26th International Association for Management of Technology Conference - IAMOT 2017

Innovating in a systematic and regular way is a fundamental concern for organizations in order to achieve competitiveness. In this context, Innovation Management Systems (IMS) constitute an important organizational approach to foster the capabilities to innovate continuously. One of the central elements of an IMS is the set of metrics that support the monitoring and control of the innovation process, its subjacent efforts and the outcomes achieved. However, due to some characteristics of the innovation such as the level of uncertainties, nonlinearity and the time required to achieve results, defining and implementing adequate innovation metrics remains a very complex task. Therefore, the central question posed in this research is: how innovation metrics are selected and implemented in companies when designing their IMS and which are the main concerns? The study starts with a literature review on innovation management and innovation metrics. Case-studies were performed with six Brazilian industrial companies that had their IMS formally established. The companies selected come from very distinct sectors: electrical equipment, information technology, ophthalmologic lenses, mining, wire-drawing products and transportation. The frameworks of Dewangan and Godse (2014) and Adams, Bessant, and Phelps (2006) were combined in an interview protocol applied to companies’ managers, all them directly responsible for the IMS implementation in their companies. Semi-structured interviews and access to internal and public documents were the main instruments for data collection. Then, a critical analysis was made on how the six companies have established and dealing with their metrics and what were the challenges and gaps. Finally, considerations were made on how to improve innovation metrics, how metrics evolve over time, how metrics impact on people’s behavior, how metrics relate (or had to relate) to the companies’ goals and the implications concerning the absence of metrics related to some elements of the IMS. The field study revealed relevant gaps, conflicts and implementation barriers in the practice of these companies. One important concern is that metrics stimulate behavior. Thus, before associating innovation metrics with front-line goals and action plans, metrics must be prototyped and used to improve managerial knowledge about the dynamics of the IMS in the company. Innovation is a complex process that needs to be transverselly tied among several points in the organization; also, innovation strongly depends on people motivation and the way they get involved in the efforts. Therefore, simple metrics are desirable, but focus on the strategic objectives for innovation should be also observed. Further research is needed to evaluate other experiences in setting innovation metrics and analyze their implications for the management of innovation in companies.