PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Innovation”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

The discipline of innovation. 1985.

How much of innovation is inspiration, and how much is hard work? The answer lies somewhere in the middle, says management thinker Peter Drucker. In this HBR classic from 1985, he argues that innovation is real work that can and should be managed like any other corporate function. Success is more likely to result from the systematic pursuit of opportunities than from a flash of genius. Indeed, most innovative business ideas arise through the methodical analysis of seven areas of opportunity. Within a company or industry, opportunities can be found in unexpected occurrences, incongruities of various kinds, process needs, or changes in an industry or market. Outside a company, opportunities arise from demographic changes, changes in perception, or new knowledge. There is some overlap among the sources, and the potential for innovation may well lie in more than one area at a time. Innovations based on new knowledge tend to have the greatest effect on the marketplace, but it often takes decades before the ideas are translated into actual products, processes, or services. The other sources of innovation are easier and simpler to handle, yet they still require managers to look beyond established practices, Drucker explains. The author emphasizes that innovators need to look for simple, focused solutions to real problems. The greatest praise an innovation can receive is for people to say, "That's so obvious!" Grandiose ideas designed to revolutionize an industry rarely work. Innovation, like any other endeavor, takes talent, ingenuity, and knowledge. But Drucker cautions that if diligence, persistence, and commitment are lacking, companies are unlikely to succeed at the business of innovation.

Commerce↗

Mapping your innovation strategy.

In the complex sport of American football, teams rely on playbooks as thick as the Manhattan phone directory. But when it comes to creating innovative growth businesses-which is at least as complicated as professional football--most companies have not developed detailed game plans. Indeed, many managers have concluded that a fog enshrouds the world of innovation, obscuring high-potential opportunities. The authors believe that companies can penetrate that fog by developing growth strategies based on disruptive innovations, as defined by Clayton Christensen. Such innovations conform to a pattern: They offer an entirely new solution; they perform adequately along traditional dimensions and much better along other dimensions that matter more to target customers; and they are not initially appealing to powerful incumbents. Companies can develop customized checklists, or playbooks, by combining this basic pattern with analysis of major innovations in their markets. The key early on is to focus not on detailed financial estimates--which will always guide companies toward the markets most hostile to disruptive innovations--but on how well the innovation fits the pattern of success. It's also crucial to encourage flexibility: Companies must be willing to kill projects that are going nowhere, exempt innovations from standard development processes, and avoid burdening project teams with extra financing, which can keep them heading in the wrong direction. Companies can create competitive advantage by becoming champions at defining the pattern of successful innovations and executing against it. But as that pattern becomes obvious--and others emerge-building a sustainable advantage on innovation competencies will again prove elusive.

Commerce↗

Disseminating innovations in health care.

Health care is rich in evidence-based innovations, yet even when such innovations are implemented successfully in one location, they often disseminate slowly-if at all. Diffusion of innovations is a major challenge in all industries including health care. This article examines the theory and research on the dissemination of innovations and suggests applications of that theory to health care. It explores in detail 3 clusters of influence on the rate of diffusion of innovations within an organization: the perceptions of the innovation, the characteristics of the individuals who may adopt the change, and contextual and managerial factors within the organization. This theory makes plausible at least 7 recommendations for health care executives who want to accelerate the rate of diffusion of innovations within their organizations: find sound innovations, find and support "innovators," invest in "early adopters," make early adopter activity observable, trust and enable reinvention, create slack for change, and lead by example.

Diffusion of Innovation↗

Innovation in nursing homes: which facilities are the early adopters?

PURPOSE: This study examined organizational and market factors associated with nursing homes that are most likely to be early adopters of innovations. Early adopter institutions, defined as the first 20% of facilities to adopt an innovation, are important because they subsequently facilitate the diffusion of innovations to others in the industry. DESIGN AND METHODS: Two groups of innovations were examined, special care units and subacute care services. I used discrete-time logistic regression analysis and nationally representative data from 13,162 facilities at risk of being early adopters of innovations during twelve 6-month intervals from 1992 to 1997. RESULTS: Organizational factors that increase the likelihood of early innovation adoption are larger bed size, chain membership, and high levels of private-pay residents. Four market factors that increase the likelihood of early innovation adoption are: a retrospective Medicaid reimbursement methodology, a more competitive environment, higher average income in the county, and a higher number of hospital beds in the county. IMPLICATIONS: This analysis shows that organizational and market characteristics of nursing homes affect their propensity toward early adoption of innovations. Some of the results may be useful for nursing home administrators and policy makers attempting to promote innovation.

