Innovation Trends in the Space Industry

Оглавление

Victor Dos Santos Paulino. Innovation Trends in the Space Industry

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Illustrations

Guide

Pages

Innovation Trends in the Space Industry

Preface

Introduction

The evolution of the space industry in light of economic considerations

Innovation strategies of space firms

Strategic diagnosis of new technologies

Structure of the book

1. Theoretical and Empirical Framework

1.1. Innovation management: introductory elements

1.1.1. Diversity and legitimacy of innovation

1.1.2. Typology of innovations

1.1.2.1. Types of innovations

1.1.2.2. The level of novelty

1.1.2.3. Cumulativeness

1.1.3. Developing product innovations

1.1.3.1. Innovation development processes

1.1.3.1.1. The first processes

1.1.3.1.2. More recent processes

1.1.3.1.3. Open innovation

1.1.4. The industry cycle

1.1.4.1. The emergence phase

1.1.4.2. The growth phase

1.1.4.3. Maturity and decline

1.1.4.4. Limitations of the industry lifecycle

1.2. The space industry

1.2.1. Why study the space industry?

1.2.2. Sources and level of analysis

1.2.3. The boundaries of the space industry. 1.2.3.1. Blurred boundaries

1.2.3.2. Space industry and space economy

1.2.4. Structure of the space industry. 1.2.4.1. Products

1.2.4.1.1. Launchers

1.2.4.1.2. Spacecraft

1.2.4.1.3. Ground equipment

1.2.4.1.4. High uncertainty and reduced product reliability

1.2.4.2. Customers and market rules. 1.2.4.2.1. The customers

1.2.4.2.2. Market rules and protectionism

1.2.4.3. Producers

2. The Emergence of Industry: The Influence of Demand

2.1. The space industry is in the emerging phase. 2.1.1. Emergence as an object of study

2.1.2. Characterizing emergence

2.1.3. Method: sources and measurements. 2.1.3.1. Sources

2.1.3.2. Measurement of variables

2.1.4. Results

2.1.5. Discussion

2.2. Customers shape the industry dynamics in the emergence phase

2.2.1. Theoretical framework

2.2.2. Sources

2.2.3. Results: influence of customers on the emergence of the space industry

2.2.3.1. The military boom: 1957–1965

2.2.3.2. Stabilization: 1965–1990

2.2.3.3. Military withdrawal: 1990–2004

2.2.3.4. Balance: 2004–2011

2.2.4. Discussion and implications. 2.2.4.1. Static analysis

2.2.4.2. Dynamic analysis

2.3. Demand influences technological change

2.3.1. Sources, data and indicators

2.3.1.1. Methodology for extracting patent data

2.3.2. Loss of impetus resulting in technical change

2.3.2.1. Loss of impetus in technology transfer

2.3.2.2. Slower adoption of innovations

2.3.2.3. Patents

2.3.2.4. The development of innovations

2.3.3. Influence of demand on technological change

2.3.3.1. Emergence of operational missions and the need for reliability: 1957–1970

2.3.3.2. Commercialization of space and strengthening the need for reliability: 1970–1993

2.3.3.3. New opportunities: 1993–2011

2.3.4. Discussion and conclusion

3. Slow Adoption of Innovations: A Key Success Factor

3.1. Slow adoption of technological innovations: a key success factor. 3.1.1. Introduction

3.1.2. Inertia: a literature review. 3.1.2.1. Slow technical change is not irrational

3.1.2.2. Some inertia strategies

3.1.2.3. Link between uncertainty, reliability and slow adoption of novelty

3.1.3. Modeling a strategy of technological inertia based on reliability. 3.1.3.1. The technological risk

3.1.3.2. The inertia strategy

3.1.4. Research methodology. 3.1.4.1. The context

3.1.4.2. The data

3.1.4.3. Measurement of variables. 3.1.4.3.1. The cost of the failure

3.1.4.3.2. Extrinsic technological uncertainty

3.1.4.3.3. Inertia based on reliability

3.1.4.4. Formal model

3.1.5. Results

3.1.6. Discussion and conclusion

3.2. Slow adoption of organizational innovations: a key success factor. 3.2.1. Introduction

3.2.2. Organizational change: a literature review. 3.2.2.1. Organizational change and survival

3.2.2.2. Complementarity of evolutionary perspectives

3.2.2.3. Organizational change in HROs

3.2.3. Modeling the organizational inertia strategy

3.2.4. Methodology

3.2.5. Results. 3.2.5.1. Risky environment

3.2.5.2. High levels of reliability required

3.2.5.3. Organizational replication

3.2.5.4. Organizational delays

3.2.5.5. Organizational inertia favors survival

3.2.6. Discussion and conclusion

4. Technological Discontinuities and Strategic Diagnosis

4.1. Disruptive innovations and threat analysis. 4.1.1. Introduction

4.1.2. The theory of disruptive innovations

4.1.2.1. Synthesis of traditional reasoning

4.1.2.2. Predictive value of the concept of disruptive innovation

4.1.2.3. Confusion about the concept of disruptive innovation

4.1.3. Model. 4.1.3.1. Types of potential disruptive innovations and threat

4.1.3.2. Analysis grid

4.1.4. Methodology

4.1.5. Results. 4.1.5.1. Discontinuities and innovator’s dilemma

4.1.5.2. Threat to existing firms

4.1.5.2.1. Characteristics of the technology

4.1.5.2.2. Demand characteristics

4.1.5.2.3. Low threat

4.1.6. Discussion

4.1.7. Conclusion

Conclusion

The evolution of the space industry

Innovation strategies in the space industry

Diagnosis of technological promises

Prospects for the future

References

Index. A

C

D, E

F, G, H

I

J, K, L

M, N, O

P, R

S

T, U

WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

Отрывок из книги

Smart Innovation Set

coordinated by

.....

We have chosen to refer to evolutionary work to answer these questions. The interpretation of delays in the adoption of technological innovations is a matter of debate. The dominant view is that adoption delays are dangerous for the survival of organizations. Nevertheless, some research on industries close to the space industry has shown that too rapid adoption of new technologies can jeopardize the survival of organizations (Anderson and Tushman 1990; Musso 2009). One example is Rosenberg’s (1976) pioneering study on the aviation industry. Within the framework of this evolutionary work, there is also a debate about whether organizational change promotes organizational survival or mortality (Hannan and Freeman 1984; Nelson and Winter 1982). In this book, we consider that these different perspectives about the effects of innovation on organizations’ survival must be seen as complementary (Carroll and Teo 1996).

The study of innovation strategies of space firms leads us to highlight the existence of a positive link between slow adoption of innovations, product reliability and organizational survival. On the one hand, we show that the slow adoption of technological innovations is rational behavior when it allows reliability to be maintained. This strategy is mainly explained by risk aversion. On the other hand, it appears that the slow adoption of organizational innovations promotes the survival of organizations when the environment is risky. This strategy aims to maintain the high levels of reliability achieved during successful space missions by achieving rigorous organizational replication (i.e. replication of processes, rules, and methods). There are several similarities between these two strategies, which we call inertia strategies. First, the inertia strategy is not immobility but a prudent adoption of innovations. Then, these strategies are observed in a risky context as is the case in space activities. Finally, these strategies generally lead to delays in the adoption of innovations, even in the case of a high-tech industry.

.....