Prepared for the IIPS Symposium on

Globalization andJapan’s Science and Technology Strategy
19 – 20 November 2007
Tokyo

Session 3
Tuesday, 20 November 2007

Who is capable of leading our journey toward
resolving global issues through innovation?

Yoko Ishikura
Hitotsubashi University

“Who is capable of leading our journey toward resolving global issues throughinnovation?”
Session 3: Innovation Policy and Global Issues“Globalization and Japan‟s Science and Technology Strategy”
Institute for International Policy Studies
November 19-20, 2007
Yoko Ishikura, Professor, ICS, Hitotsubashi University
December 17, 2007
Introduction
It is some time now since innovation became a buzzword throughout the world. In
the academic community, the number of papers on innovation has increased
dramatically since the latter half of the 1990s1. It is almost impossible to find businessarticles or annual reports not containing the term “innovation”, as many firms now
realize that innovation is the only means to sustain their competitive advantage. A
continuous race is underway for “new” products, services, and markets. Innovation has
also become a key agenda for public policymakers throughout the world, often in theform of national innovation policy initiatives, regardless of the stage of a country‟s
economic development.2
These efforts for innovation have achieved some results, and yet there are two
fundamental issues to be addressed more explicitly today.
The first issue is the gap between the scope of these national initiatives and that of
the global issues we face today, as well as the need for a more integrated andcomprehensive approach at the global level. The second issue, though closely related,is the collaboration between public and private sectors and the increased role theprivate sector could play in efforts to resolve these issues.
In this paper, I argue that because private sector companies are the ones that create
value through innovation and are in the best position to seek profitability, growth and asustainable society at the same time, the private sector should be taking a more activerole in our quest for innovation than in the past. By capitalizing on their experiences ofdaily global competition, private sector companies could and should be complementing
the public sector. They should collaborate in a more proactive manner through joint“Oxford Handbook of Innovation” Ed. Fagerberg, Jan, Mowery David C. and Nelson, Richard, Oxford
University Press pp.2
2 “Overseas Science & Technology Trend Report”(in Japanese) Center for Research and Development
Strategy, Japan Science & Technology Agency, 2006 and 2007
1

1

efforts to resolve global issues. The public sector, on the other hand, is quite limited, by
definition, to address issues beyond national boundaries and is not capable on its own ofachieving the goal of economic growth and a sustainable society.
Issues we face today - mostly global in scale and scope
In the face of globalization, in which economies have become inter-related andinter-dependent, thus competition transcends various national, industrial andorganizational boundaries, many of the issues we face are global in scope and scale.
(Exhibit 1)
The search for alternative energy sources to the fossil fuels we have depended upon soheavily has been underway for quite some time. 3 The need for alternative energy
sources including nuclear energy has become even more urgent, with the demand forenergy expected to rise sharply in the next decade. The general consensus today is that
there is no single source of energy capable of meeting the rapidly growing demand. It isalso generally agreed that this issue will not be resolved within one country, as therising demand for energy comes mainly from emerging economies such as China andIndia, where many products and services are produced for export to markets such as the
U.S.4
Environmental issues such as global warming do not recognize national borders, andthus need to be resolved as such. The fact that former U.S. Vice President Al Gore andthe IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) were awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize in 2007 for their contributions in raising global awareness of the status andcauses of global warming, calling for immediate action on a global scale indicates theglobal nature of the problem very clearly.5
Demand for resources such as food and water is more prevalent in regions such as Asia,
Latin America and Africa, where civil and tribal wars take place over the fight forresources.6 Advanced economies cannot escape from the resource constraint problem,as the battle in emerging economies affects the global price of commodities such as food.
Healthcare is also a global issue, as there are still some regions, including in Africa
and Asia, where basic hygiene and health have not been secured. In a global era withpeople moving around constantly, there is the possibility of epidemics such as avian flu
For examples, see discussion at Science & Technology in Society (STS) Forum at
http://www.stsforum.org/
4 See the latest report by IEA http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/press/pressdetail.asp?PRESS_REL_ID=239
5 For announcements on the Nobel Peace Price 2007 and related information see
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007
6 See discussion on STS Forum, 2007 (op.cit.)
3

