Global innovators v.2011

2011-11-15

It is difficult to measure innovation, but the West remains ahead

Innovation is widely acclaimed as a cornerstone for business and societal development, but innovation is tricky concept and difficult to measure and analyse. Earlier today Thompson Reuters published their 2011 Top 100 Global Innovators report in which they identify companies that are “truly the world leaders of innovation and economic growth.” An indicator of the importance of these 100 companies that they created more than 400,000 new jobs in 2010, which they argue is far better than comparative companies.

How should we measure innovation?

Research and development (R&D) has often been used as a proxy for innovation based on the simple idea that the more research the more innovation. A problem with R&D as a chief measure is that research is not an important dimension of many industries, including services. More profoundly,  innovation is not equal to research since research costs money and innovation creates it (and other values). In fact, in a previous article in this collection I have argued that “A grand illusion of politicians (and university people) is that more millions in research funding automatically results in national wealth creation.”

Another frequently used measure is intellectual property, especially patents, in companies. The assumption is that an efficiently operating intellectual property system is critical to the ability to spur innovation and bring new services and products to the marketplace faster. In other words,  intellectual property is what bridges innovation and economic growth. This is what the Thompson Reuters report is about.

In sum, they use four patent-oriented criteria:

  1. Success: The ratio of published applications to granted patents, over the most recent three years.
  2. Globality: The extent to which a patent is protected globally.
  3. Influence: How often a patent 
is subsequently cited by other companies in their inventions.
  4. Volume: Amount of patents.

So in terms of Innovation = Patents, how does the world look like?

  • The United States leads the world in Semiconductor & Electronic Component Manufacturing
  • Asia leads the world in Computer Hardware Manufacturing and Automotive Manufacturing
  • Europe leads the world in Machinery Manufacturing and has more than half of the Top 100 Global Innovators in this category in Sweden
  • France leads the world in Scientific Research and is the European nation with the most companies represented in the list

Judged by this metrics, USA remains the most innovative host country of innovative companies, followed by Japan, France, Sweden and Germany. The next five are Germany, Netherlands, South Korea, Switzerland and Lichtenstein: Most innovative host countries.

In other words, the winners are well known nations with developed industries and societal systems. Not surprisingly, these nations have some of the world’s highest GDP/capita and score high on similar measures of wealth and wealth creation.

What about industries? Given the metrics, patents, it is not surprising that manufacturing dominates but it is still noteworthy that semiconductors, electronics and computer hardware together with chemicals make up the top three most innovative industries. In these industries USA dominates. Consumer products, machinery and telecom and electrical products follow: Most innovative industries.

What companies are we talking about? Among the first ten we find global brands like, 3M, ABB, Airbus, Alcatel-Lucent, Alfa-Laval, Apple, Atlas Copco and BASF. I could not find any company based in a BRIC country, nor from any other Nordic country other than Sweden, but I am sure new contenders will be there in a few years.

Is patent the right proxy?

The number of innovation indexes out there is also growing since governments, business leaders, policymakers, and industry associations recognize the importance of innovation and want to measure it effectively.

Patent is a crude and imperfect measure of innovation, but one that lends itself to data gathering and analysis and it does provide a viable picture of where the action is. But what is really needed is a way to capture a range of factors, including investments in training, organizational change and competitive performance over time.  Some kind of peer review where organizations rate each other’s degree of innovativeness might also be helpful.

We need to regard innovation as multidimensional and far more than new products or patents. New services, standards, business models, systems and leadership processes are parts of innovation too. But this will take time and developing global standards for measuring innovations is far away.

In the mean while we need to keep investing in research and education to cultivate the culture valuing scientific discovery and scientific methods as well as one of life-long learning and curiosity. Then ensure that the national innovation system is in place to encourage the transformation of new knowledge into new products, services, markets, industries, systems and processes that are seen as valuable and useful in they eyes of paying customers, in addition to patents.

Last week I was part of a group of private and public organization leaders who heard the  new Danish minister of science, education and innovation say that the country really needs a new innovation strategy. I agree.

But, this is a clear and present challenge for all developed countries and that is why efforts like the OECD Innovation Strategy are so important. But, strategy means both differentiation and choice so replicating another country’s strategy is not the best way forward. It shall be interesting to see what the new Danish innovation policy will look like.


