Key requirements

•    You will research and prepare a written portfolio comprising 2 ‘innovation profiles’ .

•    Each of the2 profiles will provide an academic analysis and interpretation of a different ‘real-world’  innovation example, chosen from within a specified industry sector. (Note: Further detailed guidance on the expected approach and content of the profiles can be found below on pages 2-3).

•    Each profile in your portfolio must consider a different ‘type’ of innovation - from those covered in the first half of the module (as specified below).

•    There is a hard word limit of 800 words for each profile in the portfolio (excluding figures, tables and    reference listed) - i.e. max. 2 x 800 words. Penalties will be applied to submissions exceeding this limit.

•    Your 2 innovation examples must all come from one of these two broad industries (i.e. you should first select the industry, then find 2 relevant innovation examples from that industry, one example must be from a “ hidden champion”, i.e. a company that takes a top-3 position on the global market or first position on its continent, has an annual revenue not exceeding 5 billon GBP, and is relatively unknown to the wider public. Material for the identification of “hidden champions" will be provided in the Canvas course.). Either:

A.   The manufacturing industry (broadly defined); or

B.   The information and communication services industry (broadly defined).

•    The profiles in your portfolio must address 2 of these 3 types of innovation (i.e. you have a limited choice, but you can choose your 2 preferred types of innovation from these 3 options):

1.   A specific example of ‘radical technological innovation’ (with your analysis based primarily on ideas covered in the Week 3 module topic/key readings).

2.   A specific example of ‘business model innovation’ (with your analysis based primarily on ideas covered in the Week 5 module topic/key readings).

3.   A specific example of an ‘open innovation’ initiative or project (with your analysis based primarily on ideas covered in the Week 4 module topic/key readings).

•    None of the teaching examples used in class maybe used for this assessment. You are required to identify and research your own examples, using reputable online/secondary sources.

•     Note there is no requirement for an overall ‘introduction’ or ‘conclusion’ section, or table of content, for this assignment. The two profiles should be seen as ‘stand-alone’ narratives. There is no need to integrate or link together the two profiles.

Guidance on possible themes and content of your innovation profiles

•    Radical technological innovation: You might want to contextualise your chosen example in relation to previous radical and incremental innovations in the same industry; relate your chosen example to relevant academic concepts like the S-curve model; examine the technological or knowledge foundations of your chosen example; examine evidence of the impact of your chosen example on the marketplace and competitors; etc. Note, for this type of innovation, you must use a specific example of an innovation that have been commercialised (brought to market or put into use by a business) by a named company within the last 10 years (since January 2013). The aim is not to discuss broad/generic    concepts (e.g. an electric vehicle is a general concept, not a specific product innovation example; AI, IoT and 3D printing are broad emerging technology fields, not specific examples of technological or process innovation; “software as a service” or “pay as you go” are generic business model concepts, not specific BMI examples). The chosen radical technological innovation example could be a product or service innovation or a process innovation. It may also bean example of system (aka ‘architectural’) innovation or component innovation.

•    Business model innovation: For this profile,it is advisable to use a framework such as Osterwalder &

Pigneur’s (2010) ‘Business model canvas’ or the St. Gallen BM navigator framework (plus other relevant insights from the BMI literature) to: identify and comparatively analyse the chosen BM innovation; highlight its most innovative dimensions; explain how it creates, delivers and captures value. You might also consider the impact of the chosen BM innovation on the marketplace. You could include a BM Canvas diagram in your profile, but this must be your own original creation, not just an existing one you have found online. Also, you should not use any diagrams or tables to 'cheat' the word limit - e.g. you should not put lots of extra text in the diagram.

•    Open innovation: Here you should to focus on a specific, named Open Innovation initiative or project

that has been pursued by a company (or multiple companies) in the last 10 years, rather than a specific  product/service resulting from OI activities. Hence the focus is more on the process than the outcome.   For your analysis, you might want: to classify the example as inbound/outbound OI; discuss some of the likely benefits/challenges of using OI in the chosen example; identify/describe the OI strategy or model  being used (e.g. see Saebi & Foss, 2015, typology). Compared to the radical, disruptive and business model innovation examples, it maybe less easy/possible to evaluate the impact on the marketplace.

