Stiavhengighet i den norske innovasjonspolitikken : Et langtidsperspektiv av Innovasjon Norges omstillings- og klyngeprogram

Abstract

Norwegian business is now facing extensive international competition and external pressure. This means that it has become more important than ever to have network and expertise available, which can contribute to a solid competitive edge. It is important for the public sector to keep up with the development of business in society. At the same time, there is a lack of resources and many statutory tasks, which can define their scope for innovation and development. This affects particularly smaller peripheral municipalities. It has also become very important for companies to think about knowledge development and co-creation in order to develop and ensure continued existence in a labour market with extensive competition. In order to remedy this, Innovation Norway, in cooperation with the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (Ministry of Local Government and Modernization), has developed a restructuring program and, in consultation with the Research Council and Siva, a cluster program. In this assignment I want to look at the change processes and programming. It is important to show that the institutions of society are formally divided into two categories in Norway, depending on the type of group or organization they are a part of. This means the public direction and the more business-oriented. This is interpreted from a social constructivist view, where structural features like opinions and relevant practices are created through institutional objects. This master's thesis is about Innovation Norway, which is the program owner for the Restructuring Program and the Cluster Program. The latter is managed as mentioned in consultation with Siva and the Research Council. Restructuring and change characterizes both the public and the private sector nationally, regionally and locally. These are common features within isomorphism, but also different interpretations as a result of different contexts. This means that emphasis is placed on Innovation Norway's ability and willingness to adapt to changes that occur continuously from the ministries, the municipality and the clusters. It is the understanding of program learning that in this historical context looks at whether the development of the programs contains knowledge and change of understanding (Gustavsen, 2008). Innovation Norway has chosen to continue and implement knowledge and skills from the restructuring program into another program for clusters, where it is considered whether there are common features or not for the programs and whether they affect each other. It is seen the problem of originality in the form of innovation policy is evaluated. This means that it is planned to carry out restructuring and innovation in the public and private sector today. I have chosen to use the theoretical method of qualitative input as the basis for my master's thesis. Good and reasonable use of knowledge and expertise is what contributes to good restructuring and future value creation within the Norwegian economy. The restructuring program is a national program developed around 1980, as a direct result of major closures and changes over time. The purpose of the restructuring program is to assist municipalities and regions with external resources. It is being made to develop and add skills they are not in possession of or have the ability to realize themselves. The program is a collaboration between Innovation Norway, the county authorities and program participants. The cluster program has been established later in 2002 and is a foreign concept. It will be a national program aimed at strengthening and developing knowledge, expertise and innovation in regions, but also nationally and globally. The restructuring program and the cluster program overlap each other within some areas of knowledge and competence. This applies mainly to the framework of the programs. It is the ministries that get the new radical ideas from abroad that lead to innovation. Then they are implemented into Innovation Norway. The indication is that learning effects within Innovation Norway concentrate on incremental changes as a result of, among other things, feedback from program members. There is absorptive capacity in Innovation Norway that leads to renewal or reinforcement. What will naturally be the next step, will be an analysis and observation of the conversion program and the cluster program where program learning becomes the main focus. Then one must take on innovation policy and assess a reassessment or renewal in the public and private sectors that can contribute to self-improvement.