is Íslenska en English

Lokaverkefni (Meistara)

Háskólinn í Reykjavík > Samfélagssvið / School of Social Sciences > MSc Viðskiptadeild (og Klínísk sálfræði -2019) / Department of Business Administration >

Vinsamlegast notið þetta auðkenni þegar þið vitnið til verksins eða tengið í það:

  • Titill er á ensku How do established Icelandic companies approach innovation?
  • Meistara
  • Útdráttur er á ensku

    This study aims to examine how established Icelandic companies approach innovation with respect to this study's conceptual framework. The conceptual framework is a modified one, as it came to being by the merger of two frameworks, Davila's & Epstein's views on activities of successful Startups, and Miller's conceptualization of entrepreneurial orientation. It includes the following themes: Inspiration, innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness, and learning. Innovation and entrepreneurship have in recent years been widely covered in scientific research, although little is known about innovation practices in Icelandic established companies. However, it has been argued that companies need to innovate in order to survive, as technology and markets are changing at a more rapid rate than ever before. To reach the goal of this study, a deductive qualitative research method of multiple-case studies was undertaken in collaboration with Kompás. A semi-structured interview guide, including 27 questions, was created in line with the conceptual framework along with two general themes. Participating companies were nine, ranging from being 5-50 years old, and having 30-380 employees, where one employee from each participating company was interviewed. The findings indicate that all nine participating companies are, to some extent, entrepreneurially oriented, and they exploit two selected activities of successful Startups. Accordingly, all participating companies' innovation approaches take on different forms in this study's conceptual framework dimensions, although, the majority of the participating companies show similarities in three factors that could be improved. They are having unsystematic ways when it comes to matching employees and projects, lack giving employees recognition for successful ideas or creative contributions, and possessing inadequate resources for innovation/product development.

  • 13.1.2020

Skráarnafn Stærð AðgangurLýsingSkráartegund 
EddaBjörkBolladóttir_InnovationManagement_Msc_2019.pdf1.4 MBOpinnHeildartextiPDFSkoða/Opna