IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxviiy2024i3p499-510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological Aspects of Measuring the Innovation Maturity of Enterprises - Proposal of the Author’s Own Innovation Maturity Model

Author

Listed:
  • Monika Inkow

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present ways of measuring the innovation maturity of enterprises from the point of view of innovation maturity models, and to present the author’s own model that enterprises could use on their own. Design/Methodology/Approach: The first part of the article presents a short summary of literature studies on existing innovation maturity models. In the second part, the author presents her own innovation maturity model and the results of the research that was conducted in IT enterprises located in the Lubusz Voivodeship in Poland. Findings: The proposed innovation maturity model works well as a tool for self-assessment of enterprises, but unfortunately, it has some flaws as well. Firstly, due to the fact that the research was conducted only on a sample of IT enterprises, its applicability to other industries has not yet been determined, and additionally, the measurement of the innovation maturity model carried out in the form of self-assessment may be unreliable if it is not carried out in a reliable and objective manner. Practical Implications: The innovation maturity model proposed in the research can be successfully used by enterprises to measure their level of maturity; additionally, the proposed innovation maturity matrix gives directions to entrepreneurs in which areas they should make changes in order to move to a higher level of innovation maturity. It is therefore not only a tool for identifying changes in the level of innovation maturity, as some of the existing models, but also a tool containing certain recommendations for business practice allowing to increase the level of innovative capabilities and, consequently, the level of innovation maturity. Originality/Value: The paper presents a new tool for measuring the innovation maturity of enterprises. The tool is easy to use and, unlike many existing models, it indicates in which areas the company should make changes in order to develop its innovation maturity.

Suggested Citation

  • Monika Inkow, 2024. "Methodological Aspects of Measuring the Innovation Maturity of Enterprises - Proposal of the Author’s Own Innovation Maturity Model," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 499-510.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxvii:y:2024:i:3:p:499-510
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/3444/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mario Rapaccini & Nicola Saccani & Giuditta Pezzotta & Thomas Burger & Walter Ganz, 2013. "Service development in product-service systems: a maturity model," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(3-4), pages 300-319, February.
    2. Bernd Carsten Stahl & Michael Obach & Emad Yaghmaei & Veikko Ikonen & Kate Chatfield & Alexander Brem, 2017. "The Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Maturity Model: Linking Theory and Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ana Batlles-delaFuente & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & José Antonio Plaza-Úbeda & Emilio Abad-Segura, 2021. "Sustainable Business Model in the Product-Service System: Analysis of Global Research and Associated EU Legislation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-33, September.
    2. Oier Imaz & Andoni Eizagirre, 2020. "Responsible Innovation for Sustainable Development Goals in Business: An Agenda for Cooperative Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Agata Gurzawska & Markus Mäkinen & Philip Brey, 2017. "Implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Practices in Industry: Providing the Right Incentives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-26, September.
    4. Jolita Ceicyte & Monika Petraite, 2018. "Networked Responsibility Approach for Responsible Innovation: Perspective of the Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Mao, Caixia & Koide, Ryu & Brem, Alexander & Akenji, Lewis, 2020. "Technology foresight for social good: Social implications of technological innovation by 2050 from a Global Expert Survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Francesco Facchini & Joanna Oleśków-Szłapka & Luigi Ranieri & Andrea Urbinati, 2019. "A Maturity Model for Logistics 4.0: An Empirical Analysis and a Roadmap for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, December.
    7. Sophie Lythreatis & Abdul-Nasser El-Kassar & Palie Smart & Alberto Ferraris, 2024. "Participative leadership, ethical climate and responsible innovation perceptions: evidence from South Korea," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 1285-1312, September.
    8. Tatiana Iakovleva & Elin Oftedal & John Bessant, 2021. "Changing Role of Users—Innovating Responsibly in Digital Health," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Huikkola, Tuomas & Kohtamäki, Marko & Rabetino, Rodrigo & Makkonen, Hannu & Holtkamp, Philipp, 2022. "Overcoming the challenges of smart solution development: Co-alignment of processes, routines, and practices to manage product, service, and software integration," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Flick, Catherine & Zamani, Efpraxia D. & Stahl, Bernd Carsten & Brem, Alexander, 2020. "The future of ICT for health and ageing: Unveiling ethical and social issues through horizon scanning foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    11. Nathasit Gerdsri & Boonkiart Iewwongcharoen & Kittichai Rajchamaha & Nisit Manotungvorapun & Jakapong Pongthanaisawan & Watcharin Witthayaweerasak, 2021. "Capability Assessment toward Sustainable Development of Business Incubators: Framework and Experience Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    12. Mark Ryan & Josephina Antoniou & Laurence Brooks & Tilimbe Jiya & Kevin Macnish & Bernd Stahl, 2020. "The Ethical Balance of Using Smart Information Systems for Promoting the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Pascale Lehoux & Hudson Pacifico Silva & Renata Pozelli Sabio & Federico Roncarolo, 2018. "The Unexplored Contribution of Responsible Innovation in Health to Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, November.
    14. Edilson Bacinello & Gérson Tontini & Anete Alberton, 2020. "Influence of maturity on corporate social responsibility and sustainable innovation in business performance," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 749-759, March.
    15. Ilona Skačkauskienė & Povilas Švogžlys, 2021. "Improving the Process of Developing New Services Using Uncertain Data," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    16. Mylona, Kalliopi & Maragkoudakis, Petros & Miko, Ladislav & Bock, Anne-Katrin & Wollgast, Jan & Caldeira, Sandra & Ulberth, Franz, 2018. "Viewpoint: Future of food safety and nutrition - Seeking win-wins, coping with trade-offs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 143-146.
    17. Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi & Alexander Brem, 2018. "Antecedents of Corporate Environmental Commitments: The Role of Customers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-10, June.
    18. Ibo Van de Poel & Lotte Asveld & Steven Flipse & Pim Klaassen & Victor Scholten & Emad Yaghmaei, 2017. "Company Strategies for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): A Conceptual Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, November.
    19. Christine Chou, 2018. "Organizational Orientations, Industrial Category, and Responsible Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, March.
    20. Jilde Garst & Vincent Blok & Léon Jansen & Onno S. W. F. Omta, 2017. "Responsibility versus Profit: The Motives of Food Firms for Healthy Product Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-29, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation maturity model; innovation maturity matrix; innovation.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxvii:y:2024:i:3:p:499-510. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.