Danish Design 2020

2011-10-27

The future of Danish design is to integrate it with innovation

Design is an important brick in the tricky jig-saw puzzle about how to rejuvenate the Danish economy.

The country is well known for its design traditions, beautifully designed products and its thriving design industry. In the 1990s Denmark was among the first countries in the world to adopt a design policies (=1st generation) but since then other countries have caught-up and even launched design policies emphasizing the dissemination of knowledge on how to use design and how to create better-functioning markets for design services (= 2nd generation policy).  The UK, Netherlands, Korea, Singapore and Finland are just a few examples. If Denmark is to maintain its strong design identity, and if it is to become better at harnessing the innovative capabilities of design, these design policies need to be updated (= 3rd generation policy). An international group of six experts appointed by the government and chaired by me presented to the minister of business and the minister of culture the Vision for Danish design 2020 in June 2010.

Our task was to develop a vision, not a detailed action plan but we did a bit of both. We articulated a vision that we believe is both exciting and realistic and we made a number of suggestions for how to make it happen. I am absolutely delighted this was never a party political matter and that one of the strong players in the new government, the liberal RV party, presented their own design policy ideas already this spring. This means that there is a good chance that our suggestions will be converted into new and changed policies over the next few years.

In short, the we envisioned that in 2020 Denmark is known worldwide as the design society –  a society that, at all levels and in a responsible way, has integrated the use of design to improve the quality of people’s lives, create economic value for businesses, and make the public sector better and more efficient. To quote from our report: “Our vision will be realized the day it is no longer necessary to explain and motivate the value of design or promote its use to Danish companies and public organizations. This is the day when design will have become an interwoven part of the psychological, social, and economic fabric of Danish society. This is the day when design will be as natural to Danes as caring for the environment.

From here we presented the landscape and the roadmap for design as a driver of innovation, design competency development, design research and future branding of Denmark. In this post I will only mention our suggestions regarding design as a driver of innovation since, in my view, this is where the real mind shift is called for. We argued that Danish public-private partnerships simply should use design to develop innovative solutions to societal challenges, especially in areas in which Denmark and Danish companies have advantages such as the green economy and welfare services. The example of the upcoming mega investments in five new hospitals was a frequently used example of where a more intentionally and integrated up-front use of design thinking and approaches could add much value. Specifically, in our vision of using design as a driver of innovation we suggested that:

• A majority of Danish companies use design as an important and integrated driver of innovation to strengthen their productivity and global competitiveness.

• Denmark has a significant number of specialized design firms that offer a wide variety of cutting- edge design products and services to the global market.

• The Danish public sector consistently utilizes design to develop better and more efficient services.

• Denmark remains a country where materials and products are shaped, developed, and produced in innovative ways.

Our many suggestions about this an other issues represent an important step for how Denmark can retain its lead in design (or avoid losing it) by thinking of design as interwoven with innovation and by seriously upgrading its research and education about design. While the rest of the world is busy overtaking each other in innovation and Denmark is slipping in international rankings about innovation. From the perspective of research and higher education the integrated design aspect of Alto University and the new Singapore University of Technology and Design are examples that speak for themselves, which contrasts with some recent developments in Denmark.

The full report is available for downloading from the ministry of business.


The power of irony?

2011-10-25

In my last column with Berlingske Nyhedsmagasin as president of CBS in March 2011 I used irony and sarcasm to suggest that the debate about what was needed to get Denmark out of the crisis really missed some fundamental points, at least, when it comes to policies for education, research and innovation.

This was the time when the right-wing party put lots of pressure on the previous government to reduce the inflow of foreign students to the universities and the opposition left-wing group of parties kept talking about higher taxes and all politicians were jockeying for position. In many respects, it was a sad time in Denmark.

In that column I ironically suggest it was time to: (1) Increase taxes, (2) avoid innovating in the universities, (3) protect the local students from foreign influence, (4) ignore the broader regional aspects of Denmark’s capital Copenhagen, (5) prevent so called penta-helix cooperation (state-business-universities-NGO-private individuals), and (6) avoid building on what Danes are really good at (!)

Of course, what I really meant was that this was a great recipe for reducing  attractiveness and competitiveness.

