Institutional innovations. Zvezdichev G.Yu
Later, D. North described the entrepreneur as the main organizer of new institutional agreements that reduce uncertainty and create a basis for finding a compromise in a conflict of interest. Thus, the entrepreneur is assigned not only a destabilizing function, but also a creative one, namely the function of creating prerequisites for achieving a new equilibrium. It should be noted that under the entrepreneur D. North understood the person who makes the decision, as well as the political figure.
J. Schumpeter's reasoning refers to the process of creating private goods. Many institutional innovations, institutions and rules are in the nature of public goods, which have three properties:
non-selectivity: the use of the institution by one person does not reduce the degree of its accessibility to others, which contributes to the coordination of the activities of agents;
non-excludability: no one is prohibited from using the rule (institution), even if he did not participate in its creation;
· inexhaustibility: the use of an institution by one individual does not reduce the useful effect of the use of this institution by another individual, since the spread of the rule reduces the uncertainty in the interactions of agents.
Thus, institutional innovations can be in the nature of a public, private and club good, taking into account the hierarchical structure of the rules. Innovations as private goods are limited within the organization, and the innovator can control their use as internal institutions that structure the interaction between members of the organization. Innovations created within an organization are often difficult to replicate within other organizations. Institutional innovations can also be of the nature of a club good, i.e. goods, the circle of users of which can be controlled and limited. These innovations can be based on hybrid forms that combine elements of both organization and market contracts.
In general, the effectiveness of the actions of the entrepreneur himself decreases if institutional innovation acquires a character other than that of a private good. This means that there are subjects of institutional innovations that are alternative to the entrepreneur as such. From the standpoint of the NFIET, this is explained as follows.
First, clan agreements stand out, where the central place is occupied by the principles of personal acquaintance and personal dependence. An important role is played by the personal reputation of the individual, his ability to establish trusting relationships with members of the clan. The subject of innovation in this case is not a separate individual, but a community of individuals, a group, a network, a team.
Secondly, collective agreements are known, which are also based on trust and solidarity principles, but do not have a local character and apply to people who do not know each other. The subject of innovations here are social movements.
Thirdly, the civil agreement sets the basic framework for the activities of democratic institutions and is aimed at realizing the public interest. Then the subject of innovation is the state or those groups that control the state.
Thus, in addition to the entrepreneur, the subjects of institutional innovations, and hence institutional changes, can be households, firms, groups, social movements and the state. If innovations are indicated in the rows of the table as different types goods (objects of institutional changes), and in the columns - different subjects of innovation, then we get an object-subject matrix (Fig. 8.1), which allows us to find out the comparative advantages of different subjects of innovation in the implementation of changes6.
Innovation Innovator
Entrepreneur1 Household2 Firm3 Group4 Social movement5 State6
A. Private benefit A1 (4) A2 (2) A3 (2) A4 (3) A5 (1) A6 (0)
B. Club benefit B1 (3) B2 (2) B3 (2) B4 (4) B5 (3) B6 (0)
B. Public good B1 (2) B2 (0) B3 (3) B4 (1) B5 (3) B6 (4)
Rice. 8.1. Interrelation of objects and subjects of institutional innovations
and their comparative advantages
For each combination, after the cipher, a comparative assessment of the actions of innovators is indicated in brackets: 4 - maximum incentives for innovation, 2 - average, 0 - minimum. Assessment of Comparative Advantage in Implementation different types innovation shows that the most effective combinations are A1, B4 and B6, highlighted in gray. Innovation as a private good is created and controlled by the entrepreneur, he also receives the profit of the innovator (A1). In the production of innovation as a club good, the actions of groups that are most appropriate for the production of this club good are effective. The state, and then social movements and firms, are the most capable of providing institutional innovation as a public good. Households play a conservative role, as institutional innovations can change the boundary between private and social life, jeopardize existing routines. Firms and households are neutral to the production of "private" innovations, since possible benefits may be offset by rising costs of changing routines7. Such an analysis allows us to draw appropriate conclusions for each specific case of institutional innovation.
You review the article (abstract): “ Types and subjects of institutional innovations» from disciplines « New institutional economic theory»
Typology of innovations
The classic of neoeconomic theory, J. Schumpeter, identified five types of innovation (Figure 3).
