Innovating: Normative versus Constructivist Approach - Essay Example

Innovating: Normative Versus Constructivist Approach Introduction The process of innovation is a multifaceted one and requires proper planning. Organisations can use either a normative or a constructivist approach to their innovation process and this determines how an organisation can reach useful innovations. However, whether a normative or a constructivist approach is more useful to an organisation is a matter of debate. Definitely, each approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. By looking at some of the issues which guide modern research and innovation, it is easy to identify which of the two are the best for an organisation to use for its innovative processes. Some of these factors include the cost of research, the nature of research and the potential for resistance by the various agencies. Both the normative and the constructivist have their own way of meeting these different needs and it is necessary to know exactly what an organisation is looking for. For an organisation that is looking to manage the risk and the cost of research, it might be necessary to use the normative process. On the other hand, those organisations, such as the military which are not concerned with the risk of failure or the costs can use the constructivist approach. This paper tries to compare the two approaches with regard to various factors of innovation. Normative approach has its advantages in the light of the creation, distribution and sharing of knowledge. In the academic world, and especially at the tertiary level, the normative approach to knowledge and innovation can be very useful due to several reasons. First, it is indispensable to understand that one of the most imperative things about modern knowledge management is the shared learning which means that knowledge is shared equally across the world. While innovation is something that should be free from the rigid standards, it is definite that it is dependent on the normative knowledge. Most innovators are people who have acquired the shared knowledge in a specific field of knowledge. To keep up with the demand of innovation that is necessary in the modern world, there is a need to have a well thought-out way of innovation. The modern world cannot depend on erratic and unexpected innovations for its development. In this regard, normative approach to innovation is very necessary to help in a guided innovation. Despite this, there are those who believe that normative approach to innovation is not the best way to go, but that a constructivist model should be used. Most of innovations done in the past were done in a constructivist kind of environment where there were no normative structures to guide innovation. This made it possible for such innovation as spaceships, the radio, the television and many innovations which changed the world to be made. Those who argue for the constructivist model of innovation look at the normative model as the most retrogressive due to the fact that it places parameters on innovation thus eliminating possibilities. They argue that innovation must not be structured or done in a normative way because doing so makes it harder for the innovators to be able to innovate and be more creative. In this regard, normative approach to innovation becomes a hindrance rather than a contributing factor to innovation. Authors such as Bijker and Law (1992) says that innovation is not just a thing for the technologists who bring these innovations to the world. He identifies that innovation is affected by so many factors and so many actors who do not necessarily do the technical aspect of the innovation. In an organisational set up for instance, while the engineers are the ones who innovate, the success and usefulness of the innovation is affected by the other many people such as the managers, the sales and marketing team and the consumers of the innovation. This calls for a normative process of innovation in order to avoid wastage. In a normative approach to innovation, it becomes easy for useful innovations to be able to be delivered to a receptive audience or users. John and Callon (25-26) discussed this problem in their article witch tried to look at how social issues affect innovation and how lack of integration of these social issues may affect the outcome of innovation. In regard to this, it is not just about creating an environment which encourages innovation, but actually looking at the ways in which the innovation is done to ensure that it meets social needs. This need to include social issues in the innovation process is what makes the normative model of innovation to be more useful and more practical. In a constructivist approach to innovation, those who are technically aware may not understand social issues which will determine how the innovations will affect the people to whom it is intended. Innovation therefore must not be looked at as if it is just a source of technical products and innovations but must be looked at as if it is a social process. Innovation come to change the way people live, the way people do things and this means that every technical innovation is a factor of social change. In this regard, it is not easy to separate innovation from social fabrics of the society. As McIntyre (2003), say this concept of how technology affects the social structure in a society is called technological determinism and can be seen in most of today’s technologies and how they have influenced the way people live. For instance, the innovation of