We are Gradually Shifting our website to new domain TutorsOnSpot.com. TutorsOnspot is a wordlwide forum where we help our clients all over the world to meet the best Academic Writers.

s

Houston We Have A Problem: NASA and Open Innovation

Subject: Product and Brand Management

Paper Model: APA

Paper Type: Assignment

Total Words: 1844

This document is written by an Expert Academic Writer on
TutorsonSpot.com

Document Outline

Case Analysis On
Houston We Have A Problem: NASA and Open Innovation
Brief Summary:
Analysis of the issues identified in the case questions 
Evaluation
Lessons Learned
Conclusion
Reference
 


Document Preview

Case Analysis On

Houston We Have A Problem: NASA and Open Innovation

Brief Summary:

Jeff Davis who is director of Space Life sciences Directorate (SLSD) at The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been suggesting some change in organization. According to him, awareness is necessary about creativity in work. The environment of open innovation is something that is about new way to establish various system approaches in decided form. Several years to raise awareness amongst scientists were consumed and these researchers and scientist are about to provide open innovation environment. These scientist and researchers have been using developmental strategies as Davis guided.

There are benefits of open innovation and Davis penetrates with ideas about which way.The basic purpose is to provide open innovation environment and a composite system about collaboration off different research problems. Those problems were related with health and space travel. These issues should deal with out of the way approach that is innovative in working and effective in outcome. SLSD members have not considered this approach at practical basis. The main thing that is pinching is about doubtful about approach. The doubt that either Open innovation can provide benefits as it suppose to or not.

This major issue is being discussed in this case the incorporating of approach with proper mechanism, it is about the way in which team is only concern about day-to-day research. Such daily-based research and development is tool that significantly argues with Davis mindset. Team strategy is all efforts that are being invested by Davis and his team. The Case has described efforts that are with this approach and other is about react of members. The reaction after and before implication of open innovation at NASA is another elements associated with this case. Case also explored that there are some challenges that has been facing by pilot since establishment of NASA and Open Innovation has solutions about those challenges.

Analysis of the issues identified in the case questions

            1- The open innovation was effective, as it has initiated technological creativity at large scale. Scientific Innovations means there are many things that can provide as required. The space and earth both have acquired open innovation in integrated form. The production of new technology means there is proper realization about innovative techniques. Locus of innovation is main element during instilling innovative things at necessary level. At least level, SLSD has acquired strategic planning mode through Open Innovation. The process of strategic planning could satisfactory in instilling new things with new way. For example, NASA’s Johnson Space Center is example in this case. The research or technology problem is effective in collaborating with external organizations under the supervision of Davis and Richard. The supervision has developed in such way that has increased participation ofacademic, industry as well as government organizations.

2- The collaboration and open innovation is a way that can do multitasks at NASA. Therefore is its strategically important for Davis. He is excited towards approach even after worst response of workers. Further, organization was getting research and technology problems and Davis as leading role believe to provide resistive approach against those challenges. It is important for Davis to get solution as required. The effectiveness of Open Innovation is necessary because Davis has to show some realisticoutcome of program. The cost reduction of research and technology is most attractive outcome as seen by Davis but not by others. The research development through involvement of different outside firms can be innovative as per Davis thinking. He thought that Innovation that is NASA itself could beneficial for times to come.

3- The importance of radical changes in the organizational culture has recognized by open communication of innovation to generate expected outcomes. The open innovation characteristics have the major consideration in the NASA organization.  The internal problem of organization does not communicate. The change process of David and Richard has immense importance. Open innovation is not implemented in the organization. The development of strategic approach is recognized, where the manager and engineers learn to understand the potential benefits of problem solving approach.   The sharing personal experience towards open innovation with collaboration process helps to reduce the resistance of members.  Reservations and concerns with the peoples are taken place to get quick response of problem solving approach. Real benefits initialized as well as guidelines are developed to get positive involvement of member’s minds.

4-The audience felt that there would be no productivity if Open innovation gets applies in that organization that already diverse skills accordingly. For example, they thought that open innovation is entirely different thing and not coherent with duties. NASA is itself a innovative organization and they did not require any collaboration with external organization to get more innovation. It is extremely worst thing that could not happen accordingly. The external partnership means to provide such way that is entirely different and cannot initiate any innovation. The organization that only knows space and earth considerably cannot involve in Open Innovation because everyone is already has its own task to do.

5- The selection of working big problem towards space sciences is the major reason of engineers and scientist to select open innovation. Development of knowledge and talent is the major concern, because problems solving approach is implicate and potential benefits are realized. In this way member is assessing the problems in free way and feels important part of organization.  The composition of plans towards the problems solving approach helps in resolving issues in well manner. The acknowledgement of innovative solutions is the excitement for the engineers and scientists for problem solving. 