Figure 3 - Types of innovation according to J. Schumpeter
The German scientist Gerhard Mensch proposed his classification of innovations according to the degree of significance. He identified three main types of innovation (Figure 4).
Figure 4 - Types of innovations according to G. Mensch
In the statistical practice of the Russian Federation, three types of innovations are distinguished (Figure 5).
Figure 5 - Types of innovations according to the methodology of Rosstat
Separately, in statistical forms, environmental innovations are distinguished, which can be technological, marketing, and organizational. They are understood as new or significantly improved products, processes, methods that improve environmental safety and prevent negative environmental impacts.
As depicted in Figure 5, technological innovation can be both a product-innovation and a process-innovation. Novikov V.S. highlights another type of technological innovation - service innovation.
Service-innovation - an innovation related to servicing the processes of using the product outside the enterprise (for example, software computers).
There are many more classifications of innovations - according to the scope of application, according to the nature of the needs satisfied, according to the depth of changes, according to the causes of occurrence, according to the nature of the impact on the market and technological capabilities of the company, according to the scale of distribution, according to the role in the production process, according to the nature of the connection with scientific knowledge and etc. However, in this work, the institutional typology of innovations should be considered in more detail.
Institutional typology of innovation
long term the economic growth, to which any state aspires, depends on the special institutional conditions that create incentives for the innovative activity of economic agents. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the characteristics of certain types of innovations and those entities that can implement them from an institutional point of view.
In the textbook Oleinik A.N. innovations are classified in terms of incentives for their implementation and with the help of public choice theory as a contrast between private and public goods. Also, in his opinion, in some cases, innovations can be attributed to the nature of club benefits.
A public good is a good that is consumed collectively by all citizens, whether people pay for it or not. It has two characteristic properties: non-selectivity and non-excludability in consumption.
A private good is a good, each part of which can be sold for a separate price, that is, in contrast to a public good, it has selectivity and excludability.
A club good is a mixed public good, access to its consumption is limited, while its consumers who have access share the benefits and costs of this good. The club benefit is produced without state intervention.
Thus, the classification of innovations from the standpoint of public choice theory can be represented schematically (Figure 6).
Figure 6 - Typology of innovations according to public choice theory
Innovation in the form of changing the institutional framework of activity is a public good in relation to all its participants.
Innovation in the form of creating a new product is inherently the production of a private good, especially given the existence of patents that protect the rights to inventions. For the first time after its entry into the market, a new product is in a monopoly position, its creator receives a monopoly excess profit - the so-called "innovator's rent", which is designed to stimulate innovative activity.
The character of club benefits is acquired by innovations at the level of organizations. The number of their users is limited to members of the organization - insiders. It is difficult to control the use of innovation by insiders. This is where the characterization of innovations as club benefits comes from.
It is also necessary to typify the subjects of innovation, that is, those economic agents that produce (implement) innovation. Each type of subject of innovation has its own motivation and acts according to special rules or special type agreements (Figure 7).
Figure 7 - Types of subjects of innovation
In this scheme, two types of entities - entrepreneurs and firms - are combined into one block due to the similarity of goals and the type of agreement. Oleinik A.N. identifies two more types of subjects of innovation: groups and social movements.
A group is understood as people united by a common goal, between whom power relations are impossible. People form groups in order to combine their efforts with like-minded people who strive to achieve the same goals. There are three ways to form groups (Figure 8).
Figure 8 - Ways to form groups
The group differs from the household, from the firm, and from the state, and operates on the basis of a compromise between three agreements - traditional, market and civil. The purpose of the group is to maximize the total utility of its members through the use of social ties.
The social movement, according to Alain Touraine (a well-known researcher of social movements), is born on the basis of the conflict between the acting agent (transformer) and his opponent in the field of managing cultural resources and productive forces. The social movement is based on such types of agreements as traditional, industrial, civil. The difference between a social movement and a group lies in the fact that it protects the interests of not only its direct participants, but also of all people with similar interests. Example: the principle of women's solidarity. innovation typology institutional good
To understand how innovations affect the long-term growth of the socio-economic system, it is necessary to link the type of innovation with the assessment of incentives for its implementation by various actors (Figures 9, 10, 11).
