|Abstract: ||The thesis comprises four key papers, which provide fresh perspectives pertaining
to the key factors in the management of innovation: new ideas, people, transactions
First, a model of discovery is proposed, highlighting the importance of problem
reshaping and shifting in addition to usual problem solving approach. To
illustrate how they can be incorporated within existing models, the conventional
NK model is adapted in a novel way that not necessarily constrains agents to
local optima nearby. The extended model is then used to study effects of curiosity
and conditions under which analogy, recombination or local search would be
effective. Building on this model, we show how satisficing behaviour of agents can
be described by using cognitive constructs such as attention and stimulus, which
moderate the gap between local (agent) and non-local (real-world) information.
Second, Innovation entails the interfacing of communities with different traditions
and aspirations, in particular, the science and business domains. Through
a quasi-experimental design, we explore the micro-foundations of the contact and
conflict which define the science-business divide, strategies for mitigating discordance
and exploit synergies are discussed.
Third, the attempt to understand innovation as intra-firm or inter-firm process
from a consistent perspective within the existing theories of the firm has
provoked a reconceptualization of the 'firm'. A reductionist approach at the level
of actions and assets of the firm is found to achieve this reconciliation and also
helps introduce the concepts of quasi-boundary to appreciate interaction of firms
with the market and the institutions.
Third, the innovation process occasionally faces institutional impediments.
One of the preeminent changes has been the involvement of the universities in
innovation system, where its full commercial potential was realized over a century.
The historical observation of how multiple institutions were reformed provides
new insights into the mechanism of institutional entrepreneurship.
Finally, consolidation of each of the factors requires acknowledgment that the
innovation process exists in the context of each other, and are subject to evolution
and extraneous influences. The conclusion is an attempt at synthesizing the
four factors towards understanding the overarching dynamics in the innovation
ecosystem. To leverage on the independent developments at each level, a proposal
to build a consistent multi-level coherent framework for innovation is suggested.|