•    In addition, your further analysis of any of the above types of innovation could evaluate the chosen

example against some of the ‘myths of innovation’ (see week 1 – Anthony, 2011; Berkun, 2013;

Birkinshaw et al., 2011; Sawhney & Wolcott, 2004) . Your analysis of the example from a hidden champion must also examine some of the characteristics of the organisation(s) responsible for the innovation example and/or the organisational processes that led to the innovation (see Week 2 topic material).

Assessment Criteria

•    This assessment will be marked using a Canvas rubric comprising 4 assessment criteria:

1.    Quality of description, explanation and academic justification of the chosen innovation examples.

2.    Demonstrated level of academic understanding of the relevant module content.

3.    Quality of academic analysis and insights provided on the chosen innovation examples.

4.    Evidence of relevant research on the chosen examples and use of supporting evidence/citations.

•    The QMS postgraduate conceptual marking scale will be used to judge levels of attainment for against each of the above criteria (see copy in Appendix 1).

Some Mistakes to AVOID

•     Merely  describing examples without any analysis.  Description/explanation of the chosen examples is necessary but not sufficient. Academically informed analysis is required to pass the task. Good analysis tries to determine why things areas they are. Analysis often requires an in-depth look at the constituent parts of a phenomenon and how they relate to one another. Analysis usually results in clear arguments.

•     Ignoring academic theory and simply offering opinions. Good profiles will show evidence of engagement with the recommended topic readings. They will use relevant academic theory/frameworks/concepts to the guide and inform analysis of the chosen examples.

•     Using poor quality or unreliable data sources. Reputable and trustworthy data sources should be used to inform your explanation and analysis. You should be cautious about online data sources that can be edited by a user community (like Wikipedia) or when the publisher is an unknown organisation.

Academic Conduct Warning

•     Academic integrity is “the commitment from students, faculty, and staff to demonstrate honest, moral behaviour   in   their   academic   lives”   (https://academicintegrity.org/).   Without   academic   integrity, university qualifications lose their value for students and the wider society. Academic integrity is taken seriously on this module and will beenforced via the relevant processes, where necessary.

•    You are strongly encouraged to familiarise yourself with the university expectations and procedures on academic conduct. Useful student-focused guidance on these issues can be found here:

o Student guide to University procedures for dealing with academic offences:

https://www.qub.ac.uk/directorates/AcademicStudentAffairs/AcademicAffairs/AppealsCompla intsandMisconduct/AcademicOffences/Student-Guide/

o Good advice on understanding plagiarism and referencing (online learning module):

https://www.qub.ac.uk/elearning/transition-skills/ModuleDPlagiarismandReferencing/

•    Turnitin software, plus tutor judgement, will be used to identify potential academic offences.

•    Suspected offences will be referred to an academic offences panel, which may result  in a sanction. Sanctions can range from repeating the assignment for ‘capped’ mark to failure in the module.

•    This is an individual assessment, so you must NOT collaborate with any other student. Collusion (e.g. working with another student on an individual assessment) and plagiarism (e.g. copying from another student or allowing your own work to be copied) are academic offences.

•    Other forms of plagiarism include ‘passing off’ the ideas of others without proper acknowledgement (i.e. not citing your sources) and ‘cutting & pasting’ text from a book/journal/online source; Self-plagiarism (e.g. submitting all or  part of an assignment that you  have  previously submitted for  assessment  by Queen’s or any other institution); and Contract cheating (where a student commissions or seeks to commission (either paid or unpaid) another individual or artificial intelligence software tool to complete academic work on their behalf) - a very serious offence that may incur heavy sanctions.

•    Students should exercise great care with content produced using Generative AI software (e.g. ChatGPT).  QUB has clear guidelines on the use of such software (see:https://blogs.qub.ac.uk/digitallearning/wp-  content/uploads/sites/270/2018/06/QUB-AI-guidance-FINAL.pdf). While Generative AI can be used in  an appropriate way to enhance the learning process, it can also (inadvertently) lead to academic offenses  such as plagiarism and fabrication.

Late Submissions

According to the normal QUB/QMS late submission policy, work submitted late will be penalised at the rate of 5 marks for each calendar day late up to a maximum of five working days, after which a mark of zero should be awarded, i.e., up to one day late is -5 marks; two days late is -10 marks; three days late is -15 marks, etc. If you fail to submit a piece of work without exceptional circumstances (see below), you will be marked as absent,meaning you cannot normally pass the module.