The arrow in the figures shows the direction of decreasing interest of innovation subjects.
Figure 9 - The relationship of innovation as a private good with the types of subjects of innovation
Obviously, with regard to innovation, which is a private good, the potential of the entrepreneur will be used to the maximum. The group, having weak incentives for this type of innovation, could increase them by resolving the conflict of profit distribution quite easily by using social sanctions and the effect of reputation, that is, their own measures of influence on the individual developed in the group. Firms and households are not interested in this type of innovation, social movements and the state are negative about it.
Groups have the greatest interest in club innovations, as they have the most appropriate structure for this. The entrepreneur can increase his weak incentives by relying on organizational structure, the firm and transferring part of the powers associated with access to the results of innovation to other persons. Firm and household, as in the case of a private good, are neutral to this kind of innovation. The attitude of social movements and the state towards club innovations is negative.
Figure 10 - The relationship of innovation as a club good with the types of subjects of innovation
In the production of public goods, the state is more interested, then the social movement, the firm and the group are on the scale of decreasing interest. At the same time, the firm can increase its incentives by using coercion to finance innovation, but on a limited scale compared to the state.
Figure 11 - The relationship of innovation as a public good with the types of subjects of innovation
The entrepreneur is neutral towards social innovation, while the household is negatively assessed.
This is how the relationships of three types of innovations and six types of subjects of innovations look like. Each of the subjects of innovation - an entrepreneur, a group, a firm, a household, a social movement, the state - has a comparative advantage in the implementation of one of the types of innovations that are in the nature of private, club or public goods.
1The article deals with the problems of formation of the institutional environment in the framework of innovation. Of particular importance in modern economy have institutions that regulate innovation processes. The authors carry out a theoretical and methodological analysis of institutional factors in the development of an innovative economy. The authors consider a conceptual analysis of the problem of accelerating the innovative growth of the national and regional economy within the national innovation system. The institutional environment of the innovation system functions and changes under the influence of its factors. The authors propose to carry out the structuring of the institutional environment according to the objects of regulation. In addition, it is advisable to structure this environment according to the subjects of the institutionalization of the innovation market. Thus, from the state of the institutional factors of the innovation economy environment, it was revealed that the current state does not contribute to the effectiveness of the institutional environment, since if the environment is unstable, political risks high, which increases the uncertainty of the results of innovation at all stages of the innovation cycle: the conclusion of contracts, the provision of resources, the presence of demand for innovation.
institutional economy
institutional environment
institutional environmental factors
innovation system
national innovation system
1. Institutional economics: textbook / ed. A.N. Oleinik. - M.: INFRA - M., 2005. - 704 p.
2. Kondratieva E.V. National innovation system: theoretical concept. - Electronic resource. – Access mode: http://www.schumpeter.ru/article.php?id=4&book=concept. – Date of access: 02/23/2015.
3. North D. Institutions, institutional changes and the functioning of the economy. – M.: Nachala, 1997.
4. Ternovsky D.S. Institutional environment in the system of factors of economic development / D.S. Ternovsky // Economic Bulletin of Rostov state university. - T. 6. - No. 3.
5. Chris Freeman The National System of Innovation in historical perspective / Cambridge Journal of Economics. - 1995. - Vol. 19. - R. 5-24. - Electronic resource. – Access mode: http://www.globelicsacademy.org/2011_pdf/Freeman %20NSI %20historial %20perspective.pdf. – Date of access: 02/23/2015.
6. Lundvall B.-A. (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Pinter Publishers, London.
7. Michael E. Porter (1990) The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Harvard Business Review. - Electronic resource. – Access mode: http://www.clustermapping.us/sites/default/files/files/resource/The %20Competitive %20Advantage %20of %20Nations %20HBR.pdf. – Date of access: 02/23/2015.
8. Nelson R. (1993) National Systems of Innovations: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
9. Nelson R. National Innovation Systems a Comparative Analysis. – N.Y.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
10. Nelson R., Winter S. An evolutionary theory of economic changes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. - 1982.
11. Oxley J.E. Institutional environment and the mechanism of governance: The impact of intellectual property protection on the structure of inter-firm alliances // Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. - 1999. - No. 38. - P. 283–309.
