R & ampampD→ Pilot → Production → Sales
The most typical representative view of the linear model is reflected in the report Science-Endless Frontier (1890- 197) by Van Nevard Bush, the scientific adviser to President Roosevelt. The report has two basic points: (basic research or pure research itself does not consider the actual consequences; Basic science has long-term fundamental significance and is the source of technological innovation. "Influenced by Bush's thinking paradigm, there has emerged a model from basic science to technological innovation to development, production and economic development." This model is a one-dimensional "linear model" representing the dynamic form, that is, basic research drives application research and development; Then, according to whether innovation is a product or a process, it turns to production or management.
Therefore, Bush's views can be expressed in a linear form, namely:
Basic research → applied research → development → production and operation.
American scholar D.E. Stokes made a thorough study and analysis of Pasteur's work, thus revealing the limitations of Bush's above linear model. In "Pasteur Quadrant: Basic Science-Technological Innovation" (199), Stokes affirmed the historical role of Bush's viewpoint and pointedly pointed out its limitations. Stokes pointed out:
"However, the influence of this paradigm (Bush's) comes at a price, because it is both vague and profound. Bush's statement about the fundamental purpose of basic science is too narrow in explaining the motivation of scientific work; However, his exposition on the significance of basic research to technological progress is too narrow in explaining the actual source of technological innovation, which makes it more difficult to think about a series of policy issues using this paradigm. This requires a clearer understanding of the relationship between scientific research objectives, scientific discoveries and technological progress.
The stock specifically pointed out the following points:
1, there is no clear boundary between basic research and applied research, and some applied research is also outstanding basic research;
2. The process of scientific research is influenced by both cognitive goals and application goals; Pasteur and many other studies also reflect the integration of dual goals;
3. It is too simple to describe the one-way flow from scientific discovery to technological innovation with a single linear model;
Ben is relatively backward in basic science, but he has achieved great success in production technology. This example shows that the relationship between science and technology is far more complicated than Bush's single linear relationship.
The reason why innovation can break through the linear model and then break through the diffusion theory and enter the era of innovation 2.0 depends on the new environment formed under the knowledge society. First of all, the development of information and communication technology and the formation of knowledge network have broken through the physical bottleneck of traditional knowledge dissemination, and human beings can enjoy and disseminate knowledge and information more quickly and conveniently by using knowledge network. Secondly, the environment of knowledge network eliminates information asymmetry to the maximum extent, which makes the artificially constructed knowledge barriers and information barriers more and more unsustainable under today's knowledge network; More importantly, more and more researchers and timekeepers are beginning to pay attention to the information explosion in the knowledge society. Just because information can be disseminated does not mean that information can be effectively disseminated. Many knowledge encapsulation technologies that are beneficial to the rapid retrieval, understanding and application of knowledge make knowledge modular and convenient for more people to use. The external environment of the above-mentioned knowledge society is helpful for a wider range of innovative groups to engage in scientific and technological innovation activities on an open and free platform. At the same time, the knowledge society has also produced a wider demand for innovation. The external environment makes it possible for innovative subjects to carry out innovative activities, and also creates more opportunities for knowledge to collide with the needs of application occasions. This collision is the biggest source of innovation activities, and it also confirms Schumpeter's basic view that innovation comes from production activities. Therefore, the factors of knowledge society environment and demand have given birth to the vigorous development of innovation 2.0 practice activities.
Now we know that both natural science and humanities, including the innovation process, are changing from production paradigm to service paradigm, and from linear thinking mode to nonlinear thinking mode. "Technological innovation is regarded as a complex emerging phenomenon under the complex interaction between innovation subjects and innovation elements, and it is the product of the co-evolution of technological progress and applied innovation under the innovation ecology. The people-oriented innovation 2.0 model, which focuses on value realization and user participation, has also become an important exploration for innovation recognition in the new century. " "Local changes in the ecological economy or political system may cause a global crisis. The linear way of thinking, the view that the whole is only the sum of all parts, is obviously outdated. " Felix Janszen, an American management scholar, has studied the nonlinear characteristics of the innovation process for many years and achieved many important theoretical achievements and practical effects. In his book "The Age of Innovation", he said that more than ten years ago, when he began to study this subject, he was not understood. However, with the development of information network, the nonlinear characteristics of economic system have become an undeniable fact for every economist in the network age. Mainstream economists pay due attention to the nonlinear behavior of economic system, so when people talk about the new economic system, the nonlinear behavior of economic system becomes a hot topic.