However, a few days after it was published a few people told me they were shocked that I could even make such stupid suggestions…Clearly they did not see the parody, which I find hard to believe. Here it is.

Free us from new ideas and investments

Here is a recipe for how a small country can reduce its attractiveness. Or, perhaps there is a different way of doing it?

Everyone, who follows the public debate, knows that the Danes stand before great societal challenges. One of the challenges is typically called growth; but the way I see it, the problem lies in attraction. The better we are at attracting ideas, talent, inventions and investments, the more jobs and tax revenues can be used to pay for our expensive welfare system and vice versa.

I have a good recipe for doing the exact opposite, namely becoming less attractive and repelling new talent, new ideas and investments.

Here is a recipe for how a little country can reduce its attractiveness.

1. An increased high tax burden is the way forward: Ignore the fact, that the majority of our neighboring countries have gradually lowered the income tax, to motivate people to work more – successfully. Retain all tax levels and taxes, also for small and medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs. It prevents innovation. Forget everything about what has been going on in Sweden for the last five years – a significant reduction of taxes on work.

2. Avoid innovation in institutions of higher education: It is important to have as much command and control as possible at the universities, both concerning wage, educational content, and what counts as good research. A good mantra is as follows: “If it is not regulated, it is not allowed”. Jeopardize all synergy too, by dividing the ministerial responsibilities in to primary, secondary and tertiary education, and in to industry and employment; and furthermore, let us disregard what Finland has done in 2007 – 2008 and what India is doing right now.

3. Protect the students from foreign influences: If we expose Danish students to new perspectives and ideas from abroad, we risk that they seek out. A rigid “one in, one out”-exchange system is what we need. After all, it is best that the Danish universities keep their students within their protective walls, until they are thirty something. Never do as Singapore has done. It can only go wrong.

4. Ignore the Copenhagen Metropolitan Region: The bridge to Malmö is just a bridge, just as the Fehrmarn tunnel is just another expensive tunnel. Seen in this light one should avoid investing 41 billion Danish Crowns (about 7.6 billion U.S. dollars) in five large hospitals in the Scania/Skåne region across the strait in Sweden. Concurrently, one should ignore the 2 billion Euros invested in ESS, MaxLab 4 and Ideon Life Science Village outside of Lund. It would be foolish to imagine, that Copenhagen Metropolitan Region could be one of the most pulsating regions in Europe over the next 20 to 30 years.

5. Prevent penta-helix cooperation: Avoid that universities, public organizations, NGO’s, investors who are willing to take risks, and private individuals ever meet at the same time and place. It is important not to make political changes that attract individuals who may want to donate money to the universities, or that attract investors who are willing to take risks, to our county.

Once again, I must stress the importance of not coordinating with Sweden. There is a possibility that innovation may become bi-lateral and that must be prevented.

6. Do not continue build on what we are really good at: Remember that governments are not good at even picking relevant problems to solve to strengthen already strong national positions and brands such as food production, design and wind power. Last, but not least, we should not coordinate research funding for these areas and keep separating the agendas of the research councils. Thus, we ensure that all universities spread out thinly and try to everything instead of specializing.

Or is there a different way of doing it..?

(A Danish version of this text was published in Berlingske Nyhedsmagasin 2 March 2011. Translated to English by Caroline Roseberry.)


Boosting the Bachelor

2011-10-25

In other posts I have discussed the improvement potential in  higher education, at least in Denmark. One of the strategic initiatives I managed to push through while being president of CBS – despite heavy resistance within CBS and in the ministry of science – was to offer an intensive, elite Bachelor in very close cooperation with companies. This education was designed to bring theory closer to practice, companies closer to students and universities closer to companies as well as double the resources since companies would pay for it. Although this may sound like common sense for international observers we are talking about  a revolutionary idea in Denmark. Even two weeks before I resigned as president the science minister and servants were  reluctant to see the point of  and it was not until the Danish industry association offered their vocal support for it most of them backed off.

This is why I am absolutely delighted that the first round of the International Buisness EngAGE program just started at CBS.

In this column from January 2011 I presented this radical project.