12. Schumpeter J.A. The Theory of Economic Development. – New York. Oxford University, 1934.
13. Sustainable Manufacturing: Shaping Global Value Creation. Edited by G?nther Seliger, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012, ISBN 3642272908, 9783642272905.
Of particular importance in the modern economy are institutions that regulate innovation processes. These institutions include the institution of property; regulatory institutions; institutions that determine the functioning of business; competition institute, knowledge institute, etc. They act as a necessary basis for the formation of the institutional environment and, at the same time, as institutional factors for the development of an innovative economy.
Studies of three scientific schools are devoted to the relationship between the institutional environment and innovation activity in the country. Political science that studies questions industrial policy and competitiveness, argues that the institutional framework in a country determines the type of political instruments that will be used by the state to manage the economy. Sociological institutionalism studies the influence of the institutional framework on the activities of the enterprise, the role of the state is seen as proactive if it is engaged in the development of the institutional framework and the development of legal acts that stimulate innovative activity. The traditions of capitalism, combining sociological and neo-institutional approaches, explore the relationship between the innovative strategies of enterprises and the country's institutional environment.
D.S. Ternovsky in his article "The Institutional Environment in the System of Economic Development Factors" points out that the impact of the institutional environment on economic growth is possible through the formation and functioning of external institutions, but what about institutional agreements? through the formation and functioning of external and internal institutions. D. North and O. Williamson in their works proposed to distinguish between institutional agreements and institutional environment (environment).
Institutional environment (economic constitution, institutional structure of the economy, institutional framework) - characteristics of the external environment that are significant for economic activity, a set of values, formal and informal norms that affect the ratio of incentives in activities and determine the achievement of a minimum agreement between people.
R. Nelson in his study emphasizes the importance of the influence of the institutional environment on the dynamics of creating innovations and incentives, exploring the national innovation system as an interconnected system of all elements economic activity society. The basis for the formation of the national innovation system is the institutional environment. The concept of a national innovation system was proposed in 1987 by the English scientist Christopher Freeman. In his research, he revealed patterns of development national economy from the development and implementation of new technologies in the economy of society. The concept of the national innovation system is based on the works of J. Schumpeter, R. Nelson, M. Porter, B. Lundvall and other prominent scientists. E.V. Kondratieva in the article “National Innovation Economy: Theoretical Conception” concludes that “the concept’s founders have a common understanding of the NIS as a process and result of the integration of structures that are heterogeneous in goals and objectives, engaged in the production and commercial implementation of scientific knowledge and technologies within national borders ( small and large companies, universities, research institutes) provided by a complex of institutions of legal, financial and social interaction that have strong national roots, traditions, political and cultural characteristics.
A conceptual analysis of the problem of accelerating the innovative growth of the national and regional economy allows us to propose the following structural factor model (Fig. 1).
Within the framework of the national innovation system, the principles of reforming state cooperation, the processes of reforming the coordination of subjects in the NIS space are changing, taking into account: factors of the external global environment; the scale of territories and subjects of territories, the strategic goals of all subjects of the system; the potential of subjects and their specifics.
Rice. 1. Structural-factorial model of innovative systems
The central object of factor analysis is innovative systems of different levels of complexity, their resource, technological and productive parameters in statics and dynamics. The quantity, quality, and speed of innovative organizations, processes, and goods are determined by the factors influencing innovative systems. These factors are divided into institutional and non-institutional. The last group includes all resource, technological, production, implementation (sales) factors of the innovation cycle. They can be called innovation factors of the 1st kind, since they directly create the conditions for innovation activity.
Limiting themselves to the analysis of institutional factors, the authors propose their structural model in the innovation market (Fig. 2).
Rice. 2. The structure of the institutional environment of the innovation market
Institutional factors are a systemic set of norms, rules and laws that create legal formal and informal frameworks for the implementation of non-institutional factors of innovation activity. Therefore, they can be defined as factors of the 2nd kind. They can have a prohibitive or permissive, directive or indicative, stimulating or de-stimulating profile. Each of these factors has its own functionality, but in the event of the loss of any functions, this factor-institution becomes dysfunctional.
In turn, the institutional environment of the innovation system functions and changes under the influence of its factors (momentary and historical), which can be defined as factors of the 3rd kind.
