| Learning objectives |
At the end of the course, students should be able
to:
- Account for the main terms and definitions central in economics
and management of innovation
- Recognize how the economics and governance of different
organizational types affect their behavior in innovation
- Analyze the characteristics of inter-organizational
collaboration on innovation and recognize the skills required to
handle them
- Integrate a number of factors, internal and external to the
organization, in decision-related analysis
- Describe and assess the potential for formal and informal
external knowledge sourcing and how it may help the organization to
pursue innovations
|
| Examination |
|
Managing
Innovation:
|
| Exam
ECTS |
7,5 |
| Examination form |
Written sit-in exam on CBS'
computers |
| Individual or group exam |
Individual exam |
| Assignment type |
Case based assignment |
| Duration |
4 hours |
| Grading scale |
7-point grading scale |
| Examiner(s) |
One internal examiner |
| Exam period |
Spring |
| Aids |
Open book: all written and electronic aids,
including internet access
|
| Make-up exam/re-exam |
Same examination form as the ordinary exam
If the number of registered candidates for the make-up
examination/re-take examination warrants that it may most
appropriately be held as an oral examination, the programme office
will inform the students that the make-up examination/re-take
examination will be held as an oral examination
instead.
|
|
| Course content, structure and pedagogical
approach |
|
What enables some firms to continuously innovate and capture
market shares while others fail and go out of business? This course
builds analytical insight into relationships between knowledge,
innovation and competitiveness and into their implications for the
management of innovation. Innovation is by definition an activity
with uncertain outcomes and we will discuss how organizations can
successfully navigate situations characterized by high ambiguity
and volatility. The course introduces theories, concepts, and
methods for the analysis of innovations at the levels of projects,
firms and industries, in order to develop students’ analytical
skills and critical thinking. The course also introduces a set of
tools related to innovation practices of firms, as one of the ways
in which the course bridges and integrates academic analysis of
innovations with the practical issues of their
management.
|
| Description of the teaching methods |
| Teaching includes lecture-style classes, in-class
workshops with students presenting and actively participating in
discussions around pre-assigned cases and/or exercises, and guest
presentations by academics and practitioners. Preparation before
class is of crucial importance. |
| Feedback during the teaching period |
| Feedback will be offered in a number of ways.
Most sessions will feature an introductory Kahoot quiz based on the
readings assigned at home so that students can assess their
understanding of the material. There will be case discussion and
exercise in class, with both individual and group presentations.
Additionally, one session is devoted to a mock exam followed by
peer grading, where students can prepare for the exam format and at
the same time assess the work of their classmates. Finally,
individual feedback is offered during office hours. |
| Student workload |
| Teaching |
33 hours |
| Preparation/reading |
133 hours |
| Exam |
40 hours |
|
| Expected literature |
- Chesbrough, H. 2003. The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan
Management Review, Spring, 35-41
- Huston & Sakkab, 2006, Connect and Develop: Inside
P&G’s New Model for Innovation, Harvard Business Review
- Teece D, 1986. Profiting from technological innovation:
implications for collaboration, licensing, and public policy.
Research Policy 15, 285-305
- Perkmann, M., V. Tartari, M. McKelvey, E. Autio, A. Broström,
P. D’Este, R. Fini, A. Geuna, R. Grimaldi, A. Hughes, S. Krabel, M.
Kitson, P. Llerena, F. Lissoni, A. Salter, M. Sobrero (2013).
Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the
literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy 42(2)
423-442.
|
|
Permalink