BERLINGSKE NYHEDSMAGASIN 14. JANUAR – 20. JANUAR 2011

Dr. Johan Roos

Den 2. vej til højere uddannelse

Den globale virkelighed kræver mere fleksible uddannelser. Derfor skal de studernde være klar til arbejdsmarkedet efter tre år for senere at vende tilbage til universiteterne. CBS er på vej med nyt initiativ.

Jens er kommet ind på HA Almen. Han forestil- ler sig at læse tre år på bachelor og derefter to år på cand.merc. Flere af hans venner fortæl- ler, at han nok må planlægge at blive på univer- sitetet i seks-syv år. Derfor gælder det om – så hurtigt som muligt – at skaffe sig et studiejob. Jens undrer sig. Han ved, hvornår han er fær- diguddannet, men han har svært ved at forestille sig selv i et almindeligt 8.00-16.00 job, når han er 27 år.

Stine ser en alternativ fremtid foran sig. Hun er kom- met ind på en ny, intensiv version af HA Almen, der kræver så meget studietid, at hun frarådes at tage et job ved siden af. Stine er indstillet på at forfølge bache- loren på tre intensive år og ser frem til de projekter og praktikophold i virksomheder, som er en integreret del af undervisningen.

Stine får en bachelor som 22-årig. Hun ved, at universitetet tilbyder professionel hjælp til at finde et job, når hun er færdig. Stine og den virksomhed, der ansætter hende, ønsker endda, at hun vender tilbage til studier- ne senerehen for at tage en deltids cand.merc. – måske

allerede efter to år, for denne videreuddannelse indgår på en naturlig måde i virksomhedens videreudvikling af medarbejderen. Som 27-årig har Stine der- med en bachelor, fire års arbejdserfaring og en cand.merc. For Stine er videre- uddannelse helt naturligt.

Klar efter tre år: Dette valg findes ikke i dag, men på CBS arbejder vi på at give de unge studerende begge karri- ereveje. Som et første skridt udbyder CBS til efteråret bachelorprogrammet EngAGE (Engaged Applied Global Education), og de første studerende bliver udvalgt blandt unge på det meget attraktive internationale business (IB)-program. Udvælgelsen sker sammen med de delta- gende virksomheder, som på de efterfølgende semestre stiller projekter og virksomhedspraktik til rådighed.

Ideen er, at de studerende skal i relevant interaktion med virksomhederne fra starten af deres uddannelse, og virksomhederne skal være med til at forme uddan- nelsesforløbet – i et tæt partnerskab med CBS. Alle skal også i løbet af de tre år i lønnet virksomhedspraktik i et semester. Vi lægger vægt på, at det er en global uddannelse, og derfor vil der også være samarbejde med udenlandske universiteter og projekter for internatio- nale virksomheder.

Målet er klart: Bachelorer, der er klar til arbejdsmar- kedet efter tre år. Det er en fordel for virksomhederne, der kommer til at mangle højtuddannede, men det er også en fordel for de studerende, der kan koncentrere sig mere om deres karriere, når de er 22-23 år.

Det handler om et avanceret læringsforløb med teori og praktik integreret på en måde, vi savner i dag. Det handler om engaged learning.

Den femårige kandidatuddannelse skal fortsat bestå, men på CBS ønsker vi at åbne for den 2. vej.

Den globale virkelighed kræver mere fleksible ud- dannelser, som gør os i stand til at imødekomme den internationale efterspørgsel og sikre os en andel på det globale marked. Kun derved bliver vi konkurrencedyg- tige på det internationale uddannelsesmarked.

Som studielederen gennem mange år på Københavns Universitet, Jakob Lange engang sagde: ”Hvorfor tage en uddannelse og få råd til en brugt bil, når du bliver 30, hvis du kan tage et arbejde og få råd til at stifte familie og købe bil, når du er 20?”.


Copenhagen Innovation and Entrepreneurship Lab (CIEL)

2011-10-25

In my ongoing push to help improve the conditions for innovation in Denmark I worked hard with my peers at the Danish Technical University and Copenhagen University to create a joint venture that would pool into one unit our resources and activities about entrepreneurship. This became the Copenhagen Innovation and Entrepreneurship Lab (CIEL). I was delighted to note that it was inaugurated as planned 12 September 2011 and I am convinced it will be of great benefits to all parties, foremost the students . In this column I outlined the rational for this important venture.