This model includes three main types of institutions that regulate demand, supply, and equilibrium in the innovation market. Each type of institution has its own specific objects of influence - institutionalization.
Therefore, the structuring of the institutional environment according to the objects of regulation is carried out. In addition, it is advisable to structure this environment according to the subjects of the institutionalization of the innovation market. These subjects, as well as objects, can be classified, firstly, by scale (mega-, macro-, meso-, micro-, mini-institutions), secondly, by the sphere of regulation (administrative, network, corporate institutions), in- thirdly, according to the degree of legalization (formal, informal), fourthly, according to the stages of the innovation cycle and its participants, including:
Innovation Marketing Institutes;
Inventory stage institutes (R&D, R&D);
Institutes of the innovation stage;
Institutes of the stage of diffusion and imitation of innovations.
The development of the institutional environment for innovation activity is influenced by exogenous and endogenous factors. Exogenous factors include: the state of the political situation in the world market, government regulation, the infrastructure of innovation, environmental and technological restrictions on production, the emergence of new markets, the degree of formation of the market structure.
Endogenous factors include: the competence of enterprise managers responsible for R&D; high quality of strategic management of innovation activities; orientation of managers and employees to the development and use of new technologies; creative potential; staff motivation for the development and implementation of innovations and other factors.
The state of the political situation in the world market has a significant impact on the development of innovation. The current state does not contribute to the effectiveness of the institutional environment, because if the environment is unstable, political risks are high, which increases the uncertainty of the results of innovation activities at all stages of the innovation cycle: the conclusion of contracts, the provision of resources, the presence of demand for innovation.
The regulatory impact of the state as an institution should be aimed at creating legislative framework, monitoring the implementation of regulations, organizational and financial support for innovative projects. Depending on the general state of the innovation environment, the main directions state regulation innovation market can be classified as measures carried out in conditions of insufficient, balanced and excess demand for innovation.
The innovation infrastructure is a systemic set of institutions, including academic, industry and university science, technology parks, technology incubators, business incubators, business angels, innovation promotion funds, and others.
The work was supported by the Russian Humanitarian Foundation, grant No. 15-12-59005.
Bibliographic link
Prokin V.V., Lepikhina T.L., Anisimova E.L., Karpovich Yu.V. STRUCTURE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT OF INNOVATION // Fundamental Research. - 2016. - No. 1-1. - S. 182-186;URL: http://fundamental-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=39814 (date of access: 01/15/2020). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"
Essence, types and concepts of INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES
Institutions and INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES
The neoclassical approach assumes that transaction costs are zero, property rights are fully specified, institutions turn out to be free goods that automatically ensure the efficient allocation of resources and economic growth through the creation of new production opportunities. In other words, effective institutions create incentives that ensure economic growth. Therefore, institutional changes are not significant, and the efficiency of resource allocation does not depend on the existing set of rules.
In fact, the theory of institutional change is of great importance for understanding the processes taking place in society.
institutional changes mean changes in the institutional structure as a set of interrelated formal rules and informal restrictions that determine the system of incentives for economic agents.
T. Veblen sees the reason for the changes in a person’s tendency to “meaningless”, non-pragmatic creative activity and experimentation (“idle curiosity”), which, according to the American scientist, is the main source of social, scientific and technical changes. "Idle curiosity" creates new stereotypes of thinking and behavior and, accordingly, new institutions. Another source of change is the conflicts between the institutions themselves, especially those that have developed in different historical and cultural epochs. Finally, according to J. Schumpeter, the main factors of institutional development are the innovative activity of entrepreneurs and other active members of society and technological progress.
According to D. North, factors(sources) of changes arise from changes in the external environment, and are also due to the accumulation of experience and knowledge and the combination of these factors in mental (mental) structures actors. Changes in relative prices are a well-researched source of institutional change in the course of history, but changes in preferences are important nonetheless. The accumulation of experience and knowledge leads to the construction of new models of understanding the environment; in turn, such models introduce changes in the relative prices of potential solutions from the set of possibilities available to the agents of change.
In reality, the mechanism of institutional change is triggered by combining external changes and internal accumulation of knowledge.
