Analyzing Orgnizational Innovation
Analyzing Organizational Innovations
Nokia’s innovative role in the Finnish education and private business system is a fantastic idea. What was done is Nokia utilizes resources in Finland but at the same time they produce innovative resources through the education system that benefits all (Ali-Yrkkö & Hermans, 2002). From innovation resources such as the educational system, skilled labor, and Takes research and development (R&D) funding, to name a few. Similarly, Finland has reaped benefits from Nokia (Ali-Yrkkö & Hermans, 2002). I could consider this a Category 3 in the innovation Categories found in figure 1.4 for the simple reason the concept is not of the norm (White & Bruton, 2008, figure 1.4). Nokia innovation in this way causes a backlash that benefits the country by using the resources of the country education system they train the young men and women in an educational skill. Their impact on R and D in Finland is close to 1/3 of the national GDP. It would be like if Saudi Aramco established the same idea in places like Jamaica or Hawaii. That would create almost a symbiosis relationship with them to develop resources.
Another way Nokia is innovating itself and research in the process of venturing that falls into category 1 within the innovative categories (White & Bruton, 2008, p. 22). In 1998, Nokia formed a solely new division that focused on new ventures. Their whole jobs were to create growth with the company in new markets and finding a way to best apply Nokia to existing markets. Even though Seventy percent of Nokia’s new ventures were either discontinued or entirely divested (“Extracting Value from Corporate Venturing | MIT Sloan Management Review,” n.d.) and 21% were absorbed into existing business units and ceased to exist as independent ventures (“Extracting Value from Corporate Venturing | MIT Sloan Management Review,” n.d.) twenty-five percent overall was valued as creating new organizational opportunities and capabilities. I thought about
Nokia’s innovative role in the Finnish education and private business system is a fantastic idea. What was done is Nokia utilizes resources in Finland but at the same time they produce innovative resources through the education system that benefits all (Ali-Yrkkö & Hermans, 2002). From innovation resources such as the educational system, skilled labor, and Takes research and development (R&D) funding, to name a few. Similarly, Finland has reaped benefits from Nokia (Ali-Yrkkö & Hermans, 2002). I could consider this a Category 3 in the innovation Categories found in figure 1.4 for the simple reason the concept is not of the norm (White & Bruton, 2008, figure 1.4). Nokia innovation in this way causes a backlash that benefits the country by using the resources of the country education system they train the young men and women in an educational skill. Their impact on R and D in Finland is close to 1/3 of the national GDP. It would be like if Saudi Aramco established the same idea in places like Jamaica or Hawaii. That would create almost a symbiosis relationship with them to develop resources.
Another way Nokia is innovating itself and research in the process of venturing that falls into category 1 within the innovative categories (White & Bruton, 2008, p. 22). In 1998, Nokia formed a solely new division that focused on new ventures. Their whole jobs were to create growth with the company in new markets and finding a way to best apply Nokia to existing markets. Even though Seventy percent of Nokia’s new ventures were either discontinued or entirely divested (“Extracting Value from Corporate Venturing | MIT Sloan Management Review,” n.d.) and 21% were absorbed into existing business units and ceased to exist as independent ventures (“Extracting Value from Corporate Venturing | MIT Sloan Management Review,” n.d.) twenty-five percent overall was valued as creating new organizational opportunities and capabilities. I thought about