Model for the analysis of the innovation level for IT&C entrepreneurial activity in Romania.

Tamasila, Matei ; Taucean, Ilie Mihai

1. INTRODUCTION

The methodology for the assessment of the innovation level of the proposed entrepreneurial activity is based on a global indicator achieved through the level-headed summing up of three indicators: the indication of the entrepreneur satisfaction [I.sub.ES], corresponding to the charming characteristics from Kano's model (Kano, 1984), the indicator of inventiveness, [I.sub.IN], associated to Altshuller's five levels of inventiveness (Altshuller, 1999), and the indicator of ideality, [I.sub.ID], which reflects the degree of ideality.

Thus, in order to assess the level of innovation, we propose a global indicator of the innovation level, [I.sub.I], which can be determined by means of the following relation:

[I.sub.I] = [I.sub.ES] x [p.sub.ES] + [I.sub.IN] x [p.sub.IN] + [I.sub.ID] x [p.sub.ID] =

[I.sub.ES] x [p.sub.ES] + [I.sub.IN] x [p.sub.IN] + ([9.summation over k=1][i.sub.k] x [q.sub.k]) x [p.sub.ID] (1)

where [p.sub.ES], [p.sub.IN] and [p.sub.ID] represent the weights corresponding to the three indicators, [i.sub.1], [i.sub.2], ..., [i.sub.9] are the indicators of the degree of ideality, and [q.sub.1], [q.sub.2] ..., [q.sub.9] are the weights of the indicators of ideality. The sum of the weights from each category is equal to 1, i.e. [p.sub.ES] + [p.sub.IN] + [p.sub.ID] = I and [q.sub.1] + [q.sub.2] + ... + [q.sub.9] = 1. Some weights can be null, as function of the field where the methodology is applied.

2. THE INDICATORS LEVEL ESTABLISHING

Generally, the characteristics of a product, according to Noriaki Kano's model, from the point of view of customers' satisfaction, are as follows: non-satisfying characteristics, satisfying characteristics, and charming characteristics.

In the proposed methodology, we have considered that it is necessary that the indicator of the entrepreneur's satisfaction, [I.sub.ES], refer only to the charming characteristics from Kano's model, because, on the one side, their achievement implies an innovation effort from the part of the entrepreneurs, and, on the other side, they represent, most often, the decisive element for the success of a business (see table 1).

For the assessment purposes, there has been proposed that [I.sub.ES] indicator be attributed grades on a scale from 1 to 10, as function of the number of charming characteristics, as follows: grades 1 and 2 for one charming characteristic, grades 3 and 4 for two charming characteristics, grades 5 and 6 for three charming characteristics, grades 7 or 8 for four charming characteristics, and grades 9 or 10 for five or more charming characteristics.

In order to take into account the degree of inventiveness, there has been proposed in the paper to make an adjustment on the basis of the five levels of the inventiveness solutions and of the required inspirations sources established by Altshuller, with the grades corresponding to the inventiveness indicator, [I.sub.IN] (see table 2) as follows:

Level one activities--which do not imply any invention, can be achieved by routine improvements of some existing products through well-known methods in the field, and for which the inspiration source comes from own knowledge (grade 2). Level two activities--which imply minor improvements of some existing products for which the inspiration source comes from the scientific field where the designing engineers work (grade 4).

Level three activities--which imply fundamental improvements of some existing products through known methods, for which the solutions shall be looked for in related fields or in other fields (grade 6).

Level four activities--which principally imply new products or new generation products for which there are used new principles, and the solutions come from the clearing up of some phenomena from various fields, phenomena that have been less understood until that moment (grade 8).

Level five activities--which imply rare scientific discoveries, whole new products, whose solutions can be found by exceeding the borders of the scientific knowledge known at a certain moment (grade 10).

The ideality indicator, [I.sub.ID], takes into account the ideality of the product through nine indicators. These indicators are as follows: The indicator of the system dimensionality degree ([i.sub.1]); The indicator of the aggregation status ([i.sub.2]); The indicator of the type, nature, and frequency of the actions applied to the system The indicator of the degree of the system "porosity" ([i.sub.4]); The indicator of the degree of the system dynamic capability ([i.sub.3]); The indicator of the degree of human involvement ([i.sub.6]); The indicator of the degree of the system multiplicity ([i.sub.7]); The indicator of the nature, type and dimensionality of the system functions and features ([i.sub.8]); The indicator of the degree of the system convolution ([i.sub.9]).

The indicator of ideality, [I.sub.ID], can be determined with the following relation:

[I.sub.ID] = [9.summation over k=1][i.sub.k] x [q.sub.k] (2)

where [i.sub.k] represents the nine indicators of the degree of ideality, and [q.sub.k] - their weights, with the feature that their sum is 1. The indicators weights are established as function of the object of assessment.

3. CASE STUDY

In order to highlight the use of the developed researches, here we will present below the application of the proposed methodology for the very assessment of the level of innovation of the IT&C entrepreneurial activities from Romania.

3.1 The determining of the indicator of the entrepreneur satisfaction ([I.sub.ES])

It has been considered that there are at least 5 charming characteristics, such as (Burtica et al., 2006): the possibility to apply own ideas, the motivation to obtain higher income, the advantage to be one's own chief and to have a flexible work schedule, a way to obtain a better social position. According to the grades scale, the indicator [I.sub.ES] is given grade 10.

