III
Technology and Innovation
Introduction
Technology is a way to produce something. This is a very broad definition which includes most activities that lead to value creation by corporations. A new product that is developed is a technology if it provides the consumer better health, higher caloric intake or enhanced welfare. A new service is also a technology if it reduces the anxiety of the consumers over the risk they face, if they give them the pleasure of enjoying a vacation or a smoother way to process a payment. Of course technology is also something that makes companies more productive because they can use more advance machines and software or because they can organize more efficiently their productive processes.
Given its centrality to productivity and competitiveness, the central question is âwhy do (most) companies not develop or have access to the best possible technologies?â One possible answer is that the institutional rules that shape the environment in which companies operate do not make it possible/profitable. This is the type of answer studied in the previous module.
An alternative (or complementary) answer is that the problem is in the capacity of companies to implement and develop the technologies that would make them more productive. In this alternative view, companies lack an essential factor to implement technologies, technological knowledge. Knowledge is not something companies can buy in the market. And therefore, they have to stick with the inefficient technologies they can implement and operate. The cases discussed in this module provide examples of companies and activities where this narrative is relevant.
Once one accepts that the scarcity of knowledge is critical and that the market cannot provide this missing factor, a natural question is âwhat role should the government play?â Traditionally, we have tended to think that innovation is something that governments should leave to private companies. However, in reality, many of the most significant innovations have the governmentâ stamp on them. This is the case of GPS, the internet, computers, and many of the pharmaceutical advances of the last century.
This observation raises at least a couple of important questions. First, should the government be directly involved in the development of technologies (in addition to its more wide-spread role as a financier of R&D)? Second, what role should it play when it comes to facilitating the diffusion of technologies? That is, when technologies have been already invented but despite that companies do not have the ability to implement them in their production processes?a
It is important to emphasize that, the cases in the module also enable participants to discuss the consequences for a companyâs strategy of the frictions that impede a proper allocation of knowledge in society. For example, the ABB case discusses the risk of imitation of ABB technologies in China; ABB, CoET and Malaysia discuss the commercialization of technologies; Inkaterra emphasizes the possibility of using foreign knowledge to implement a domestically crafted innovation.
The cases in the module are designed and sequenced to explore the contrast and similarities between rich and emerging economies when it comes to technology. To this end, the first five cases focus on emerging economies, while the last four are centered in two rich countries (Germany and the U.S.). From a sectoral perspective, the cases broadly cover all sectors in the economy (e.g. services, agriculture, and manufacturing). Finally, when writing the cases, me and my co-authors have tried to provide a historical perspective that allows the reader to assess the relative importance for current developments of contemporaneous factors versus others that are inherited from the past.
Synopses and Assignment Questions
Inkaterra
The case presents the unique business model of Inkaterra, a leading eco-tourism organization in Peru, and the different strategies the company can pursue to grow. Through the experience of Inkaterra the case studies two general issues. First, it discusses the potential barriers that exist for the development of the tourism sector. Second, it presents the debate of whether governments may want to use tourism as an engine of growth, and if so, what is the best strategy to preserve the environment.
AQ:
1. What is Inkaterraâs business model?
2. How should Inkaterra Grow?
3. What would it take for eco-tourism to take off in Peru?
ABB: âIn China, for Chinaâ
ABB, a power and automation Swiss engineering company had to decide if they wanted to be even more integrated into the Chinese economy, ABBâs biggest market, or if they should instead increase their presence in other emerging markets such as India and Brazil.
AQ:
1. Evaluate ABBâs strategy in China. How well have they managed their technologies?
2. Were they right to agree to transfer high voltage direct current technology?
3. Is their mid-market strategy a good idea? If it succeeds, what will Winmation mean for ABB?
Low carbon, Indigenous Innovations in China
For the past seven years or so, the Chinese government has been powering ahead with industrial policies to promote low-carbon energy technologies-wind, solar, electric batteries and vehicles, nuclear power, and even carbon capture and sequestration. In 2009, the government focused broadly on âindigenous innovation,â a policy to adopt and then develop technology in dozens of high-tech sectors. As with the earlier focus on renewables, explicit governmental policies and subsidies discriminate against foreign products and foreign companies invested in China. The net effects of these initiatives leave low-carbon energy industries in the United States in the dust.
AQ:
1. Why/How/where is China moving up the value chain?
2. Why is China pursuing indigenous innovations specifically in renewable energies?
3. Is it just China or can other countries do it too?
4. What should the US do with technologies to produce renewable energies?
CoET: Innovation in Africa
Dr. Jamidu Katima, the Principal of the College of Engineering and Technology (CoET) of the University of Dar es Salaam, knew that operating in Tanzania had its challenges. CoETâs mission as a technology center that innovated to solve local problems could be a great way to contribute to the countryâs growth while training Tanzaniaâs top talent. Yet, very few of its technologies developed at CoET had made it to market, and for those that had, the diffusion rate had been quite low.
AQ:
1. How should CoET be organized?
2. Do African firms adopt new technologies? Why?
3. What should be technological priority of African governments?
Malaysia: Standing on a Single Leaf
The case discusses the development of palm oil in Malaysia. This experience provides important insights about when and how government intervention can be successful in developing new sectors in the economy.
AQ:
1. Was the development of the palm oil sector in Malaysia the result of market forces or of government intervention?
2. Is the plantation sector a good sector to specialize?
3. When/how can economic activity shift to a new sector?
Fraunhofer: Innovation in Germany
Fraunhofer: Five Significant Innovations
Fraunhofer is one of the largest applied research organizations in the world. With 17,000 employees and a 1.6 billion euros budget, Fraunhofer has 60 institutes in Germany that cover most fields of science. The case examines the consequences that Fraunhofer has for the competitiveness of the German economy. It also explores whether the organization of R&D is affected by the size distribution of firms as well as by institutions in labor and financial markets.
AQ:
1. Is Fraunhofer an effective organization?
2. Are German companies com...