the aeroplane has lead to a more global world because now people can move around the world in a more convenient and cheaper way. This, combined with other communication technologies which have been brought about by the government has mean that people can now easily carry out business transactions around the world as if it was in the local world. In this regard, technology is so much a part of the social fabric and any innovation process must be looked at as a social project. Technological determinism not only means that the technological innovations will affect the social change, but will also mean that the social factors will affect technological innovation (Jordan, 2009). Normative approach and the social factor While the normative approach to innovation can have numerous challenges, it offers the best way to overcome the social issues which if not addressed would not only hinder innovation but would also lead to rejection of most of the innovations. Normative approach to innovation helps to make sure that all the issues affecting innovation are well addressed. For instance, it provides for agency with regard to innovation. Normative processes in innovation make it easy for there to be agents of change which make is easier for innovations to be successful. All innovations face some force of resistance in their initial chapters. This resistance comes from various quarters such as from agents of existing technological innovations which face obsoleteness if the new innovations are made. The end users of such innovation may also resist the innovation due to the fact that they are not comfortable with the unknown. Normative approach to innovation is in a position to provide the solution for such issues and help in limiting the social resistance or any other resistance by varying agents of change and innovation and backing them with the right systems and mechanisms to ensure that the innovation is given the required support. Social network analysis Innovations, apart from being affected by social structures of the society, also depend on social networks. This is where the common sharing of knowledge comes in. In a modern world, making innovations is determined by social networks and this is in turn affected by the normative processes (Singh, 2012). Constructivist approach to innovation would fail to take advantage of the social networks which would help in making sure that every individual in the network is able to use other people’s resources to achieve best innovations (Neisser, 2012). These resources include time, research, knowledge and information, as well as collaboration (Czarniawska, 2005). This is because in constructivist approach to knowledge and innovation is geared towards the personal application of the knowledge in a personal way rather than in a normalised and collaborative way. Constructivists believe that every individual is best able to learn when they are allowed to learn on their own and apply the knowledge in the best way they know. While this might be a very good way to encourage learning, the issue that may arise where the constructivist theory is applied is that innovation will lack a cohesive direction. This lack of a single direction may lead to confusion, especially with a global audience for these innovations. As such, in a modern global world, there is a need to have a way to make sure that innovation is done cohesively, in order to reduce duplications of innovations. This would also mean a better way of doing things, and also avoid issues to do with patents etc. In a constructivist environment however, each individual is likely to be working on their own projects because they have to apply their knowledge and skills in the most personal way and this may lead to similar projects being done simultaneously. Apart from the fact that this approach is likely to cause these issues, it would also create an innovation environment where there is no power to protect the innovation. As already discussed, innovation can sometimes be faced with resistance which would make it harder for these innovations to be implemented into useable products. A good example of this is the alternative energy innovations which have happened in the past. Although it is not entirely clearly confirmed, there has been a conspiracy theory that most fossil energy firms such as those who deal with petroleum always try to thwart any innovation that may make petroleum energy obsolete. In line with this theory, it has been argued that Chen (2007) has however tried to look at how constructivism can be used to not only reach and inspire students to innovate, but how it can be used as a fertile ground for innovation. According to him, constructivism is necessary as a catalyst for innovation. He identifies that this approach to innovation is necessary as it gives the student to draw from multiple sources of knowledge in order to create a pool of knowledge which is then converted into useful innovations. It is however not everyone who looks at this issue in this kind of manner though. While Chen was looking at how innovation can be encouraged among high school students, it is necessary to note that his theory may not be applicable in higher levels of innovation. At higher levels of innovation, there is a need for standardisation and for collaboration of the various sources of knowledge in order to come up with an innovation process which is clearly good enough to handle it. Change and perspective Change has always caused concerns among people. People like to stay in their safe comfort zones and very few are