3.2 The determining of the inventiveness indicator ([I.sub.IN])

For this case study, to the indicator [I.sub.IN] there was given grade 4, because as per the classification established by Altshuller it has been deemed that the entrepreneurship is of level two, on account of the fact that following a study carried out on the Small and Medium Size Enterprise (SME) from Romania (Tamasila et al., 2008): only 40% are concerned with innovation, 65% do not have a compartment dedicated to innovation, in 54% of the cases there is only one person in charge with innovation, and 61% have declared that the new products contribute with 30% to the obtained turnover, at the most.

3.3 The determining of the indicator of ideality ([I.sub.ID])

This indicator reflects the degree of ideality of the entrepreneurial activity. In order to determine the level of ideality, there have been taken into account only the indicators [i.sub.1], [i.sub.2], [i.sub.5], [i.sub.6], [i.sub.7] and [i.sub.8] because it has been considered that only these ones are relevant for the analysed case study. Thus, indicator [i.sub.1], which gives the system degree of dimensionality, was given grade 8, according to the presented classification, because the entrepreneurial activity involves three planes, as per STEP model: the social, the technical and the economic ones (and less the political plane). Indicator [i.sub.2], which estimates the size of the system where the entrepreneurial activities are carried out, was given grade 7, because the entrepreneurial activity is being developed in smaller enterprises, almost all of them SMEs. Indicator is, which shows the degree of flexibility, was given grade 9 because the system dynamic capability develops inversely proportional to its dimensions. Indicator [i.sub.6], namely the degree of human involvement, has been given grade 10, because in this case the human involvement is intense and decisive for the start and for the success of the business. The degree of the system multiplicity, taken into account through indicator [i.sub.7], was given grade 6, because it can be achieved with three functions of the enterprise (production, trading, and financial-accounting). Indicator [i.sub.8], which estimates the dimensionality of the entrepreneur managerial functions (Taucean et al., 2008), was given grade 8, because the entrepreneur's activity implies at least 4 functions (organizing, decision, coordination and control).

The five indicators taken into account were given the following weights: [q.sub.1]=[q.sub.2]=[q.sub.7]= 0,1; [q.sub.5]=[q.sub.8]= 0,2; [q.sub.6]= 0,3. The other weights corresponding to the eliminated indicators have been considered to be null.

3.4 The calculation of the global indicator of the innovation level [I.sub.I]

In order to calculate the global indicator, there have been established the following weights associated to the three indicators: the weight of the indicator of the entrepreneur's satisfaction [p.sub.ES] = 0.30, the weight of the indicator of inventiveness [p.sub.IN] = 0.4S and the weight of the indicator of ideality [p.sub.ID] = 0.2s.

Finally, through the use of relation (1), the global indicator of the innovation level of the methodology proposed in this paper came to be equal to 6.92.

4. CONCLUSION

By applying the methodology proposed, subjectivity can be eliminated in the assessment of the activities & products innovation level. The weights can be modified according to the type of the assessed entity and by taking into account the importance of the indicators in the given assessment.

The innovation level of the Romanian IT&C entrepreneurial activity, in accordance by the proposed evaluation model, it is relatively modest in this moment (scored 6.92 out of 10). In our opinion, using this model for innovation level establishing is a very good way to improve the inventiveness score by increasing the number of firms that are concerned with innovation, increase also the firms that have a compartment dedicated to innovation and those with more persons in charge with innovation.

5. REFERENCES

Altshuller, G. (1999). The Innovation Algorithm: TRIZ, Systematic Innovation and Technical Creativity, Technical Innovation Ctr, ISBN 978-0964074040, Worcester

Burtica, M.; Taroata, A. & Tamasila, M. (2006). The management of Small and Medium size Enterprises, Solness, ISBN 978-973-729-069-4, Timisoara

Kano, N. (1984). Attractive quality and must-be quality, The Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, April, 1984, pp. 39-48

Tamasila, M.; Mocan, M.L. & Taucean, I.M. (2008), Proceedings of The 6th International Conference of DAAAM Baltic Industrial Engineering, Kuttner, R.(Ed.), pp. 369-373, ISBN 978-9985-59-783-5, Estonia, April 2008, DAAAM Baltic University of Technology, Tallinn

Taucean, I.M.; Taroata, A. & Tamasila, M. (2008), Proceedings of The 6th International Conference of DAAAM Baltic Industrial Engineering, Kuttner, R.(Ed.), pp. 381-386, ISBN 978-9985-59-783-5, Estonia, April 2008, DAAAM Baltic University of Technology, Tallinn

Tab. 1. Scale for entrepreneur's satisfaction level.

 Grades 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Characteristics 1 2 3 4 [greater
 than or
 equal
 to] 5

Tab. 2. Scale for inventiveness level.

Inventions/ improvements Grades
 0 2
 Minor 4
 Fundamental 6
 New 8
 Completely new 10

Tab. 3. Scale for ideality level (AP = authorized person)

Grades 1 2 3 4 5

[i.sub.1] 0 1
[i.sub.2] AP micro small
[i.sub.3] large big medium
[i.sub.4] reduced
[i.sub.5] 1 2
[i.sub.6] 1 2
[i.sub.7]
[i.sub.8]

Grades 6 7 8 9 10

[i.sub.1] 2 3 [greater
 than or
 equal
 to] 4

[i.sub.2] medium big large
[i.sub.3] small micro AP
[i.sub.4] medium big intense
[i.sub.5] 3 4 5
[i.sub.6] 3 4 5
[i.sub.7]
[i.sub.8]