Aged↗

Innovation: the classic traps.

Never a fad, but always in or out of fashion, innovation gets rediscovered as a growth enabler every half dozen years. Too often, though, grand declarations about innovation are followed by mediocre execution that produces anemic results, and innovation groups are quietly disbanded in cost-cutting drives. Each managerial generation embarks on the same enthusiastic quest for the next new thing. And each generation faces the same vexing challenges- most of which stem from the tensions between protecting existing revenue streams critical to current success and supporting new concepts that may be crucial to future success. In this article, Harvard Business School professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter reflects on the four major waves of innovation enthusiasm she's observed over the past 25 years. She describes the classic mistakes companies make in innovation strategy, process, structure, and skills assessment, illustrating her points with a plethora of real-world examples--including AT&T Worldnet, Timberland, and Ocean Spray. A typical strategic blunder is when managers set their hurdles too high or limit the scope of their innovation efforts. Quaker Oats, for instance, was so busy in the 1990s making minor tweaks to its product formulas that it missed larger opportunities in distribution. A common process mistake is when managers strangle innovation efforts with the same rigid planning, budgeting, and reviewing approaches they use in their existing businesses--thereby discouraging people from adapting as circumstances warrant. Companies must be careful how they structure fledgling entities alongside existing ones, Kanter says, to avoid a clash of cultures and agendas--which Arrow Electronics experienced in its attempts to create an online venture. Finally, companies commonly undervalue and underinvest in the human side of innovation--for instance, promoting individuals out of innovation teams long before their efforts can pay off. Kanter offers practical advice for avoiding these traps.

Commerce↗

Information technologies within the cancer information service: factors related to innovation adoption.

CONCLUSIONS: This collaborative study, conducted by members of the Cancer Information Service Research Consortium Team for Evaluation and Audit Methods and the Network Analysis Advisory Board, is part of a larger project that evaluates the impact of communication structure on innovation within the contractual network of the Cancer Information Service (CIS). This study examines four different technological innovations with respect to the characteristics of relative advantage, compatibility, observability, complexity, trialability, adaptability, riskiness, disadvantage, computer knowledge, and acceptance. METHODS: Data were gathered from self-report questionnaires completed in May 1995 by organizational members (n = 82) within the National Cancer Institute's CIS, a geographically dispersed federal government health information program. RESULTS: Paired comparison t tests found that organizational members rate contrasting dimensions of an innovation differentially, depending on the nature of the specific technology. For example, significantly lower levels of riskiness were reported for computerization for communication (e.g., e-mail) than for computerization for telephone service or outreach. In addition, computerization for office management had significantly lower levels of riskiness than computerization for telephone service or outreach. With respect to complexity, computerization for communication had significantly lower ratings than did outreach. In terms of observability and trialability, computerization for communication had significantly lower ratings than for telephone service. With respect to relative advantage, computerization for office management had significantly lower ratings than all other areas of computerization. In terms of computer knowledge, ratings were significantly higher for communication than for all other areas of computerization. No significant differences were found between contrasting innovations for adaptability or acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that organizational members rate contrasting dimensions of an innovation differentially, depending on the nature of the specific innovation. Managers can employ this information as a diagnostic tool to evaluate the fit of an innovation, anticipate problems arising as a result of innovation, and modify innovations to reflect the changes that stakeholders deem necessary. Computerization efforts such as this one are at the cutting edge of efforts to improve the dissemination of information to the public. These efforts can result in considerable improvements in public health.

Automation↗

Why innovation in health care is so hard.

