Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Competitive Strategies for Small and Medium Enterprises pp 77–92Cite as

The Innovation Triple Challenge: A Creativity Check for SMES

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

In this chapter you will learn how creativity is a key element to deal with challenges that SMEs must overcome to innovate. For this purpose, the innovation challenges in SMEs are reviewed, the concept of creativity and its relationship with organizational innovation is discussed. A five-step approach to act creatively producing innovative propositions is presented. Finally, a creativity check for SMEs based on the Need for Closure Scale invites to a self-assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In a sense that “there are no universals given in advance that could be cognized and afterwards in an unchanged form utilized: the field of praxis depends on concrete situation” (Dobrosavljev 2002, p. 606).

  2. 2.

    Hannah Arendt 1974s interview with the French writer Roger Errera. Accessed in 23/06/2014 at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1u5OjatwqA, around 3′40″.

  3. 3.

    “Intersubjective meaning becomes distinct from intrasubjective meaning when individual thoughts, feelings, and intentions are merged or synthesized into conversations during which the self gets transformed from “I” into “we”.” (Weick 1995)

  4. 4.

    “In matters of sense making, believing is seeing.” (Weick 1995)

  5. 5.

    Hannah Arendt 1974s interview with the French writer Roger Errera. Accessed in 23/06/2014 at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1u5OjatwqA, around 3′40″.

  6. 6.

    “A primitiva ideologia liberal formou o seu discurso com elementos da filosofia naturalística que se impôs de forma avassaladora no século subsequente à publicação dos Principia de Newton. Os indivíduos, orientados pela lei do menor esforço (expressão da razão inerente à natureza humana) e impulsionados pelo desejo de melhorar o próprio bem-estar, produziram coletivamente um sistema de forças sociais cuja adequada canalização institucional assegurava o progresso.” (Furtado 2008)

References

  • Abel, D. L., & Trevors, J. T. (2006). Self-organization vs. self-ordering events in life-origin models. Physics of Life Reviews, 3(4), 211–228. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2006.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adorno, T. (1965). Functionalism today. In N. Leach (Ed.), Rethinking architecture: A reader in cultural theory (pp. 1–12). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allport, G. (1979). The nature of prejudice: 25th anniversary edition. Cambridge: Perseus Books Publishing, L. L. C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity and innovation in organizations. Boston: Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision, 47(8), 1323–1339. doi:10.1108/00251740910984578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67(6), 380–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, J. (2013). Steve blank: Lessons from 35 years of making startups fail less. Retrieved December 21, 2015, from http://99u.com/articles/7256/steve-blank-lessons-from-35-years-of-making-startups-fail-less.

  • Dankbaar, B. (1996). The management of technology in technology-contingent SMEs. Technology Management and Public Policy in the European Union, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities and Oxford University Press, Luxembourg and Oxford, pp. 114–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobrosavljev, D. (2002). Gadamer’s hermeneutics as practical philosophy. Philosophy, Sociology and Psychology, 2(9), 605–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florida, R. (2003). Cities and the creative class. City and Community, 2(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furtado, C. (2008). Criatividade e dependência na civilização industrial. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H. G. (2004). Truth and method (2nd ed.). London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurteen, D. (1998). Knowledge, creativity and innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(1), 5–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(46), 16385–16389. doi:10.1073/pnas.0403723101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacson, W. (2011). Steve jobs by Walter Isaacson. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahnke, M. (2013). Meaning in the making: Introducing a hermeneutic perspective on the contribution of design practice to innovation. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, S. G., & Scholes, K. (1989). Exploring strategic management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristensson Uggla, B. (2010). Ricoeur, hermeneutics and globalization. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). The psychology of closed mindedness (essays in social psychology). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103(2), 263–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laforet, S. (2011). A framework of organisational innovation and outcomes in SMEs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 17(4), 380–408. doi:10.1108/13552551111139638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lansing, J. S. (2003). Complex adaptive systems. Annual Review of Anthropology, 32(1), 183–204. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.32.061002.093440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewe, P., & Dominiquini, J. (2006). Overcoming the barriers to effective innovation. Strategy & Leadership, 34(1), 24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madrid-Guijarro, A., Garcia, D., & Van Auken, H. (2009). Barriers to Innovation among Spanish. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(4), 465–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manhães, M. C. (2015). Innovativeness and prejudice: Designing a landscape of diversity for knowledge creation. Centro Tecnológico: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Retrieved from http://btd.egc.ufsc.br/?p=1911.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: Knowledge creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 1(1), 2–10. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Von Krogh, G. (2009). Perspective—Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science, 20(3), 635–652. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D., & Vickers, I. (2001). Public sector support for innovating SMEs. Small Business Economics, 16, 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, K., Silva Neto, E., & Calle, G. D. (2013). Vencendo os desafios do crescimento: o método “aprender a crescer” para pequenas e médias empresas brasileiras. Navus—Revista de Gestão e Tecnologia, Florianópolis, SC, 3(1), 6–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Østergaard, C. R., Timmermans, B., & Kristinsson, K. (2011). Does a different view create something new? The effect of employee diversity on innovation. Research Policy, 40(3), 500–509. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. (1986). Du text a l’action. Essais d’herméneutique 2. Paris: Sueil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. (2007). From text to action: Essays in hermeneutics II. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2007). Separating ability from need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the need for closure scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 266–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarooghi, H., Libaers, D., & Burkemper, A. (2015). Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 714–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1979). Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 137–163). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139173865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1912). The theory of economic development. Leipzig: Verlag von Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1927). The explanation of the business cycle. Economica, 21(21), 286–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1987). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104(1), 66–89. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.104.1.66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (1999). Origins of genius. Darwinian perspectives on creativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2010). Creative thought as blind-variation and selective-retention: Combinatorial models of exceptional creativity. Physics of Life Reviews, 7(2), 156–179. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2010.02.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. (1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(4), 438–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari, R., & Buse, S. (2007). Barriers to innovation in SMEs: Can the internationalization of R&D mitigate their effects?. In: Proceedings of the First European Conference on Knowledge for Growth: Role and Dynamics of Corporate R&D-CONCORD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., Archpru, M., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 63–72. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.10.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verganti, R., & Öberg, Å. (2013). Interpreting and envisioning—A hermeneutic framework to look at radical innovation of meanings. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(1), 86–95. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.11.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh, G., Takeuchi, H., Kase, K., & Canton, C. G. (2013). Towards organizational knowledge. In G. Von Krogh, H. Takeuchi, K. Kase, & C. G. Cantón (Eds.), Towards organizational knowledge: The pioneering work of Ikujiro Nonaka. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137024961.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil

    Maurício Manhães & Guillermo Antonio Dávila

Authors
  1. Maurício Manhães
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guillermo Antonio Dávila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maurício Manhães .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wiesbaden Business School, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Darmstadt, Germany

    Klaus North

  2. Dept. of Engineering and Knowledge Mgmt., Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Trindade, Florianópolis - SC, Brazil

    Gregorio Varvakis

Annex: Need for Closure (NFC) Scale

Annex: Need for Closure (NFC) Scale

The NFCS 41 items questionnaire is presented below. The 15 items taken into account for obtaining the NFC levels of each individual are marked with “X”. Details about how it should be used to obtain individual NFC levels and groups NFC Mean and NFC CoV can be found at Manhães (2015).

Instructions

Read each of the following statements and decide how much you agree with each according to your beliefs and experiences. You are encouraged not to think too long about each question, just answer spontaneously. Please respond to the 41 items according to the following scale:

1—strongly disagree

2—moderately disagree

3—slightly disagree

4—slightly agree

5—moderately agree

6—strongly agree

41 Questions

15 items

1

2

3

4

5

6

1. I think that having clear rules and order at work is essential for success.

       

2. Even after I’ve made up my mind about something, I am always eager to consider a different opinion.

       

3. I don’t like situations that are uncertain.

X

      

4. I dislike questions which could be answered in many different ways.

X

      

5. I like to have friends who are unpredictable.

       

6. I find that a well ordered life with regular hours suits my temperament.

X

      

7. When dining out, I like to go to places where I have been before so that I know what to expect.

       

8. I feel uncomfortable when I don’t understand the reason why an event occurred in my life.

X

      

9. I feel irritated when one person disagrees with what everyone else in a group believes.

X

      

10. I hate to change my plans at the last minute.

       

11. I don’t like to go into a situation without knowing what I can expect from it.

X

      

12. When I have made a decision, I feel relieved.

X

      

13. When I am confronted with a problem, I’m dying to reach a solution very quickly.

X

      

14. When I am confused about an important issue, I feel very upset.

       

15. I would quickly become impatient and irritated if I would not find a solution to a problem immediately.

X

      

16. I would rather make a decision quickly than sleep over it.

       

17. Even if I get a lot of time to make a decision, I still feel compelled to decide quickly.

       

18. I think it is fun to change my plans at the last moment.

       

19. I enjoy the uncertainty of going into a new situation without knowing what might happen.

       

20. My personal space is usually messy and disorganized.

       

21. In most social conflicts, I can easily see which side is right and which is wrong.

       

22. I almost always feel hurried to reach a decision, even when there is no reason to do so.

       

23. I believe that orderliness and organization are among the most important characteristics of a good student.

       

24. When considering most conflict situations, I can usually see how both sides could be right.

       

25. I don’t like to be with people who are capable of unexpected actions.

X

      

26. I prefer to socialize with familiar friends because I know what to expect from them.

       

27. I think that I would learn best in a class that lacks clearly stated objectives and requirements.

       

28. When thinking about a problem, I consider as many different opinions on the issue as possible.

       

29. I like to know what people are thinking all the time.

       

30. I dislike it when a person’s statement could mean many different things.

X

      

31. It’s annoying to listen to someone who cannot seem to make up his or her mind.

       

32. I find that establishing a consistent routine enables me to enjoy life more.

X

      

33. I enjoy having a clear and structured mode of life.

X

      

34. I prefer interacting with people whose opinions are very different from my own.

       

35. I like to have a place for everything and everything in its place.

       

36. I feel uncomfortable when someone’s meaning or intention is unclear to me.

       

37. I always see many possible solutions to problems I face.

       

38. I’d rather know bad news than stay in a state of uncertainty.

       

39. I do not usually consult many different opinions before forming my own view.

X

      

40. I dislike unpredictable situations.

X

      

41. I dislike the routine aspects of my work (studies).

       
  1. Source: Kruglanski and Webster (1996), Kruglanski (2004), Roets and Van Hiel (2007, 2011a)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Manhães, M., Dávila, G.A. (2016). The Innovation Triple Challenge: A Creativity Check for SMES. In: North, K., Varvakis, G. (eds) Competitive Strategies for Small and Medium Enterprises. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27303-7_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation