Generic Heurorithm of Innovation Management from Generating Ideas to Commercialization

Abstract

Introduction In today's economy the competitiveness level of the country is mainly determined by the efficiency of the national innovation system--the amount of innovation and volume of competitive high-tech products produced. In recent decades, Russia is working on the creation of such system, forming various kinds of support for innovation, intensively developing infrastructure--technology parks, innovation and technology centers, innovative-industrial complexes and clusters, centers of technology transfer and commercialization, coaching centers, business incubators, and even science cities. However, efforts to create a national innovation system yet have a little impact on the growth of the quantity and quality of innovations. In the world rankings of competitiveness Russia does not rise above 50s positions. One of the reasons for this situation lies in the fact that many innovators practically don't have the effective tools (methods, techniques and means) for knowledge management of the creative process at all stages of innovative activity--from generating competitive ideas to their commercialization. 1. Disadvantages of the traditional approach to innovation support The dominating approach to the construction of national innovation system focuses on the process of commercialization of scientific and technical activities results, i.e. bringing innovations to the market. It is assumed that the very innovations (concept technical solutions of varying degrees of maturity) either already exist, or successfully created within processes, the support of which is not a priority of the innovation system. As a result, the most important inalienable stages of the innovation cycle, providing the formation of innovation (the definition and specification of technically implementable needs, formulation of the problem of creating a novelty, consistent solution of this problem by the methods of scientific and technical creativity), are on the periphery of the innovation management [1-3]. The support of these stages by the current innovation infrastructure is minimal and is reduced only to formal issues (for example, planning and accounting of jobs by means of the project management technology). All intentional problems of conceptual design are solved without the use of system-wide resources of scientific and methodological support, provided by the innovation infrastructure. Several researchers justify this distribution of priorities between the areas of responsibility of the innovation system by the creative nature of designing a novelties, complicating their formalization. Also, there is a point of view that the problem of creating novelties is not actual (there is a sea of ideas), and the effectiveness of the innovation process is determined by the marketing of the results of scientific and technical activities and the search for sources of funding for their commercialization. In our opinion these arguments cannot be accepted, because it is not about formalizing the process of scientific and technical creativity and knowledge of the subject areas in which it is under way, but about ensuring their advanced scientific, methodical and information support. Research of engineering creativity process, cognitive technologies and heuristic methods of conceptual design indicate the existence of objective laws and regularities of the technology and engineering development, and invariant to the domain methods of the directed search and synthesis of new technical solutions [4-6]. Ideally, every specialist involved in the innovation process should possess the appropriate methodology and have access to the cross-industry facilities of heuristics that support it [7]. Creating such environment for innovation is the task of the national innovation infrastructure, which should include scientific, methodical and information support means, covering all stages of the innovation cycle, including creative ones. …