Health care in the United States--and in most other developed countries--is ailing. Medical treatment has made astonishing advances, but the packaging and delivery of health care are often inefficient, ineffective, and user unfriendly. Problems ranging from costs to medical errors beg for ingenious solutions-and indeed, enormous investments have been made in innovation. But too many efforts fail. To find out why, it's necessary to break down the problem, look at the different types of innovation, and examine the forces that affect them. Three kinds of innovation can make health care better and cheaper: One changes the ways consumers buy and use health care, another taps into technology, and the third generates new business models. The health care system erects an array of barriers to each type of innovation. More often than not, organizations can overcome the barriers by managing the six forces that have an impact on health care innovation: players, the friends and foes who can bolster or destroy;funding, the revenue-generation and capital-acquisition processes, which differ from those in other industries; policy, the regulations that pervade the industry; technology, the foundation for innovations that can make health care delivery more efficient and convenient; customers, the empowered and engaged consumers of health care; and accountability, the demand from consumers, payers, and regulators that innovations be safe, effective, and cost-effective. Companies can often turn these six forces to their advantage. The analytical framework the author describes can also be used to examine other industries. Cataloging the innovation types and identifying the forces that aid or undermine them can reveal insights on how to treat chronic innovation ills- prescriptions that will make any industry healthier.

Delivery of Health Care↗

Age differences in neophilia, exploration, and innovation in family groups of callitrichid monkeys.

The prevailing assumption in the primate literature is that young or juvenile primates are more innovative than adult individuals. This innovative tendency among the young is frequently thought to be a consequence, or side effect, of their increased rates of exploration and play. Conversely, Reader and Laland's [International Journal of Primatology 22:787-806, 2001] review of the primate innovation literature noted a greater reported incidence of innovation in adults than nonadults, which they interpreted as (in part) a reflection of the greater experience and competence of older individuals. Within callitrichids there is contradictory evidence for age differences in response to novel objects, foods, and foraging tasks. By presenting novel extractive foraging tasks to family groups of callitrichid monkeys in zoos, we examined, in a large sample, whether there are positive or negative relationships of age with neophilia, exploration, and innovation, and whether play or experience most facilitates innovation. The results indicate that exploration and innovation (but not neophilia) are positively correlated with age, perhaps reflecting adults' greater manipulative competence. To the extent that there was evidence for play in younger individuals, it did not appear to contribute to innovation. The implications of these findings for the fields of innovation and conservation through reintroduction are considered.

Age Factors↗

The innovation triad: an EvoDevo agenda.

This article introduces a special issue on evolutionary innovation and morphological novelty, two interrelated themes that have received a remarkable increase of attention over the past few years. We begin with a discussion of the question of whether innovation and novelty represent distinct evolutionary problems that require a distinct conceptualization. We argue that the mechanisms of innovation and their phenotypic results--novelty--can only be properly addressed if they are distinguished from the standard evolutionary themes of variation and adaptation, and we present arguments for making such a distinction. We propose that origination, the first formation of biological structures, is another distinct problem of morphological evolution, and that together with innovation and novelty it constitutes a conceptual complex we call the innovation triad. We define a problem agenda of the triad, which separates the analysis of the initiating conditions from the mechanistic realization of innovation, and we discuss the theoretical problems that arise from treating innovation as distinct from variation. Further, we categorize the empirical approaches that address themes of the innovation triad in recognizing four major strands of research: the morphology and systematics program, the gene regulation program, the epigenetic program, and the theoretical biology program. We provide examples of each program, giving priority to contributions in the present issue. In conclusion, we observe that the innovation triad is one of the defining topics of EvoDevo research and may represent its most pertinent contribution to evolutionary theory. We point out that an inclusion of developmental systems properties into evolutionary theory represents a shift of explanatory emphasis from the external factors of natural selection to the internal dynamics of developmental systems, complementing adaptation with emergence, and contingency with inherency.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

Foraging innovation in the guppy.