BERLINGSKE NYHEDSMAGASIN 19. NOVEMBER – 25. NOVEMBER 2010

Dr. Johan Roos

Universiteter skaber nyt væksthus

Finland er gået i front for at skabe et nyt, tværvidenskabeligt universitet på internationalt niveau med offentlig og privat støtte. I Danmark prøver tre universiteter at gøre kunsten efter – i lidt langsommere tempo.

Alle europæiske lande kæmper om at nå samme mål: At få bare ét universitet i verdensklasse. Lad os sammenligne Finland og Dan- mark. Finland investerer nu 4 pro- cent af bruttonationalproduktet i forskning og udvikling. Danmark knap 2 procent. I Finland har man for nylig skabt et nyt tværfagligt superuniversitet, Aalto University, der er flagskibet i en stor universitetsreform. Tre univer- siteter i hovedstaden Helsinki – Handelshøjskolen, Det Kunstindustrielle Universitet (Designskolen) og Det Tek- niske Universitet – lægges sammen og har fået en fælles identitet, strategi, administration og forskermiljø. Aalto University styres som et privat universitet med egen fond.

Det finansielle mål for fonden er at sikre universitetet en samlet sum på 5 mia. kr. ved udgangen af 2010, hvoraf 1,5 mia. er private bidrag og 3,5 mia. fra staten i såkaldte matchmidler. Inden fusionen lød det samlede budget for de tre universiteter på ca. det halve – 2,5 mia.

kr. Alt tyder på, at universitetet når det ambitiøse mål ved udgangen af i år; alene i 2009 gav finsk erhvervsliv 750 – 800 mio. kr. i private donationer.

Ideen er at kombinere for- skellige videnska- ber på nye måder for at skabe nye, erhvervsrettede og innovative uddannelser og forskningsresultater i tæt samarbejde med erhvervslivet. I praksis viser det sig altid vanskeligere at realisere potentialerne, end man først tror. Men ambitionen om at få kreative forskere fra forskellige videnskabelige fel- ter til at arbejde tættere sammen fortjener opbakning.

Den finske regering har da også valgt at give sin ful- de økonomiske støtte og erhvervslivet ligeså. Bliver Aalto University en succes, vil Finland have skabt et lokomotiv inden for forskning, undervisning og innovation, der er internationalt konkurrencedygtigt.

Dansk initiativ: Hvad gør vi i Danmark? Sammen med Danmarks Tekniske Universitet (DTU) og Københavns Universitet (KU) er vi for første gang gået sammen om at etablere et fælles projekt, der skal være et vigtigt fyr- tårn for entreprenøraktiviteter i Danmark.

Erhvervs- og Byggestyrelsen under Økonomi- og Er- hvervsministeriet ønskede, at projektet “Det Entreprenørielle Universitet’”(DEU) skulle havne hos ét af Dan- marks universiteter, men for at udforske potentialerne på tværs af universiteterne har vi i fællesskab med pro- rektor Anders Bjarklev (DTU) og Thomas Bjørnholm (KU) valgt at søge i fællesskab.

Selv om dette initiativ ikke på nogen måde svarer til en egentlig fusion af tre universiteter, mener jeg, at DEU-initiativet kan blive et første skridt på vejen til et langt stærkere samarbejde mellem os om en central platform i centrum af København. Ikke mindst hvis er- hvervslivet og de politiske aktører også bakker op.

De tre universiteter har til sammen halvdelen af al- le studerende i Danmark. Vi kan kombinere nogle af de stærkeste og mest innovative forskningsområder i verden, f.eks. inden for sundhedsvidenskab, biotek, en- treprenørskab, marketing, innovation samt de tekni- ske løsninger der skal til. Dette potentiale kan og skal udnyttes bedre.

Så vi er på vej – men der er godt nok langt op til det finske tempo.


Innovation, not only research

2011-10-25

A grand illusion of politicians (and university people) is that more millions in research funding automatically results in national wealth creation. As I continued to observe the ill-informed debate about this in Denmark last year I wrote yet another column to showcase Finland and its innovation policy and system to show that a systemic vie is essential. The result was that the permanent chief civil servant in the ministry of business paid me a visit to discuss the matter and it turned out we agreed on a lot of matters.