Changes in formal rules may be the result of legal changes, legislative changes, changes in regulatory rules introduced by power structures, as well as changes in the constitution that defines the meta-rules on which the entire system of rules is built.
Changes in informal restrictions occur gradually and often create alternative behaviors in individuals associated with new perceptions of benefits and costs.
1.2. Discrete and Continuous Institutional Change.
D. North under discrete changes understands the radical changes in formal rules that usually result from conquest or revolution. Such discrete changes share some features with discontinuous evolutionary changes (characterized by "point equilibrium"). However, we know from history that they are rarely as revolutionary as they seem. If formal rules change, then informal restrictions cannot change quickly, as they are based on an ingrained cultural heritage, stable stereotypes of thinking and ways of acting.
Since informal rules are the limiting factor, institutional changes are predominantly continuous (incremental) and cumulative.
Cumulative called institutional change, arising from shifts in the secondary rules and the gradual change in the rules of a higher order, reflecting the violation of institutional equilibrium. Continuous institutional change means the dominance of the adaptation of economic agents at the limit or in small increments. Continuous change is possible in an institutional environment that allows for new transactions and trade-offs between players. The continuity of rule change is due to the existence of increasing returns effects and associated network externalities, learning, coordination, and adaptive expectations. The effect of increasing returns means the growth of the functional parameters of institutions as a manifestation of "economy of scale". A network externality is a type of effect that occurs when benefits or costs that are not reflected in the price system are the result of a change in the number of participants in the network. The learning effect means that transaction costs decrease as the use of an institution increases. The effect of coordination (or the advantage of cooperation with other agents) is expressed in the reduction of transaction costs of those who follow accepted rule behavior, and deviation from it becomes unprofitable. The adaptability of expectations is derived from the value of experience and is due to bounded rationality. In other words, the expansion of the use of a certain institution reinforces expectations, and its dominance will increase.
D. North refers to the statement of B. Arthur, according to which the result of the action of the above mechanisms can be four states: 1) multiple equilibrium, in which various solutions with an indefinite outcome are possible; 2) inefficiency - the best solution loses in the competition because it did not have enough supporters; 3) blocking - once a decision is made it is difficult to change in the future; 4) dependence on the trajectory of previous development - due to random circumstances, a decision can be made that will lead development along a strictly defined path.
Consequently, the direction of changes is determined by the trajectory of the previous development. Political and economic organizations, which were formed as a result of the existence of an institutional matrix, tend to preserve the institutional structure. The interests of existing organizations, reproducing path dependence, and the mental models of actors, reproducing ideologies, rationalize the existing institutional matrix and, therefore, direct the perception of actors towards policies that are implemented in the interests of existing organizations. In general, a given institutional matrix of formal rules, informal constraints, and coercive characteristics will "tune" benefits and costs towards choice alternatives that are compatible with the existing institutional structure. The gradualness of the change determines the importance of the initial institutional choice, which determines the trajectory of institutional changes, as well as economic development in the long term.
1.3. Types and subjects of institutional innovations.
The main role in institutional development is played by institutional innovation, i.e. those innovations that are carried out in formal and informal rules and in their interaction. Here it is necessary to recall the theory of economic development by J. Schumpeter. The main five types of innovation were identified by J. Schumpeter as the introduction of a new technology for the production of well-known products, the organization of the production of new products, the opening of new markets for products and resources, and organizational innovations. The role of the main creator of new combinations of factors of production is played by the entrepreneur. Under the influence of these innovations, the economic system is brought out of equilibrium, and the destabilizing function is assigned to the entrepreneur.
Later, D. North described the entrepreneur as the main organizer of new institutional agreements that reduce uncertainty and create a basis for finding a compromise in a conflict of interest. Thus, the entrepreneur is assigned not only a destabilizing function, but also a creative one, namely the function of creating prerequisites for achieving a new equilibrium. It should be noted that under the entrepreneur D. North understood the person who makes the decision, as well as the political figure.
J. Schumpeter's reasoning refers to the process of creating private goods. Many institutional innovations, institutions and rules are in the nature of public goods, which have three properties:
non-selectivity: the use of the institution by one person does not reduce the degree of its accessibility to others, which contributes to the coordination of the activities of agents;
non-excludability: no one is prohibited from using the rule (institution), even if he did not participate in its creation;
· inexhaustibility: the use of an institution by one individual does not reduce the useful effect of the use of this institution by another individual, since the spread of the rule reduces the uncertainty in the interactions of agents.