When novel behaviour patterns spread through animal populations, typically one animal will initiate the diffusion. It is not known whether such 'innovators' are particularly creative individuals, individuals exposed to the appropriate environmental contingencies, or individuals in a particular motivational state. We describe three experiments that investigated the factors influencing foraging innovation in the guppy Poecilia reticulata. We exposed small laboratory populations of fish to novel foraging tasks, which involved exploration and problem solving to locate a novel food source. Experiments 1 and 2 found that (1) females were more likely to innovate than males, (2) food-deprived fish were more likely to innovate than nonfood-deprived subjects, and (3) smaller fish were more likely to innovate than larger fish. We suggest that the sex difference may reflect parental investment asymmetries in males and females. Experiment 3 found that past innovators were more likely to innovate than past noninnovators. Collectively, the results suggest that differences in foraging innovation in guppies are best accounted for by differences in motivational state, but, in addition, guppies may vary in their predisposition to innovate. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Journal Article↗

Medicine and pharmacy--facts and myths about the development of an innovative pharmaceutical industry in Poland.

Innovation is fundamental to the pharmaceutical industry and a key to improvements in healthcare. Its effectiveness depends on huge, constant investments in research. This innovative industry directly affects the course of studies in healthcare and medicine. Its efforts translate directly into the length and quality of our lives. For several years now, the progress underway in pharmaceutical industry has produced measurable benefits. Doctors have new pharmaceuticals at their disposal, including many types of antibiotics and anti-viral drugs, vaccines and a wide range of drugs which save lives or make them more comfortable. In the near future, ever more efficient cures for neoplastic, rheumatic, neurological, psychic, metabolic, circulatory or respiratory diseases can be expected. Innovation is necessary. The human population is ageing, and the task of an innovative pharmaceutical industry is to keep it in a good condition. The use of innovative drugs can translate directly into lowering the costs of illness. A continuous reduction in spending on healthcare has been observed. The costs of inventing an innovative drug are enormous though (US dollar 800 million), and studies on a new drug last between 10 and 13 years. An essential element in recovering the incurred costs and ensuring funds needed for new research is protection by patent. Innovative pharmaceutical companies in Poland are committed to increasing the competitiveness and sustaining the development of not only the market, but also the entire pharmaceutical sector. It is a group of companies of crucial importance to the Polish healthcare system, as it influences improvement in the quality of medical services. Through their investments and spending on research and development, innovative companies accelerate economic growth. In Poland, the innovative pharmaceutical industry is represented by the Association of Pharmaceutical Companies Representatives in Poland (SPFFwP).

Chemistry, Pharmaceutical↗

An update on the first decade of the European centralized procedure: how many innovative drugs?

AIMS: In a previous paper, we proposed an algorithm to assess the degree of therapeutic innovation of the agents approved by the European centralized procedure, which must be followed by biotechnological products and is optional for drugs claimed as innovative. A low overall degree of therapeutic innovation (about 30%) was found. This figure may be an underestimate of the actual level of innovation, because common biotechnological products, such as recombinant human insulins, must follow this procedure. To test the hypothesis that therapeutic innovation prevails among nonbiotechnological products, we evaluated separately the degree of therapeutic innovation of biotechnological vs. nonbiotechnological agents in the first decade of European Medicines Agency activity, also studying a possible time trend. METHODS: We assessed, for each drug: (i) the seriousness of the target disease, (ii) the availability of previous treatments, and (iii) the extent of therapeutic effect according to the previously proposed algorithm. RESULTS: Our analysis considered 251 medicinal products corresponding to 198 active substances, classified according to four main areas as therapeutic agents (88.9%), diagnostics (5.5%), vaccines (5.1%) and life-style drugs (0.5%). Among all therapeutic agents, 49 out of 176 agents (28%) were classified as having an important degree of therapeutic innovation. Fifteen out of 60 biotechnological therapeutic agents were considered important therapeutic innovations (25%), whereas this figure was 29% for nonbiotechnological agents. CONCLUSIONS: Among active substances claimed as innovative by the manufacturers, only a minority deserve this definition according to our algorithm.

Drug Approval↗

Predictors of nurse adoption of a computerized information system as an innovation.