BERLINGSKE NYHEDSMAGASIN 8. oKtoBER – 14. oKtoBER 2010

Dr. Johan Roos

Innovation skaber job, som skaber velstand

Det er ikke nok bare at poste flere milliarder i forskning. Der skal bygges bro mellem forskning og erhvervsliv og skabes forståelse i befolkningen for sammenhængen mellem innovation og fremtid.

Folketingets partier skal fordele nye forsk- ningsmidler fra globaliseringspuljen for ca. 1.400 mio. kr. i 2011 og en portion af de 1.600 mio. kr., som er afsat i 2012. Re- geringen har for nylig lagt vægt på, at der sikres en stærkere sammenhæng mellem fordelingen af forskningsmidler og den økonomiske vækst. Spørgsmålet er derfor: Hvordan får vi mest muligt for pengene til glæde for innovation og vækst i Danmark i de kommende år?

I mine øjne nytter det ikke blot at poste endnu flere milliarder ind i forskningen. Det gælder om at bygge en stærkere bro fra erhvervslivet til forskningen. I Dan- mark sætter vi ofte lighedstegn mellem innovation og resultater fra den naturvidenskabelige forskning. Men det er en for snæver og elitepræget forståelse af inno- vation, som betyder, at store dele af dansk erhvervsliv holdes uden for den løbende innovationspolitik.

Forskningsresultater kan kun blive til innovation og vækst ved en vekselvirkning med kommercielle aktører – og det forudsætter, at de kommercielle aktører også har blik for de mange muligheder.

Med Globaliseringsstrategien er der investeret ganske store milliardbeløb i netop den tekniske, natur- og sundhedsvidenskabelige forskning. Resultaterne på forskningssiden udebliver da heller ikke. Forskningsstrategien ser ud til at virke. Men betyder dette øget innovation og vækst i erhvervslivet og i samfundet? Ikke nødvendigvis.

Udfordringen er at få de mange gode ideer og paten- ter ud fra universiteterne, så de kan være med til at ska- be vækst og arbejdspladser i de private virksomheder.

Eksemplet finland: I Finland arbejder regeringen meget hårdt på netop at skabe den brede folkelige forståelse for nødvendigheden af et stærkt og blomstrende erhvervs- liv, der er afgørende for landets og velfærdens fremtid. Logikken er enkel: Innovation = privat virksomhed = gevinst = arbejde = skat = velfærd = velstand.

Med udgangspunkt i at skatteyderne forstår, hvorfor innovation er vigtigt, handler det for finnerne om at skabe forudsætningerne for kontinuerlig dialog mellem myndigheder og virksomheder om landets erhvervs- og innovationspolitik.

Til dette formål har de blandt andet etableret VTT – Finlands tekniske forskningscenter – med næsten 3.000 ansatte, hvoraf ca. 600 har en ph.d-grad og 270 mio. euro (cirka 2 mia. kr.) i omsætning.

Lige nu fokuserer VTT på en håndfuld knowledge clu- sters –forskningsområder, hvor de forventer store forsk- nings- og erhvervsmæssige vækstpotentialer.

Hvor er den danske pendant? Hvor er den fælles in- novationsstrategi for Copenhagen Metropolitian Re- gion som ud over Danmark inkluderer sydlige Sverige og nordlige Tyskland? Hvor er den danske befolknings forståelse for, hvad der skaber vækst og velfærd? Jeg undrer mig bare.

Der er en forskel mellem at pick the winner og at fo- kusere sine investeringer i fremtiden, især i et lille land som vores. Det første kan diskuteres. Det andet er bare sund fornuft. I begyndelse af november byder vi på CBS en delegation fra VTT velkommen for at høre, hvordan vi kan bygge bro mellem forskning, innovation og kommercialisering.


Business-in-Society Platforms

2011-10-25

9 September 2010 I hosted the Prime Minister’ Growth Forum at Copenhagen Business School. As the host I was invited to join the two-day conversations, but I was also given the opportunity to privately present the school’s new strategy to the PM, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Science. The PM’s comments what that he rarely had seen such an offensive and exciting strategy, especially in view of all the negativism in Denmark at the time.