Thus, institutional innovations can be public, private and club good, which takes into account the hierarchical structure of the rules. Innovations as private goods are limited within the organization, and the innovator can control their use as internal institutions that structure the interaction between members of the organization. Innovations created within an organization are often difficult to replicate within other organizations. Institutional innovations can also be of the nature of a club good, i.e. goods, the circle of users of which can be controlled and limited. These innovations can be based on hybrid forms that combine elements of both organization and market contracts.
In general, the effectiveness of the actions of the entrepreneur himself decreases if institutional innovation acquires a character other than that of a private good. This means that there are subjects of institutional innovations that are alternative to the entrepreneur as such. From the standpoint of the NFIET, this is explained as follows.
First, clan agreements stand out, where the central place is occupied by the principles of personal acquaintance and personal dependence. An important role is played by the personal reputation of the individual, his ability to establish trusting relationships with members of the clan. The subject of innovation in this case is not a separate individual, but a community of individuals, a group, a network, a team.
Secondly, collective agreements are known, which are also based on trust and solidarity principles, but do not have a local character and apply to people who do not know each other. The subject of innovations here are social movements.
Thirdly, the civil agreement sets the basic framework for the activities of democratic institutions and is aimed at realizing the public interest. Then the subject of innovation is the state or those groups that control the state.
Thus, in addition to the entrepreneur subjects of institutional innovations, and hence institutional changes, may be households, firms, groups, social movements and the state. If innovations are indicated in the rows of the table as different types of goods (objects of institutional changes), and in the columns - different subjects of innovation, then an object-subject matrix will be obtained (Fig. 1), which makes it possible to find out the comparative advantages of different subjects of innovation in implementing changes.
Fig.1. Interrelation of Objects and Subjects of Institutional Innovations and Their Comparative Advantages
For each combination, after the cipher, a comparative assessment of the actions of innovators is indicated in brackets: 4 - maximum incentives for innovation, 2 - average, 0 - minimum. An assessment of comparative advantages in the implementation of different types of innovations shows that the most effective combinations are A1, B4 and C6, highlighted in gray. Innovation as a private good is created and controlled by the entrepreneur, he also receives the profit of the innovator (A1). In the production of innovation as a club good, the actions of groups that are most appropriate for the production of this club good are effective. The state, and then social movements and firms, are the most capable of providing institutional innovation as a public good. Households play a conservative role, as institutional innovations can change the boundary between private and public life, jeopardize existing routines. Firms and households are neutral to the production of "private" innovations, since possible benefits may be offset by rising costs of changing routines 7 . Such an analysis allows us to draw appropriate conclusions for each specific case of institutional innovation.
Innovation management Makhovikova Galina Afanasievna
1.3. Main types and subjects of innovative activity
The activity of organizing and implementing innovative processes is called innovation activity. Such activity involves the use of the results of fundamental and applied scientific research, experimental design and solutions, various innovations to create or improve a product brought to the market, or a new or improved technological process used by an enterprise. Innovative activities include the provision of educational, financial, consulting services.
The main types of innovation activities include:
Research and development work;
Technological work, preparation of production and industrial testing;
Acquisition (sale) of patents, licenses, know-how;
Investment decisions necessary for carrying out innovative activities;
Certification and standardization of innovative products;
Marketing solutions for innovative activities;
Selection and organization of markets for innovative products;
Training and retraining of personnel for innovative activities.
Innovative activity has a number of features.
Duration of the innovation process. Innovation is the longest of all business processes in terms of time, such as real investment, production.
High degree of uncertainty and risks of the innovation process. Innovation differs from other business processes by low predictability of results.
The ability to initiate structural change. Successful innovation significantly affects the position of the enterprise, its organization, market position, industry structure and the economy as a whole.
"Human intensity" (increased intellectual saturation) of innovative activity. The main innovative resource is human capital, the creative ability to generate and implement ideas.
The nature of innovative goal setting. Failure to achieve the originally set goals does not mean the failure of an innovative project, and vice versa, the creation of a new product does not mean commercial success.
