Innovation culture assessment: An exploratory diagnosis of a Taiwanese manufacturing company

• Main Author: TAY, Yong Keong
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2022
• Subjects: Innovation; Innovation culture; Innovation quotient; Process; Organisation; Diagnostic tool; 6 building blocks; Personas; Change; Closed culture; Innovation champions; Rao and Weintraub; Asian Studies; Organizational Behavior and Theory
• Online Access: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/etd_coll/433; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/etd_coll/article/1434/viewcontent/GPBA_AY2015_PhD_Tay_Yong_Keong.pdf
• Institution: Singapore Management University

The purpose of this research study is to better understand how manufacturing firms in Asia are trying to make innovation work and the challenges they are facing in creating and capturing new value. Based on a real-life case study of a medium-sized OEM lock manufacturer in Taiwan (“3ST”), the study sheds light on key building blocks of a robust corporate innovation culture with focus on ‘Values’, ‘Behaviours’, ‘Climate’, ‘Resources’, ‘Processes’, and ‘Success’, using a valid and reliable diagnostic innovation culture framework developed by Rao & Weintraub (2013). Besides the identification of critical gaps in 3ST’s innovation culture based on Rao and Weintraub’s Innovation Quotient instrument (2013) and a thematic analysis of interviews, this mixed method study reveals how the various corporate status groups within the manufacturing firm (managers, supervisors, etc. ) as well as the different business functions view 3ST’s innovation challenges and strengths. There are conflicting views between and within the various groups and functions with regards to the urgency of innovation which makes it difficult for management and staff to work together and innovate. Relative innovation weaknesses of 3ST include (i) the lack of innovation champions as a ‘resource’ as indicated by insufficient innovation activities and dedication to promoting change within the firm; (ii) a rather poor understanding of how to make innovation work and to avail suitable training resources on innovation; (iii) insufficient innovation ‘processes’ such as stage-gate systems for reviewing and prioritizing projects as well as (iv) an insufficient ROI of innovation efforts (‘success’) that stems from the fact that 3ST is unable to operationalize commercial opportunities and monetize innovative ideas. One failed opportunity refers to the design and development of smart locks for gun lockers. As the smart lock requirement for guns is very unique unlike 3ST’s existing product portfolio, despite numerous exchanges of ideas and several rounds of change requirements for the prototypes, the project eventually did not take off as both design and cost did not meet the customer’s requirements. A key issue was the lack of collaborative, customer centric prototyping skills. Practical recommendations to enhance 3ST’s innovation culture derived from the panoptical study include: 1. Turn the concept of innovation into concrete habits by promoting innovation awareness and active ideation engagement at all levels; 2. Create a knowledge depository for the transfer of knowledge and ideas across the organization; 3. Introduce a robust innovation governance framework while reducing bureaucracy in order to make innovation work; 4. Appoint innovation agents and champions to improve the participation of employees in innovation initiatives; and 5. Provide more internal and external resources to speed up the prototyping process to leverage promising innovation opportunities both within 3ST and amongst external stakeholders.