This descriptive study focused on factors that influence the diffusion and adoption of an innovation after it is first introduced to members of a social system. A dearth of knowledge exists in this area regarding nurses as adopters and information technology as the innovation. The purpose of the study was to explore a set of individual, technological, and organizational characteristics as predictors of hospital nurse adoption of a computerized information system (CIS) as an innovation. A computerized system for staffing, scheduling and productivity management was selected as the innovation. The sample included 193 staff nurses and 34 nurse managers in one large teaching research hospital. A self-report written survey method was used to test a set of 12 independent variables in relation to innovation adoption. Using multiple regression analysis, 50% of the variance in adoption was explained by all 12 predictors (p < .001). The results suggest that focus on the perceived advantages of an innovation, the perceived need, values held by peers regarding the innovation and use of communication mechanisms facilitate nurse adoption of a computerized information system as an innovation.

Adult↗

Replication of clinical innovations in multiple medical practices.

BACKGROUND: Many clinical innovations had been successfully developed and piloted in individual medical practice units of Kaiser Permanente in North Carolina during 1995 and 1996. Difficulty in replicating these clinical innovations consistently throughout all 21 medical practice units led to development of the interdisciplinary Clinical Innovation Implementation Team, which was formed by using existing resources from various departments across the region. REPLICATION MODEL: Based on a model of transfer of best practices, the implementation team developed a process and tools (master schedule and activity matrix) to quickly replicate successful pilot projects throughout all medical practice units. The process involved the following steps: identifying a practice and delineating its characteristics and measures (source identification); identifying a team to receive the (new) practice; piloting the practice; and standardizing, including the incorporation of learnings. The model includes the following components for each innovation: sending and receiving teams, an innovation coordinator role, an innovation expert role, a location expert role, a master schedule, and a project activity matrix. Communication depended on a partnership among the location experts (local knowledge and credibility), the innovation coordinator (process expertise), and the innovation experts (content expertise). RESULTS: Results after 12 months of working with the 21 medical practice units include integration of diabetes care team services into the practices, training of more than 120 providers in the use of personal computers and an icon-based clinical information system, and integration of a planwide self-care program into the medical practices--all with measurable improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: The model for sequential replication and the implementation team structure and function should be successful in other organizational settings.

Benchmarking↗

Patient oriented activities in Dutch community pharmacy: diffusion of innovations.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the implementation of patient oriented activities, the perception of an innovation aimed at implementation of patient education and the preconditions for implementation of this innovation among Dutch pharmacists. METHOD: A survey, based on Roger's theory of diffusion of innovations, was carried out among a random sample (n = 300) of Dutch managing pharmacists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reported activities regarding patient education, medication surveillance and drug therapy meetings, as well as perception of the innovation and its perceived compatibility with pharmacy practice. RESULTS: The response rate was 49.3%. Hundred (84.7%) respondents reported to provide extra written and verbal information with first prescription medication. Medication surveillance (100% check by computer, and check of the lists by the pharmacist) was reported by 43 (36.4%), and complete participation in drug therapy meetings was reported by 57 (48.3%) respondents. Observability (or results to others) of the new strategy was perceived as important by 90 (77.6%), compatibility (perceived consistency with existing values, past experiences and needs of potential adopters) by 87 (76.4%) and trialability (degree to which an innovation may be experimented with) by 81 (69.8%) respondents. Relative advantages (perception of the innovation as being better) and complexity (relatively difficult to understand and use) of the innovation were perceived as important by less respondents. The preconditions that were met by most pharmacists were 'financial resources' (n = 70; 59.8%), 'enough workspace' (n = 61; 53.1%) and 'enough time' (n = 58; 50%). Fifty-eight (49.2%) respondents intend to adopt the innovation, but this intention would be higher when more time and money and technicians are available, as well as less situations that are experienced as barriers (rush hours, lack of support, illness of employees). CONCLUSION: Based on the definitions used, we conclude that the implementation of medication surveillance and drug therapy meetings is relatively low compared to patient education. The development of an implementation tool is justified, but should deal with the experienced preconditions, barriers and needs of pharmacists. Combined, comprehensive pharmacy interventions promise to be a good way to change pharmacy practice.

Adult↗

The decision to adopt evidence-based and other innovative mental health practices: risky business?

