Refine
Document Type
- Workingpaper / Report (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- no (3)
Keywords
- A_FBMV (1)
Department/institution
The article argues that European innovators can profit from some of the concepts of philosophical Daoism, namely "wu-wei" (non-interference) and "ziran" ("go with the flow"). Whereas most Western approaches to innovation emphasize the different stages of the creative process as well as tools to enhance creativity, the Daoist world view allows for the mind to just wander and thus spontaneously discover the solution to a problem in a rather detached state of mind. Creative minds need space for personal development and the permission to wander around without being exposed to control and instant judgement on the results. Training individuals in the tools and techniques of problem solving and creativity as the common approach in innovation management is certainly necessary, but in the end it is the intellectual accomplishment of a creative mind that produces innovation. Managers can allow this to happen when they get the balance of control and non-interference right.
The working paper at hand assumes that differences of innovativeness of different countries can be explained to a certain extent by cultural differences. Thus, the paper deals with the research question of which cultural dimensions have an influence on national innovativeness. Previous research mainly uses the Hofstede-dimensions to describe cultural differences and often focuses on single parameters to describe national innovativeness (e.g. number of patents per capita). This paper, instead, uses the dimensions of the GLOBE-study which builds on the findings of Hofstede but is more up-to-date and comprehensive and uses two innovation indexes – the Global Innovation Index (GII) and the Innovation Union Scoreboard (IUS) – to describe national innovativeness. The authors use correlation analysis to find relationships between the GLOBEdimensions and the innovation indexes. They find positive correlations of innovativeness (both indexes) to Future Orientation (practice scale), Gender Egalitarianism (value scale), Human Orientation (value scale) and Uncertainty Avoidance (practice scale) as well as negative correlations to In-Group Collectivism (practice scale), Future Orientation (value scale) and Uncertainty Avoidance (value scale). Some of the findings are contrary to existing hypotheses, e.g. only a weak negative correlation of Power Distance to one of the indexes. Furthermore the findings show significant differences between practice scales and value scales, especially concerning Future Orientation and Uncertainty Avoidance which deserve further examination. Overall it can be concluded that culture has an impact on national innovativeness. The different cultural dimensions of the GLOBE-study show a multi-faceted interrelationship between culture and innovation. To come to a concise answer for the question which dimensions affect national innovativeness in which way additional research will be necessary.