2

traveling extremely quickly throughout the world once they break out. 7
National innovation ecosystem initiatives - broad-based, but within national boundaries
Recent years have seen many national innovation ecosystem initiatives in a numberof countries. Often-cited examples include the National Innovation Initiative of the U.S.
(well known for its “Innovate America” report)8, the EU‟s Aho report9, and Innovation 25,
a recent attempt by Japan.10 Emerging economies such as China and India have also
launched national innovation policy initiatives at an accelerating pace, catching up very
quickly with initiatives in advanced economies.11 These initiatives are characterized ashaving a “broad-based, ecosystem” approach, different from the traditional approach,which focuses mainly on science and technology. Aware of the need to build an
innovation-friendly environment, they cover various aspects of the social system, suchas human capital, education, investment and infrastructure. Japan‟s Innovation 25 andsimilar national initiatives by Singapore, South Korea and China are all broad-based intheir approach, and thus comprehensively seek reform and innovation in the social
system that goes beyond simple science and technology or R&D investment. (Exhibit 2)
These initiatives have had mixed results in promoting innovation through creatingand enhancing an innovation-friendly environment. Some policies, for example, havebeen implemented with financial budget support and with actual changes in regulations
and tax policies promoting the smooth flow of risk capital, while others remain as“slogans” rather than “actions” implemented by all involved parties.
What is more significant, however, is that the majority of these initiatives focus onbuilding “national” innovation ecosystems, rather than explicitly addressing global
issues. (Exhibit 3)
Initiatives such as “Five for the Future”, very recently launched by the Council on
Competitiveness in the U.S., recognize the need for a comprehensive and integrated
approach at the global level.12 This approach is different from the former National
For an example of this, see http://www.who.int/en/“Innovate America” (2004) “Competitiveness Index: Where America Stands” (2006) Council on
Competitiveness, Washington D.C. http://www.compete.org
9 “Creating an Innovative Europe -Report of the Independent Expert Group on R&D and Innovation
appointed following the Hampton Court Summit”, Aho, E., Cormu, J. Georghiou L. Subra A (2006)
Rapporteur: Luke Georghiou, January 2006
10 Foran executive summary of the Innovation 25 Interim report in English, see
http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/innovation/interimbody e.html
For the long term strategic guideline “Innovation 25”, see the summary of Kiyoshi Kurokawa‟s key
note speech at Global Innovation Ecosystem Conference 2007
http://www.gies2007.com/en/symposium/summary/kurokawa.html
11 Global Innovation Ecosystem 2006: http://crds.jst.go.jp/GIES/archive/summary.htm
12 “Five for the Future” 2007 Council on Competitiveness, Washington DC
783

Innovation Initiative. The EU‟s Framework is expected to play a similar role beyond theregion under immediate EU control.13 However, these initiatives are just starting andclear action has yet to be taken to address the global nature of the issues.
Private sector companies - filling the gap?
In order to fill this gap between national innovation ecosystem initiatives and theglobal nature of the issues we face today, I propose a more active role on the part ofprivate sector companies.
It is quite natural that the public sector leads initiatives in the early stage of theeconomic development of a nation, building basic infrastructure such as transportation,utilities and telecommunications, and putting basic education and healthcare systems
in place. The aforementioned initiatives to build a national innovation ecosystem follow
these basic efforts, as governments realize the need to continuously innovate to attaineconomic growth and prosperity. A national innovation ecosystem calls for collaboration
between the public and private sectors, and the term “ecosystem” itself signifies theevolutionary interaction of various players - specifically, the government, companies ofvarious sizes, universities, and service providers.(Exhibit 4) In actual fact, a number ofefforts have been made to promote collaboration between the public sector, universities
and business community. 14
What I want to propose is an even more active role on the part of private sector
companies in resolving global issues.
The rationale is as follows: (Exhibit 5)
1) The global arena is the reality for private sector companies.
Private sector companies face the reality of global competition every day and they
make every effort to survive by tapping resources and reaching for markets throughout
the world.15
With the exception of companies whose operations are constrained to one nation or
region, such as utilities companies, many companies today operate in the global arena.
With the progress of ICT (Information and Communication Technology), thesecompanies are becoming increasingly able to seek and hire people with the required
skills, regardless of nationality, age, background or physical location, to collaborate on
For Innovation Policy and other initiatives updates, see
http://cordis.europa.eu/innovation/en/home.html
14 See “National Innovation Ecosystem Initiative for Science-based Innovation 2006” (Japanese),
Center for Research and Development Strategy, Japan Science and Technology Agency, for example.
15 For examples, see “What Matters” McKinsey & Company, 2007
13