OBJECTIVE: A risk-based decision-making framework was used to examine the decision to adopt innovative mental health practices, including both evidence-based and other research-guided practices. METHODS: Seventy-eight projects involving decisions to adopt one of four innovative mental health practices were the focus of this study. Key informants with direct knowledge about the adoption decision provided data for hypothesis testing. RESULTS: As predicted, the propensity to adopt an innovative practice-as measured by decision stage-was negatively related to the perceived risk of adopting the practice, positively related to expected capacity to manage risk, and positively related to an organization's past propensity to take risks. Further, perceived risk, anticipated resource availability, and exposure to field-based evidence explained a substantial part of what differentiated adopters from nonadopters. Finally, several features of innovations known to influence innovation adoption decisions were found to be related in expected ways to perceived risk, capacity to manage risk, and risk propensity. CONCLUSIONS: This research supports the view that the decision to adopt an innovative mental health practice is a decision made in consideration of risk. Contrary to popular views that early adopters of innovations are willing to take enormous risks, these data offer the novel idea that early adopters act because they see the risks associated with adopting as lower than their nonadopter counterparts, partly because the risks are seen as more manageable. Implications of results are discussed for organizations considering adoption of innovative health care practices and for state or local mental health authorities hoping for a higher level of adoption in their areas.

Decision Making↗

Open-market innovation.

Companies in many industries are feeling immense pressure to improve their ability to innovate. Even in these tough economic times, executives have pushed innovation initiatives to the top of their priority lists, but they know that the best ideas aren't always coming out of their own R&D labs. That's why a growing number of companies are exploring the idea of open-market innovation--an approach that uses tools such as licensing, joint ventures, and strategic alliances to bring the benefits of free trade to the flow of new ideas. For instance, when faced with the unanticipated anthrax scare last fall, Pitney Bowes had nothing in its R&D pipeline to help its customers combat the deadly spores. So it sought help from outside innovators to come up with scanning and imaging technologies that could alert its customers to tainted letters and packages. And Dow Chemical and Cargill jointly produced a new form of plastic derived from plant starches--a breakthrough product that neither company could have created on its own. In this article, Bain consultants Darrell Rigby and Chris Zook describe the advantages and disadvantages of open-market innovation and the ways some companies are using it to gain competitive advantage. By importing ideas from the outside, the authors say, companies can collect more and better ideas from different kinds of experts. Creative types within a company will stick around longer if they know their ideas will eventually find a home--as internal R&D projects or as concepts licensed to outside buyers. Exporting ideas also gives companies a way to measure an innovation's real value. However, the authors warn against entering into open-market innovation without properly structuring deals: Xerox and TRW virtually gave away their innovations and had to stand by while other companies capitalized on them.

Commerce↗

Deep change. How operational innovation can transform your company.

Breakthrough innovations--not just steady improvements--in operations can destroy competitors and shake up entire industries. Just look at Dell, Toyota, and Wal-Mart. But fewer than 10% of large companies have made serious attempts to achieve operational innovation. Why? One reason, contends the author, is that business culture undervalues operations--they're not as sexy as deals or acquisitions. In addition, many executives who rose through the ranks of finance or sales aren't familiar with operations--and they aren't interested in learning more. Finally, because no one holds the title Vice President of Operational Innovation, it doesn't have a natural home in the organization, so it's easily overlooked. Fortunately, all of these barriers can be overcome. This article offers practical advice on how to develop operational innovations, such as looking for role models outside your industry to emulate and identifying--and then defying--constraining assumptions about how work should be done. The author also discusses the best way to implement operational innovations. For instance, because they are disruptive by nature, projects should be concentrated in those activities with the greatest impact on enterprise strategic goals. Operational innovation may feel unglamorous or unfamiliar to many executives, but it is the only lasting basis for superior performance. Executives who understand how operational innovation happens--and who understand the barriers that prevent it from happening--can add to their strategic arsenal one of the most powerful competitive weapons in existence. In an economy that has overdosed on hype and in which customers rule as never before, operational innovation offers a meaningful and sustainable way to get ahead--and stay ahead--of the pack.

Commerce↗