in particular types of institutions and particularly in acommunity setting might be expected to include users. Fully open innovations do not reach a fixedend point but rather remain subject to further development by actors other than the originatinggroup. So although this concept is discussed in relation to the source of innovations it can be seenthat it also has implications for the adoption and diffusion phases.6.2.2 Adoption and Transfer of Innovations6.2.2.1 Understanding of Product Adoption from the Innovation LiteratureThe focus within the traditional innovation literature has been on the take up of new productsacross a population. This has been seen to involve early adopters and then the take up within thepopulation at large to a point where the product reaches a saturation level and adoption stabilisesover time (or declines as it is displaced with another product). This process has often been studiedin retrospect in terms of the way the innovation was promoted, the infrastructural changes needed,the characteristics of early adopters, the speed with which it was more widely adopted and so on(Rogers, 2003).Appleby Ltd July 2009