Dynamic – A large number and variety of collaborative opportunities and combinations thereof are
possible. Stakeholders are actively looking for collaborative opportunities or conceiving of new ways
to collaborate.
Organic – A bottom-up development that does not require an overdependence on a particular
stakeholder assuming a disproportionate share of risks or benefits. In such a situation buy-in of the
other stakeholders become exceedingly difficult and collaboration is either dissuaded or inconsistent
and inefficient. Organic growth occurs in an environment where an asymmetry of risks or benefits
among stakeholders does not develop into an impediment to innovation.
Sustainable – Ecosystem expansion and collaboration triggers additional expansion and collaboration.
Collaboration is iterative. Unforeseen paths and positive outcomes occur and collaboration may iterate
indefinitely at the ecosystem level.
A culture of innovation is created by sustained community building activities that are conducted from
a base of mutual empathy, mutual support and a common drive to generate innovation for the benefit
of all stakeholders and the local economy at-large. In a culture of innovation both sufficient risks and
incentives exist for the pursuit of innovation and innovation is a mutual objective without regard of the
source of innovation and the immediacy of the benefits to be derived for each individual stakeholder.
Every stakeholder understands and accepts the need to share in both the risks and benefits. Indeed
the consensus of shared risk within a culture of innovation prompts the conception and employment
of innovative approaches to identify and actuate collaboration among stakeholders.
How can we adequately illustrate such an abstract concept as a culture of innovation?
The best way to do so may be to describe how innovation is muted at the micro individual stakeholder
level. What stifles innovation is disturbing the risk-benefit dynamic. The reasons for failure of strategic
partnerships between large corporations and much smaller tech start-ups offers an excellent analogous
and illustrative case.
Differences in business cultures, an asymmetrical possession of resources and the inherent conflict
of interest between the immediate commercial interests of the corporation and the longer term ROI
interests of the start-up and its shareholders can be respectively correlated with dynamism, organic
growth and sustainability. The contrast between the highly structured and bureaucratic business
culture and decision-making processes of a large corporations and the more agile and stimulating
business culture of a start-up leads to a lack of mutual empathy and may result in dysfunctional
dynamics causing a severe disincentive for the start-up to continue to innovate. The development
of a dependent top-down relationship between the much larger corporation and a cash-starved
start-up is an impediment to organic growth. There is the danger that a start-up becomes effectively
a mere internal development team for the larger corporation where priorities are directed towards
the strategic objectives of the corporation and away from the vison of the start-up founders. Not
only is there an asymmetry regarding possession of resources there is also an asymmetry in regards
to benefits due to the inherent conflict of interest between the immediate commercial interests of
the corporation and the longer-term Return-On-Investment (ROI) interests of the start-up and its
shareholders. This conflict of interest is an impediment to sustainable innovation.
Such potential impediments to innovation found in a strategic partnership between a corporation and
a start-up is a microcosm of what could be impediments to innovation at the macro ecosystem level
if a proper culture of innovation is not fostered where an awareness of such possible impediments
is shared by all the stakeholders.
1.9.3 Benefits of a Culture of Innovation
It is the existence of a culture of innovation that ensure the dynamism and sustainable growth of
the ecosystem. It is the perceived culture of innovation that is the primary attraction for foreign
stakeholders and a pre-requisite to establishing one’s ecosystem as a center of innovation. Organic
19
Nurturing a start-up culture for digital development toolkit
and sustainable expansion of the ecosystem is the primary benefit. An increasing number and variety
of stakeholders leads to more of the three resources vital to innovators and more opportunities for
collaboration and combinations thereof. A sense of community will compel collaboration beyond
the incentive of individual self-interest. As we shall see in more detail in the next section there
are three types of needs. Some needs can be settled between two stakeholders. The fulfilment of
such need only requires the ability of the engaged stakeholders to identify each other, sufficient
self-interest incentives of the engaging parties and an environment that permits or facilitates such
engagement. A second need requires stakeholder champions to rally collaboration amongst more than
two stakeholders where identification and execution of such collaboration is made more complicated
because the opportunity to collaborate may be less obvious, the multiple stakeholders have a broader
range of capabilities to contribute and the degree of benefits to be derived for each stakeholder may
vary greatly creating an asymmetry of benefits and more effort to secure buy-in. A third community-
level need requires a degree of selflessness as the benefits to be derived is not immediate and/or
clear to some or all of the stakeholders. The need is to a great degree mutual with indirect benefits
for every stakeholder. For collaboration to occur a strong sense of community is required and an
understanding of each stakeholder role is vital. In a vibrant entrepreneurial community that exists
within a culture of innovation all three needs can be optimally pursued.
1.10 Basic Assumptions of Collaborative Framework
Before we proceed to a discussion of the framework we must first set forth some underlying
assumptions behind framework. There are three primary assumptions of the collaborative framework
we are about to examine.
•
User-Centric
The user being entrepreneurs and all the other stakeholders performing supporting roles. The focus
is on aiding entrepreneurs to build innovative ventures and discover improved processes, products
and services. Regarding public policy making support should also be extended to those stakeholders
performing supporting roles for the entrepreneurs as well as a focus on stakeholder needs, not
political priorities.
•
Three Critical Resources for Start-up
•
There are three types of resources critical for start-up
They include financial, knowledge-based and relational resources. Each local stakeholder has one or
more of these resource types to offer and in a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem the stakeholders
effectively coordinate to more efficiently allocate their resources. Multiple stakeholder coordination
to deliver resources in more organized and focused form usually results in the creation of major
bootstrapping opportunities that permits entrepreneurs to acquire all three types of critical resources
from one program or source. Furthermore in a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem additional foreign
stakeholders are attracted and the amount and variety of resources increased.
•
Systems of Innovation
Consistent with the systems of innovation approach acceleration of digital innovation and
entrepreneurship is best achieved through improved local entrepreneurial ecosystem internal
dynamics in which the various stakeholders are optimally collaborating and, similar to a successful
sports team, each player is effectively performing their primary role. Only through such improved
dynamics can a local start-up ecosystem truly attain a vibrant state.
Digital Innovation Ecosystem
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |