| 创新董事对企业创新能力的影响研究 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 杜龙政.创新董事对企业创新能力的影响研究[J].科研管理,2006,40(12):243-252. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 杜龙政 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 内蒙古财经大学工商管理学院，内蒙古 呼和浩特010070 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 创新治理视域下创新董事作为创新治理的主体，其内涵为“专家+董事+授权”。本文首先通过数学建模，形成创新董事直接和间接作用下的企业创新能力模型；然后采用德尔菲法提炼出影响创新董事发挥作用的八个因素，继而以创新董事为潜变量，运用结构方程模型分析其对企业创新能力的影响。研究发现创新董事的直接作用、间接作用均与创新能力正相关，创新治理的关键是对创新者“赋权”，企业创新能力提升的有效逻辑是“创新治理→科技+权力的结合→创新制度供给→创新能力提升”。故企业应设立创新董事，进行硬授权、给予话语权，构建创新驱动的制度环境。为实现企业由“生产驱动型”向“创新驱动型”转变，国企须从“行政型治理”向“经济型治理”转变，民企须从“控制型”向“授权型”转变。
|
| 收稿时间： | 2018-03-29 |
A research on the influence of innovation directors on enterprise innovation ability |
| |
| Du Longzheng.A research on the influence of innovation directors on enterprise innovation ability[J].Science Research Management,2006,40(12):243-252. |
| |
| Authors: | Du Longzheng |
| |
| Institution: | School of Business Administration，Inner Mongolia University of Finance and Economics, Hohhot 010070, Inner Mongolia,China |
| |
| Abstract: | The new supply economics emphasizes the perception of the supply side. Every industrial revolution originates from the supply side innovation. The development of human society experiences a cycle of “science and technology revolution→productivity development→institutional innovation→new science and technology revolution”. On the macro level, the supply-side reform is characterized by deepening the reform of the government, innovating the supply of the system, and realizing the conversion of new and old driving force. On the micro level, the supply-side reform is manifested in the improvement of the enterprise’s innovation ability. And under the global perspective, enterprise R&D management needs to be upgraded from “production-oriented” technology management to “innovation-oriented” innovation governance. From the existing literature, it is obviously a global trend that people who implement innovation have greater power and participate in high-level governance: CTO needs to develop from specialist to generalist, and deal with the relationship with the CEO, and even enter the board of directors and become innovation director to resolve “power conflicts” with senior management.Innovation director is treated as the main body of enterprise innovation governance under the perspective of innovation governance. First of all, the definition of innovation director is “expert + director + authorization”, and then through mathematical modeling, the model of enterprise innovation ability is formed under the direct and indirect roles of innovation director; by using the Delphi method, eight factors that influence the role of innovation director are extracted, includingexert’s knowledge, technical skills, scientists, director’s attitudes, diligence, participation, director’s hard and soft authorization.Then, with the innovation director as the latent variable, the structural equation model is used to analyze its impact on the innovation ability of enterprises. The study finds that the direct and indirect roles of innovation director are positively related to innovation ability. The direct role of innovation director has a greater impact on the ability of enterprises to innovate than the indirect role. In terms of the eight influential factors of direct effect, the path coefficient of hard authorization is the largest, and the “management decision-making power granted by the shareholders’ meeting” has the greatest impact on hard authorization; the path coefficient of knowledge ability is also large, indicating that the forward-looking vision of the innovation director is critical. The influence factor of director’s meeting attendance in the board of directors has the greatest effect, indicating that the participation of innovation director can promote the formulation and implementation of the R&D strategy. As far as the eight influential factors of indirect effects are concerned, the “technical ability” has the largest path coefficient, because the exertion of indirect role depends on the expert effect of the innovation director rather than the power. So the direct role of the innovating director as executive director helps to generate innovation institutional supply, and hard authorizations including strategies, decisions, organizations, incentives, etc., can enhance a company’s ability to innovate. Therefore, enterprises should set up innovation directors, carry out hard authorization, give the right to speak, and build an innovation-driven institutional environment.Research shows that, first, the innovation director is not only a technical expert, but he demands the cooperation of “authorization” and “director” to play a direct role, timely launch the institutional supply of incentive innovation. Innovation director is a two-dimensional combination of “science and technology” and “power”,which plays a key role in promoting the transformation of enterprise from “production-driven” to “innovation-driven” and can lay a micro foundation for supply-side reform. Second, the supply-side reform is to promote reform and innovation through innovation of government governance, and to enhance innovation ability through micro-enterprise innovation governance. It is the key to the “empowerment” to innovators, and the effective logic for the improvement of enterprise innovation ability is “innovation governance→new technology + power combination→innovation institutional supply→innovation ability improvement”.Innovation governance with innovation director as the core enhances the innovation ability of enterprises through institutional innovation, governments and companies need to pay close attention to the following aspects. Firstly, the key to the transformation of enterprises from “production type” to “innovation type” is “empowerment”. The core of innovation governance is to give innovators the right to speak. In the internet era, enterprises have changed from the “big corps” operations to the “special warfare groups” operations. Innovation governance requires the empowerment to experts. For state-owned enterprises, it is necessary to continue to promote the transformation from “administrative governance” to “economic governance”. The government should liberate the R&D investment in the technological frontier areas from the total wages, and even give equity, and accelerate the transformation to economic governance. For private enterprises, the transition from “control” to “authorization” must be realized.Secondly, innovation governance should coordinate the relationship between governance and management, and keep the balance of “power and technology”. If there is power without technology, only the market-oriented and manufacturing-oriented enterprises will be created. Because if the innovation director does not go deep into the technology frontier, he can’t play the expert role. If there is technology without power, it is difficult to realize the industrialization of technology by the function of pure technical expert; empowering innovators can open up the channel for enterprises to accelerate innovation, instead of just making R&D and innovation a tool for profit. It is crucial to play the direct role of the innovation director. Its realization path is the organic combination of “technology and power”.Thirdly, in the context of globalization, Chinese companies should take advantage of innovation directors, integrate global innovation resources, establish a global innovation platform, and accelerate the improvement of innovation ability. The Belt and Road Initiative has created unprecedented advantages for Chinese companies to go global. Through the establishment of innovation governance mechanisms, Chinese enterprises have taken advantage of the integrating advantages of innovation directors in selecting overseas scientific and technological resources and exploring new technologies in the future, making full use of western technology accumulation, realizing the integration and learning of R&D resources at home and abroad, and standing at the forefront of world development. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
| 点击此处可从《科研管理》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《科研管理》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