4

projects. The possibility of tapping global talent is more significant, as the economy
seems to be in the process of shifting from a knowledge-based to concept-based economy.
In the concept-based economy, human capital and other intangible assets have become
more critical and will be even more so for a sustainable competitive advantage, rather
than tangible assets such as physical plants and equipment.
With constant access to the Internet and the emergence of companies such as Google
and e-Bay, companies are able to reach consumers and penetrate markets in physicallydistant locations.16
At the same time, the competition companies face today is no longer limited to theirrivals in the “industry” in certain geographic markets. Competition may emerge fromanywhere in the world, such as the emerging economies of India and China, or fromdifferent industries as the definition of „industry‟ becomes blurred.
This “global” scope is the reality for private sector companies as they face this issue ona daily basis. Companies have now accumulated the know-how to tap resources fromthroughout the world and market their products and services beyond nationalboundaries.172) Management of complex value chain activity networks throughout the world
As characterized by the term “globally-integrated enterprises”, global giants such as
IBM now locate their value chain activities at optimal locations throughout the world
and manage them as a complex network.18 They are not limited to activities in certain
geographical areas, unlike the public sector. In addition to physical supply chain
networks where materials and parts are sourced, processed, assembled and transported
to numerous locations throughout the world, knowledge and know-how networks arebeing set up and utilized on a trial and error basis by companies. The virtual global
network has become more important now that a certain type of knowledge (often called“explicit” knowledge) is rapidly becoming a commodity.19 Knowledge and know-how areexchanged, shared, and re-created throughout the global network, for example, in thefinancial services, consulting and other knowledge-intensive sectors.20
In addition to the global giants, small IT entrepreneurs, such as those from India, arealso targeting the world market from the outset, and thus setting up complex value
About discussion on Forces at work and their implications for business strategy, see for example,“Business Strategy in the Web2.0 era”(in Japanese), Ishikura, Y, Think, Winter, 2007
17 See some discussion at World Economic Forum, Annual Meeting of New Champions 2007, forexample, http://www.weforum.org
18 “The Globally Integrated Enterprise” Palmissano, Samuel, Foreign Affairs, May/June, 2006
19 See “Act Globally, Think Locally” Ishikura Y, Harvard Business Review, Feb.2007.
20 For example, see the WEF Annual Meeting of New Champions, 2007 (op.cit)
16

5

chain activities beyond their domestic markets, which are far too small for theirproducts and services.21
Private sector companies, through their efforts to manage such a complex andever-changing network of operations, have accumulated know-how in addressing global
issues such as immigration, differences in physical distribution, consumer behavior andculture etc. This kind of intangible asset base can only be accumulated through actual
experiences (i.e. learning by doing) and through a great deal of trial and error. It hasenormous value, as it cannot be acquired from textbooks.223) Value is only created by the private sector
Value creation, and not value distribution, is at the heart of our journey towards
economic prosperity and a sustainable society. Value needs to be created before it isdistributed and it is private sector companies, and not governments or universities,
which translate new knowledge into the products or services which benefit consumers.
As is clear from the excellent example of Singapore in the late 1970s and 80s, the more
recent example of China, and the development of the Eastern bloc countries, in contrast
to the struggles in Africa, economic development should precede or take place in parallelwith the democratization of countries. If economic policies are not integrated with thesocial and political agenda and the standard of living does not rise, social unrest or
political instability usually result. Value should be created first and private companies
are the main players in creating value over the long run, even in developing
economies.23
For advanced economies such as the U.S., Western European countries and Japan,
wealth needs to be continuously created by innovation and entrepreneurship tomaintain the dynamism of the nation and upgrade the economy.
Existing companies in the private sector, in their pursuit of profitability and growth,and new entrepreneurs, whether high tech or not, play the main role in wealthcreation.24
4) Corporate social responsibility beyond national boundaries
Recent years have seen many more private sector companies take on issues once
For example, see the panel discussion summary at Global Innovation Ecosystem 2007,
http://www.gies2007.com/en/symposium/summary/panel/html
22 “Knowledge Creating Company,” Nonaka, I and Takeuchi, H 1995, Oxford University Press
23 See case studies and other research at Institute of Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business
School, http://www.isc.hbs.edu
24 For small companies impact on U.S. competitiveness, see “Where America Stands:
Entrepreneurship” Council on Competitiveness, 2007
21

