IMIB Journal of Innovation and Management
issue front

Anna-Vanadis Faix1

First Published 1 Dec 2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/ijim.221091004
Article Information Volume 1, Issue 1 January 2023
Corresponding Author:

Anna-Vanadis Faix, School of International Business and Entrepreneurship (SIBE), Steinbeis University, Kalkofenstraße 53, 71083 Herrenberg, Germany
Email: a.faix@steinbeis-sibe.de

1 School of International Business and Entrepreneurship (SIBE), Steinbeis University, Herrenberg, Germany

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-Commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed.

Abstract

Innovation has now become a core issue in companies and the economy, and it is becoming the leading driver of growth and prosperity. However, there is often a lack of uniform and holistic concepts that grasp the phenomenon and integrate it interpretatively, and, therefore, business structures towards innovation cannot be defined and interpreted adequately. This article aims to take up this question and answer it within a minimal concept of innovation quality. The quality of innovation is not based on the profit of the company or other one-sided economic core variables but rather on the general creation of value and the improvement of the quality of life in a society. This makes it possible to create a normative basis for a general evaluation that can be used to interpret structures in the company that are conducive to innovation and long-term solutions towards creativity and critical thinking.

Keywords

Innovation quality, value creation, business structures, minimal conception, welfare, society

References

Becker, K. Brinkmann, U. Engel, T. (2008). ‘Hybride Beteiligung’ im Betrieb Sachkundige Beschäftigte und Arbeitsgruppen [‘Hybrid participation’ in the company Knowledgeable employees and working groups]. WSI Mitteilungen, 6, 305–311.

Bösch, P. (2021). Demokratische Unternehmen sind im Trend [Democratic companies are vogue]. Kompetenzzentrum Management & Law. Retrieved July 4, 2021, from https://hub.hslu.ch/management-and-law/2019/07/03/demokratische-unternehmen-sind-im-trend/

Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201–215.

Dierksmeier, C. (2011). Reorienting management education: From Homo oeconomicus to human dignity. In W. Aman, M. Pirson, E. Dierksmeier, & H. Von Komakowitz (Eds.), Business schools under fire. Blackwell.

Doyal, L. Goth, I. (1991). A theory of human need (critical perspectives). Guilford Publications.

Faix, A.-V. (2020). Business ethics in difficult times: Takeaways from the current corona and economic crises. Global Business & Economics Anthology, 2(12), 12–20.

Faix, A.-V. (2021 December). Democratisation of business. How more democratic business structures generate innovation. Global Business & Economics Anthology, 2, 86–98.

Faix, W. G. Kisgen, S. Mergethaler, J. (2019). Leadership, personality, innovation. Steinbeis University.

Faix, W. G. Mergenthaler, J. (2010). Die schöpferische Kraft der Bildung. Über Innovation, Unternehmertum, Persönlichkeit und Bildung [The creative power of education. About innovation, entrepreneurship, personality and education]. Steinbeis University.

Faix, W. G. Mergenthaler, J. Ahlers, R.-J. Auer, M. (2014). Innovation quality: The value of the new. Steinbeis University.

Fichter, K. (2015). Grundlagen des Innovationsmanagements [Fundamentals of innovation management]. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from http://www.innovationsmanagement.uni-oldenburg.de/download/leseproben/p01_Kap1.pdf

French, J. R. P. Raven, B. (1959). The basis of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 529–569). University of Michigan Press.

Gebhardt, B. (2011). Diskurs als Unternehmenskultur-wie Enterprise 2.0 Unternehmen revolutioniert [Discourse as corporate culture - How Enterprise 2.0 is revolutionizing companies]. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 5, 28–35.

Hefferman, M. (2021). Quotes. Retrieved November 4, 2021, https://www.garyfox.co/quotes/good-ideas-true-innovation-need-human-interaction-conflict-argument-debate/

Herzog, L. (2019). Die Rettung der Arbeit: Ein politischer Aufruf  [Saving labor: A political call]. Hanser.

Ingram, D. (2019). The advantages of flat organizational structure. Chron. Retrieved June 10, 2020, from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/advantages-flat-organizational-structure–3797.html

Johnson, S. (2021). Quotes. Retrieved November 20, 2021, from https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/steven_johnson_527620

Jones, E. (2019). Rethinking greenwashing: Corporate discourse, unethical practice, and the unmet potential of ethical consumerism. Sociological Perspectives, 62(5), 728–754.

Kimakowitz, E. V. Pirson, M. Spitzeck, H. Dierksmeier, C. Amann, W. (2011). Humanistic management in practice. Humanism in Business Series. Palgrave Macmillan.

Kisgen, S. (2017). The future of business leadership education in tertiary education for graduates. Steinbeis University.

Kogobayev, T. Maziliauskas, A. (2017). The definition and classification of innovation. Holistica, 8(1), 59–72.

Kühl, S. (2015). Wie demokratisch können Unternehmen sein [How democratic can companies be] Wirtschaft und Weiterbildung, 6, 19–24.

Mergenthaler, J. Faix, W. G. Lange, N. (2020). In der Kurve beschleunigen! Mit Innovationen die Zukunft aktiv gestalten [Accelerate in the curve! Actively shaping the future with innovations]. Transfer, Steinbeis-Magazin (Extra-Ausgabe), 6–7.

Nida-Rümelin, J. (1992). Ökonomische Rationalität und praktische Vernunft. In H. Spitzek, M. Pirson, W. Amann, S. Khan, & E. V. Kimakowitz (Eds.), Moralische Entscheidung und rationale Wahl (pp. 131–152). Scienta Nova.

Nida-Rümelin, J. (1997). Economic rationality and practical reason [Economic rationality and practical reason]. Springer.

Nida-Rümelin, J. (2001). Strukturelle Rationalität. Ein philosophischer Essay über praktische Vernunft [Structural rationality. A philosophical essay on practical reason]. Reclam.

Nida-Rümelin, J. (2009). Philosophical grounds of humanism in economics. In H. Spitzek, M. Pirson, W. Amann, S. Khan, & E. V. Kimakowitz (Eds.), Humanism in business (pp. 15–25). Cambridge University Press.

North, D. C. (1981). Structure and change in economic history. W. W. Norton & Company.

Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities. The human development approach. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Rogers, M. (1998). The definition and measurement of innovation. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/downloaddoi=10.1.1.194.4269&rep=rep1&type=pdfs

Schumpeter, J. A. (1911). The theory of economic development. An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Transaction Publisher.

Sen, A. (1988). The concept of development. In H. Chenery & T. Srinivasan (Eds.), The handbook of development economics (Vol. 1, pp. 9–26) Elsevier.

Sen, A. (2003). Ökonomie für den Menschen, Wege zu Gerechtigkeit und Solidarität in der Marktwirtschaft [Economics for people, paths to justice and solidarity in the market economy]. dtv Verlagsgesellschaft.

Sen, A. (2013). On ethics and economics. Blackwell Publishing.

Stiglitz, J. E. Sen, A. Fitoussi, J. P. (2010). Mis-measuring our lifes, why GDP doesn’t add up. The New Press.

Tuomela, R. (2007). The philosophy of sociality. The shared point of view. Oxford University Press.

Tuomela, R. (2013). Social ontology: Collective intentionality and group agents. Oxford University Press.

Veccio, R. P. (2003). Entrepreneurship and leadership: Common trends and common threads. Human Resource Management Review, 13(2), 202–327.


Make a Submission Order a Print Copy