In this column I briefly outline one important facet of that strategy, namely the three Business-in-Society platforms that combines research and education to address pressing societal challenges and opportunities relevant to our region.The BiS Platform idea was proposed by many CBS people during the previous strategy process and, in my view, a really great concept for a modern university eager to connect with the world. Specifically, the three platforms were focused on Enterprise Design, Sustainability and Private-Public Partnership – all three topics relevant to the Danish/Scandinavian identity, image and real challenges.  After I resigned as president the concept BiS Platform lives on, but it has been greatly reduce in magnitude and the Design platform has been canceled.

BERLINGSKE NYHEDSMAGASIN 15. OKTOBER – 21. OKTOBER 2010

Dr. Johan Roos

3 platforme til design af Danmarks fremtid

Teori skal være præget af praksis og praksis præget af teori. Derfor præsenterer CBS tre nye forskningsplatforme, der på tværs af fag og i samarbejde med erhvervslivet skal medvirke til en vision for Danmark.

Da regeringens Vækstforum forleden besøgte CBS, blev jeg af mi- nistre og erhvervsledere spurgt, hvordan CBS konkret bidrager til at løse nogle af samfundets og er- hvervslivets vigtigste problemer. Heldigvis kunne jeg forsikre dem om, at vi faktisk bidrager en hel del – både ved at ud danne unge og via vores forskning.

Et godt eksempel er en ny publikation fra nogle af CBS’ bedste forskere, “Væksthuset”, der netop skitserer en række konkrete anbefalinger til, hvordan politikere, erhvervsledere og embedsmænd kan skabe mere vækst og innovation i Danmark. Men der skal mere til.

Nye forskningsplatforme: Jeg har tidligere argumente- ret for, at en moderne og ambitiøs handelshøjskole skal være dygtig til både forskning og undervisning. Teori skal være præget af praksis og praksis præget af teori. Vi skal kunne levere forskningsbaseret undervisning og undervisningsbaseret forskning. Og vi skal blive bedre til at forstå, analysere og påvirke samfundsdebatten og løse virksomhedernes udfordringer.

En vigtig del af CBS’ strategi er derfor at sætte tre nye forskningsplatforme i søen – nemlig designtænkning, bæredygtighed og offentlig-private partnerskaber.

De tre temaer har det til fælles, at de ikke alene har betydning for Copenhagen Metropolitan Region; de har også global relevans. Samtidig er det ambitionen, at de tre platforme skal nedbryde barriererne mellem forsk- ningsdiscipliner ved at gå på tværs af mange områder. Temaerne har derfor relevans for stort set alle på CBS, og alle har mulighed for at bidrage – også blandt vore eksterne samarbejdspartnere. Dette er en invitation – Join Us, som det hedder i vores Guiding Principles.

Designtænkning: Som den første introducerer vi platfor- men Creative Enterprise Design (CED) der skal bidrage til, at Danmark designes bedre. Dette arbejde skal i høj grad foregå i samarbejde med erhvervslivet og offentlige institutioner. CED skal bidrage til, at vi designer os til et bedre og mere effektivt samfund. Design skal her for- stås bredt, som design af organisationer, institutioner, produkter og processer. Designtænkning er en vigtig motor for værdiskabelse og gør virksomhederne mere konkurrencedygtige. CED skal netop organisere et sam- arbejde mellem forskere fra forskellige discipliner – på tværs af institutter og universiteter, og i samarbejde med virksomheder og offentlige institutioner.

Personligt ser jeg frem til at udarbejde en vision for Danmark som designnation i 2020 sammen med en række andre forskere og erhvervsledere i Økonomi- og Erhvervsministeriets nye Visionsudvalg for Design. Ud- valget skal ikke alene undersøge, hvordan design kan være med til at løse nogle af de centrale udfordringer i fremtiden, men også forholde sig til design som innova- tionsmotor, udvikling af designkompetencer, forskning i design samt markedsføring.

Ved at udfordre os selv og betragte det velkendte fra nye vinkler, tror vi på, at der opstår nye spændende synergier. Det er i høj grad den øvelse, der bredt set er brug for, hvis der skal skabes ny vækst i samfundet. Det arbejde bidrager CBS gerne med, og vi glæder os tilsamarbejdet.