Omrod, a British economist, was the head of the Economist's economic advisory group and a visiting professor of economics at London and Manchester College. Now he is called an important figure in post-orthodox economics. He published a book called Death of Economics in 1994, and wrote another book called Butterfly Economics in 1998. In the preface of the latter book, he said: "One argument I wanted to make ten years ago is that traditional economics regards economy and society as a machine. On the contrary, human society is more like a living organism-a living animal, and its behavior can only be understood through the complex interaction of its parts. It is this concept and thought that constitutes the basic theme of butterfly effect economics. "
Yes, the "butterfly effect" is the most frequently quoted metaphor in chaos theory: it shows the nonlinear development of things, that is, the wings of a butterfly can trigger a big storm on the other side of the earth. Butterfly effect economics emphasizes that economics should consider the nonlinear effects of interaction and accumulation of various factors, which shows extreme uncertainty and unpredictability in the economic field. Therefore, Mai Hewald believes that technological innovation has entered the fourth generation-the era of organized individual invention. He left Microsoft with $650 million in Microsoft stock and founded an "intelligent venture capital" company, which he called the "invention factory". The fourth generation of technological innovation has two remarkable characteristics: 1, and really good ideas can get a lot of financial support; Independent inventors have new information tools, such as high-performance computers, which can simulate and experiment new products in three dimensions, which has never happened before.
Mai's four-generation model of technological innovation has inspired people a lot, but it is still idealistic on the whole. Even from his idealized analysis, we can still see that technological innovation is not a linear process, but a nonlinear process in which various factors interact, among which patent law, company law, venture capital and organization management all play a role in technological innovation, which is not completely predictable and controllable. With regard to the analysis of the Silicon Valley model, it is controversial that by the spring of 2000, Silicon Valley had entered a low ebb. In the book "Advantages of Silicon Valley-Habitat for Innovation and Entrepreneurship" written by many insiders in Silicon Valley, Professor Qian Yingyi, the author of "Chinese Preface", had such a passage when introducing the book:
"The English version of this book was published at the peak of Silicon Valley in 2000, while the Chinese version coincided with the adjustment period of the US economic recession and the development of Silicon Valley (Silicon Valley experienced the low tide in the early 1970s, mid-1980s and early 1990s). In fact, anyone familiar with the history of Silicon Valley knows that the development of Silicon Valley has experienced many twists and turns, and the industry is constantly updated in the constant ups and downs. Every adjustment is to prepare for a new breakthrough. " This shows that the Silicon Valley model does not seem to be out of date, but has been adjusted to "prepare for new breakthroughs". It is also seen from the book that the future development of Silicon Valley will tend to be networked and clustered, which means that it will develop in a more complex interaction and nonlinear direction. The formation of knowledge society promoted by the integration and development of information and communication technology and its influence on innovation have been further recognized. The scientific community further reflects on the understanding of technological innovation. Innovation is no longer a linear chain from research to application, but a spreading process from people to people. In 2007, Ge Ting and others summarized seven major advances in international innovation theory on the basis of studying the recent report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). This paper emphasizes the original position of value realization in innovation activities, which is considered as the basic standard to measure the success or failure of innovation. Based on this, the dynamic nonlinear interactive innovation model replaces the linear model, which highlights the multi-level, multi-link and multi-agent participation of innovation. Non-technical innovation (institutional innovation) and strengthening the role of non-technical elements in innovation have also become the focus of attention in the development of innovation theory. Innovation is further placed in the vision of complexity science. Technological innovation is regarded as a complex emerging phenomenon under the complex interaction between innovation subject and innovation elements, and it is the product of the co-evolution of technological progress and applied innovation under the innovation ecology. The people-oriented innovation 2.0 model, which pays attention to value realization and user participation, has also become an important exploration for re-understanding innovation in the new century.
As Jiang said: "Innovation is the result of introducing new technologies, new processes, new services, new markets and new forms of organization and management. In most cases, it is the result of the mutual penetration of the above factors, because there is an interdependent relationship between the factors, and the whole system is also a spiral rising process. In short, innovation is not an independent event, but a combination of many spiral events. Therefore, it is difficult to judge which moment of innovation has produced results, or which individual factors have contributed to the success of innovation. "
Innovation is an uncontrollable and unpredictable nonlinear process. The above discussion is to illustrate the nonlinear characteristics of interdependence and interaction of various factors in the process of innovation. This section will discuss the paradox in the process of innovation from the essence of innovation itself.
As mentioned earlier, Jiang listed the following five paradoxes that are common in the process of innovation in his book "The Age of Innovation" (page 255). These paradoxes come from the discussion of "problems and paradoxes" in Castie's book "The Real World". Paradox 6, which I got from Peter Senge's The Fifth Discipline, aims to illustrate the nonlinear process in the process of innovation.
Paradox 1: Innovation is "creative destruction"
Paradox 2: Successful innovation requires both disorder and control (the edge of chaos).
Paradox 3: The direction of innovation management is to reduce uncertainty, but at the same time, we should also make use of uncertainty.
Paradox 4: Innovation emphasizes the elimination of barriers and bottlenecks, but it also creates new barriers and bottlenecks, which are both predictable and unpredictable.
Paradox 5: Innovation can be regarded as both an event and a process.
In addition to the above five paradoxes, a more common paradox in the process of innovation, that is, the promotion factors and inhibition factors pointed out by Shengji are mutually restrictive.
Paradox 6: the strengthening chain and limiting chain of innovation process,
For a simple example, China's accession to the WTO is decided and promoted by the government, but once it enters the WTO, the government's functions will fade out, so there is a paradox between the strengthening and fading out of government functions, and the same dilemma will be encountered in the future innovation process. In a word, the existence of paradox shows the nonlinear process and mechanism in the process of innovation.