6

thought of as public.25 This includes various efforts to develop human capital – forexample, science and technology education at primary and secondary schools,
immigration policies, and the retraining of displaced workers in manufacturing. In
addition to efforts to build and upgrade the regions that private sector companies locate
to, more companies have begun “philanthropic” activities beyond national boundaries.26
Various activities by the private sector in the U.S., for example, concerning energy
efficiency and environmental issues, provide us with one such example. Unlike theBush administration, which has not been known for its strong commitment to the issue
of global warming, private companies such as IBM, BP, Wal-Mart, and P&G have led
recent efforts to re-build and re-design value chain activities with energy efficiency andenvironmental friendliness in mind. CSR investment funds have become quite popularand have become a part of investment portfolios. The ranking of companies in terms of
their social responsibility and contribution to a friendly environment for customers,
employees and the community, and not only in terms of profitability, has become moreprevalent today.27
Judging from the agenda and issues discussed at world-level conferences such as theWorld Economic Forum, it is clear that the trend toward a more socially-conscious
corporate agenda will remain an important standard. More evidence and studies havebecome available which show that social responsibility and long-term profitability is nota trade-off.28
5) Social entrepreneurs
There are an increasing number of social entrepreneurs emerging. The Gates
Foundation, headed by Bill and Melinda Gates, is the organization with the largest
endowment in the world and is known for its business approach to social issues.
Various activities of the Gates Foundation, such as its Global Health project, and theannouncement by Bill Gates of the full commitment to the Foundation in 2008 haveencouraged more people to take this combined approach. 29 Heightened interest in
developing countries among the younger generation in the U.S., for example, indicates aclear awareness of the issues at large beyond national boundaries.
Most social entrepreneurs are, in a way, a hybrid between the private and public“Strategy and Society: Linking Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility”
Porter, M.E, and Kramer Mark ,Harvard Business Review, December 2006
26 See panel discussion at GIES2007, also New York Academy of Sciences, http://www.nyas.org
27 “The McKinsey Global Survey of Business Executives” McKinsey Quarterly, January 2006,
November 2007
28 “CEOs on strategy and social issues” The McKinsey Quarterly, October 2007
29 Gates Foundation, http://www.gatesfoundation.org/default.htm
25

7

sector. The aggressive use and application of business skills and concepts, in particular
entrepreneurship and innovation, is expected to help resolve global issues in the future.
The Nobel Peace Prize of 2006 went to the Grameen Bank and its founderMuhammad Yunus for his microfinance to help impoverished women in Bangladesh to
becomeself-sufficientandindependent.

This

is

anotherexampleofsocialentrepreneurship.
Implementation - existing or new organization?
How, then, could private sector companies become more proactive in this ambitious
and challenging task of resolving global issues?

It is clear that a single company,

however large, cannot do this job alone. The private sector cannot accomplish this job on
its own, either.
I would like to propose a new type of diverse and open organization, which is a hybridof the real and virtual (more virtual than real in its activities), as an agent for change
for this purpose. (Exhibits 6 and 7)
The reasons for this are as follows:
1) The organization needs to have a clear, distinctive mission and vision beyond thoseof any particular organization, whether company, government, or university, toresolve global issues. Thus it needs to be diverse, covering a variety of sectors.
Most of the existing organizations, including established business associations,semi-governmental organizations or university consortiums in Japan have a long
history and tradition, which would limit their activities. The majority of theseorganizations tend to have an origin in one of the three sectors - business, governmentor academic. In that sense, they do not meet the requirement for diversity. Furthermore,they tend to be “perceived” as representing a certain sector or group, which would
hinder their activities.
Existing organizations, in addition, have members who have worked hard to makethe organizations into what they are today. It is natural that they have pride in building
such institutions. It requires more energy and time to transform an existingorganization with a long tradition, certain culture and administrative heritage than tocreate a new organization with a clear vision and mission for the future.
2) The organization needs to have a clear strategy of applying “innovation” to resolve
global issues. As global issues requires complex problem solving (see Exhibit 8 forthe typical problem solving process) in the unexplored area, the new organization8