Evaluation

The practice of open innovation in collaboration process is recognized to initiates the reduction in resistance of members. Different ways are identified by Davis to convince employees to take open innovation approach. A series of learning lectures are delivered to employees to get to know about the potential benefits of open innovation and its importance to internal workforce. The changing of organizational mindset is the basic aim of open innovation in collaborative process. After complete evaluation of open innovation, Richard and Davis commence   survey of insures the importance of open innovation service providers. The radical change in the organizational culture is pursued by imposition of open innovation within organization.

Both Richard and Davis conduct workshops to ensure the best collaboration process. This workshop is also conducted to get involved all employees who resist changing. In this way stimulation of employees are created to lowers the resistance of employees.  Research and development activities are strengthen the collaborative approach to attain desired objectives of open innovation. But both of individuals are unable in pursuing the employees to involve in open innovation. 

The real time results are obtained when imposition of open innovation taken place to convince employees in well manner. The employee involvement and engagement are identified by could produce desires results. When these efforts are unable to produce results, then both individuals develop strategic approach towards implications of open innovation.  They are doing restructuring approach of open innovation with collaboration process by thinking that this is not new, but main objectives is to persistent with longstanding practices of NASA. Collaboration with crossing boundary is the successful foundation that accepts open innovation. Member to member connect helps in creation of open innovation that motivates SLASD workforce in well execution. 

Lessons Learned

I have learned that either you are right in apply anything seems most relevant to you only does not means it is as attractive for others. The consent of people is necessary in every aspect. Employees those are involved in implication of any process should be viewed in planning phase. There should be no loophole in planning of any project before implication. The basic thing is missing over her, which is pilot study before applying actual project. There is need of suggestive things from employees as well through notices boards and other ways of communication. The more talkative project is more effective.

Communication with employees, communication with stakeholders and communication with rules of organizations are basic things to apply any project. Davis and Richard has some authoritative attitude about project that is not seems effective for people. Theo colleagues that may in good relations with Davis and Richard cannot be in same position after implication of project. Workshops, counseling and any training module before implication of project are necessary rather than forceful. Planning phase of Open innovation was not good in any aspect. Planning phase did not argue or consider alternatives like fad, buzzword, kaizen, ISO and Six Sigma.

These are some things alternatives of Open innovation. These alternatives are not be debated at any stage during Davis and Richard. It comes from employee in critical mode. Open innovation means there is constant approach that requires collaboration of different organizations outside NASA but collaboration inside organization is missing thing. This is not a way to implement entirely different approach at any level.

Conclusion

Initially, Davis and Richard both have faced many challenges and negativity while applying new approach. The approach can apply successfully because NASA was a learning organization and innovative as well. Nevertheless, any approach without people is empty one and cannot apply successfully. Open Innovation that was new tool, new to apply, new to change and new to people as well. This new approach needs some new strategy at least level. Strategy that can involve people different mindset was never considerable at any stage of implication. It was challenges to attractive colleagues that what has been given by Davis and Richard is itself productive for all.

The changes of way about problem solving, changes of knowledge required for apply and others function indirectly involves in apply. The strength of organizations was a way that took many years to apply Open innovation that can takes months. Problem is natural and this natural phenomenon can modified is not an easy thing at all. The justification is necessary in this way because culture and change is two sides of same coin. Because Davis and Richard did not consider collaborative approach, sothey face problems. The reorganization of any program is there but there is no consideration to instill it with Open innovation.


You can also get help in Re-Writing/Paraphrasing this paper with Guaranteed 0% Plagiarism by an Expert Academic Writer on
TutorsonSpot.com

Click the button above to view the complete essay, speech, term paper, or research paper

Tags


Related Uploads

11 pages
.
9 pages
4 pages
.

Open Innovations at Siemens

Subject: Marketing Research

Model: APA

Type: Essay

Words: 821

.
7 pages
.
14 pages
.
7 pages
1 pages
6 pages
.
6 pages
.
6 pages
.
.
3 pages
.

Sputnik Crisis

Subject: Customer Relationship Management

Model: APA

Type: Assignment

Words: 530

.
3 pages
pages
.
.
4 pages
Question No 1: What does NASA stand for? Answer: NASA stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Question No 2: Who was Yuri Gagarin? Answer: The Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space and he was titled under the first man in space by Russia and Russian administration and media boosted his morale by consistent buzzing it. .
Question No 1: What does NASA stand for? Answer: NASA stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Question No 2: Who was Yuri Gagarin? Answer: The Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space and he was titled under the first man in space by Russia and Russian administration and media boosted his morale by consistent buzzing it. .
13 pages
.
.
pages
.

Questions & Answers

Subject: Business-to-Business Marketing

Model: APA

Type: Assignment

Words: 517

.
1 pages
.

Communication in Organizations

Subject: Consumer Behavior

Model: APA

Type: Assignment

Words: 519

.
pages
pages
.
.
8 pages
Tutor Images