willing to take the risk and go beyond their comfort zones. The understanding of an individual affects the way they regard change and the perspective they will have with regard to the change. In this regard, when an innovation is made and it is about to affect the way people’s lives, it is necessary to make sure that there is clear understanding in order to create a positive perspective. The issue then is how to create this understanding and making new innovations to enjoy support and not to face resistance. The normative approach to innovation may be more able to create an environment that is best creates a better understanding of change that may be brought about by innovation (Andersen, 2013). This definitely leads to less resistance to change and innovation. The same may not be said about the constructivist approach to innovation. In the constructivist model, what may be lacking is the environment in which to create awareness and thus reduce resistance. It is necessary to note that this is not an argument against constructivism as a way to lead innovation. In fact, constructivism in the past been seen as one of the most important ways to creativity. The inventors of the early days did not have university labs to do their experiments, nor did they have university PhD panels to rubber-stamp their research. In this regard, it can only be argued that the earliest and some of the most important innovations were made by constructivist scientists. However, the question is on how this may work in a modern world, where there is much more positions and the world can choose to forgo some of the innovations. Apart from that, it is important to note that modern research is very expensive and some of the innovation can take millions of research investment. In such a case where the cost of innovation process is so high, there is a need to have checks-and-balances as a way to avoid unnecessary losses. The only system that can guarantee that there will be a checks and balances system to avoid losses is the normative process. If all the research in universities and organisations were to be funded in a constructivist environment, there would be issues with regard to the fact that some of the research may waste woo much money and never provide anything useful to the university or the organisation Watson (1999). In a normative process though, this is easily avoidable. Conclusion Innovation can be a demanding process, not just because of the difficulty in identifying ways to solve problems, but also in terms of selling these ideas to the right people in order to make the ideas acceptable. This calls for a right process of innovation. In the academic world and also in organisations, innovations can be done either in a constructivist or a normative way. The constructivist model has is own advantage due to the fact that it will give the innovator the freedom he or she requires in order to complete their work. However it lacks some of the advantages which are necessary in order to make sure that the process of innovation can easily managed. The normative model on the other hand helps in making sure that there are mechanisms put in place to place checks which will make innovations successful not only at the technical level but also at the social and economic level. This is important in a modern world where these issues are always there and always threaten to thwart any innovations. A normative process of innovation is therefore needed as way to make sure there are systems which can be used to govern innovation. While this is not the most efficient way in terms of giving the world new innovations, it is the best in guaranteeing two important things. The first is the fact that under a regulated normative environment, it is possible to avoid the resistance from the numerous quarters and thus make these innovations quite successful in their time. Secondly, a normative approach to innovation can be seen as a way to deal with losses in the research processes. Reference list: Andersen, A. (2013). Public Sector Innovation . Politica Volume 45, No. 3 | Public sector innovation , pp. 14-18. Bijker, W. & Law, J. (eds.) (1992) Building Technology/Shaping Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. MIT Press, London. Czarniawska B. (2005) Actor-Network Theory and Organizing. Copenhagen Business School Press Chen, T. (2007). Application of constructivist theory of learning in technological innovation activities in secondary schools. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 8, Issue 1, Article 18 , 23-29. John, L. & Callon, M. (n.d.). Engineering and Sociology in a Military Aircraft Project: A Network Analysis of Technological Change Vol 35, Issue 3. Journal of Social Problems, pp. 284-297 . Jordan, T. (2009). Hacking and power: Social and technological determinism in the digital age. First Monday, Volume 14, Issue 7 , 1-9. McIntyre, D. (2003). Technological determinism: A social process with some implications for Ambulance Paramedics, Vol.1, Issue 3. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine , 1-11. Neisser, F. (2012). Fostering Knowledge Transfer for Space Technology Utilization in Disaster Management: An Actor-Network Perspective. International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI) Volume 5, Issue 1 , pp. 1-15. Singh, M. (2012). Innovation in Communication: An Actor-Network Analysis of Social Websites. International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI) Volume 4, Issue 1. , pp. 13-15. Watson T. & Harris P. (1999) The Emergent Manager. Sage: London. Read More