PA RT I I
usual scenario involves a technology know–how promotor, and the bond between the power promotor and technical promotors has proven to be a strong force in the success of innovations (Hauschildt and Kirchmann, 2001), as illustrated in Figure 25. Degree of innovativeness
6,00 (very high)
5,50
5,00
4,50 no promoter
sole technology promoter
dyad
troika
37
52
19
21
(medium)
4,00
Figure 25. Definition and Distribution of Promotor Structures (Source: Hauschildt and Kirchmann, 2001).
106
The studies indicate that an increase in adequate promotor resources increases the organization’s capability for spectacular innovations. It may be that the solo work of a technological promotor is more creative, and becomes even more creative in the presence of a power promotor—in overcoming hurdles of will in the organization, for instance. When the process promotor in also engaged, further organizational barriers may be removed. These findings are illustrated in Table 7.
=N