Non-formalizable mechanisms in the innovation process. Innovations initiate changes, effects that are weakly or not at all amenable to formalization.
Table 1.1
Organizations - subjects of innovation
Table 1.2
Specific features of the subjects of innovative entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation
Objects innovative activities are the development of technology and technology by enterprises, regardless of their form of ownership and legal form, located in the country.
Subjects innovative activities are those organizations and individuals that carry out innovative activities, i.e. organize, stimulate and develop innovative activities, taking into account the specific features of such activities.
Such organizations include legal entities regardless of the legal form and form of ownership, both Russian and foreign origin. Individuals include citizens of the Russian Federation and foreign citizens. The subjects of innovation activity also include public authorities and its subjects and bodies. local government(Table 1.1).
Subjects of innovative activity can have the functions of customers, executors and investors of innovative programs, projects and programs to support innovative activities, depending on the strategic tasks they face and innovative potential.
Innovation potential - a set of different types of resources used by the subjects of innovation for its implementation. Specific features of various subjects of innovative entrepreneurship are presented in Table. 1.2.
This text is an introductory piece. From the book Accounting valuable papers and currency transactions author Sosnauskene Olga IvanovnaChapter 2 MAIN ACTIVITIES OF BANKS IN WORKING WITH SECURITIES
author From the book Innovation Management author Makhovikova Galina Afanasievna6.2. Sources of funding for innovation Financing for innovation is the process of providing and using Money allocated for the design, development and organization of production of new types of products, for the creation and
From the book Innovation Management author Makhovikova Galina Afanasievna7.6. Legal support of innovation activity Legal framework for innovation activity in Russian Federation enshrined in a number of legislative acts: federal laws, decrees of the President, resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation. The main functions of state
From the book Innovation Management author Makhovikova Galina AfanasievnaChapter 11 EVALUATION OF INNOVATION ACTIVITIES 11.1. The system of indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of an innovative project 11.2. Static evaluation indicators economic efficiency innovative projects 11.3. Dynamic indicators of economic efficiency assessment
From the book Construction with the participation of authorities. Accounting and taxation author Anokhina Elena Vladimirovna1.2. Subjects investment activity Subjects of investment activity carried out in the form capital investments, are investors, customers, contractors, users of capital investment objects and other persons. List of investment entities
author Mukhamedyarov A. M.10.2. Financing of innovation activities abroad developed countries various forms, methods and ways by which financing is carried out have been developed fundamental research, innovative developments, in particular financial
From the book Innovation Management: tutorial author Mukhamedyarov A. M.11.1. Risks in innovation activity Innovation activity is associated with various types of risk. V general view risk in innovation activity is defined as the probability of losses arising from investment in the development and production of innovations. To species
From the book Enterprise Economics: Lecture Notes author7. Subjects of innovation activity Innovation activity is the practical use of innovative, scientific and intellectual potential in mass production in order to obtain a new product that meets consumer demand in
From the book Enterprise Economics author Dushenkina Elena Alekseevna38. Concept and classification of innovations. Subjects of investment activity Innovation (innovation) is an object introduced into production as a result of scientific research or a discovery made that is qualitatively different from the previous analogue.
author Smirnov Pavel Yurievich3. Investors and other subjects of investment activity Subjects of investment activity (participants other than investors) may be citizens and legal entities of Russia and foreign states (as well as states represented by their governments): investors; customers;
From the book Investments. cheat sheets author Smirnov Pavel Yurievich113. Financing of innovation activities (beginning) Innovation is a commercialized innovation with high efficiency; is the end result of human intellectual activity, his imagination, creative process, discoveries,
From the book Investments. cheat sheets author Smirnov Pavel Yurievich114. Financing of innovation activities (end) Innovation is the result of investing in the development and acquisition of new knowledge, not previously used ideas for updating the areas of people's lives: technology; products; organizational forms of society
author Smagina I A From the book Business Law author Smagina I A21.2. Subjects of appraisal activity The following persons are among the subjects of appraisal activity.1. Appraisers are individuals and legal entities entitled to carry out valuation activities. To valuation activities individuals presented
From the book Business Plan 100%. Strategy and tactics of effective business author Abrams Rhonda2.3. Main activities The main activity of the company is the production of