needs collaborative and competitive style where new ideas and concepts can be
developed, tried and implemented, preferably in an open space.
3) The organization needs to make the best use of the most up-to-date technology, inparticular, ICT which functions as an enabler for connecting individuals, groups andorganizations beyond various borders.
The new organization should take every advantage of current and upcoming
technology. ICT has progressed and will continue to progress at an unprecedented speed,enabling communication, whether audio or visual, regardless of global location. Existingorganizations, on the other hand, are in most cases trapped by both technologies andmediums of communication which are less up-to-date and by working together throughconferences or meetings, with written reports completed months later.
It is easier to design an organization with virtual forums and a virtual platform fromscratch than to attempt to transform existing systems and upgrade them, as the latterapproach tends to face many obstacles and challenges from inherited systems andprocesses. In a virtual platform and forum, people can share knowledge and know-how
and interact freely beyond physical space.
In addition, it is often pointed out that the economic and social revolution and change
triggered by the progress of ICT, is still only half complete, leaving many more newopportunities for the future.30 The major features and requirements of more advanced
ICT, both present and future, such as the personalization, decentralization, importanceof intangible assets and co-existence of two elements once considered a trade-off (global
and local, individual and organizational, competition and collaboration etc.) sometimes
go against the traditional mentality of mass market, centralization, physical assets, andabove all, existing power structures.31
It is far more efficient (speedy) and effective (fits the objective) to start a neworganization in cooperation with people who are ready for the new requirements andmind-set. Virtual medium will go a long way toward resolving the problem of
increasingly scarce time resources of the members and member organizations.
4) The organization needs to have readiness to collaborate with similar action-oriented,
adaptive and evolving organizations in other countries.
As one of the major objectives of the new organization is the tackling of global issues,“Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages”
Perez, Carlota, Edward Elgar Publications, 200231”Business Strategy in the Web2.0 era” Ishikura, Y.
(2007) op.cit
30

9

it is imperative that the organization has a global perspectives AND infrastructure for
global collaboration.
A global perspective is easier to accomplish as it is more of a mind-set and mentality
based upon real experiences. It would be possible to ensure that the participatingorganizations and/or members have a global perspective rather than national orregional perspectives.
The difficulty lies in the infrastructure for global activities. In order for a diverse
organization to have collaborative/competitive interaction, the communication medium
needs to be based upon a de-facto (common) global standard. Thanks to the progress of
ICT, web-casts and You-Tube have become an extremely easy medium to transmit visual
images across national boundaries. Communication takes the form of audio and/or text,
thus, translation remains as an impediment. Under circumstances in which it will stilltake some time before automatic translation into English, now the de-facto global
standard language, becomes available and easily accessible, English will function as thede-facto standard, making it imperative for the members of the new organization tocommunicate in English.
Another approach to take in designing a new organization is to learn from similarorganizations established overseas. Learning from the history and activities of suchorganizations throughout the world will also open up realistic and practical avenues forcollaboration on a global scale.
One such example is the Council on Competitiveness (COC) in Washington DC.32 The
Council was founded in 1986 at the initiative of John Young, then Chairman and CEO of
Hewlett Packard. A predecessor to the COC was the President‟s Commission on
Industrial Competitiveness, which was established by President Reagan in 1983. The
report of this Commission “Global Competition: The New Reality”, also known as the“Young Report”, became the game plan for both public policymakers and the private
sector in the U.S. and has resulted in many activities beyond its publications or reports.
It has served as a platform for concrete action.
An additional key characteristic of the COC that we need to focus on is the fact that it
is a private sector, non-partisan advocacy group of CEOs composed of all sectors of theeconomy, presidents from the nation‟s top universities, and labor leaders. The diverse
nature of the COC, along with it orientation towards action, could provide a model forthe new organization.33
32
33

http://www.compete.org
There was an attempt at collaborating with the COC in Japan, at the U.S.-Japan Innovation

10

Though the COC originally began with a primary focus on U.S. (thus national)
competitiveness, and not on global issues, the COC has made a certain shift in theissues they address, as shown in the most recent initiative “Five for the Future.”
Despite its 20 year-history, it has renewed and transformed itself to address mostcurrent and urgent issues. The reason for this, in my opinion, is because theorganization is private-sector driven, and the private sector cannot survive unless it
adapts to a changing world.
I believe there are some other organizations, private sector-driven and yet diverse,
including universities, public policymakers and other relevant parties, already existing
and/or emerging in other parts of the world, which we need to study. We could learn
from these examples and approach them for collaboration in resolving global issues.
5) Full-time competent professional staff and dedicated support staff
Another desirable feature of the new organization, without which it will not produce
tangible results, is competent staff capable of working in a “globally-networked”
environment preferably on full-time basis. It would be ideal to have a leader for eachproject who has had some experience of project management.

Speed in getting theplan implemented, follow up and an open/public format with transparent processes
disclosed on the Internet will be key to this process.
Without professional staff, no matter how many well-known companies signed up forthe cause, the organization would not function and would become yet another layer
consisting of the members of a top management group with no time to come even to themeetings and few staff sent from the member companies.
What we need are professional members of staff who have not only considerable
knowledge in certain disciplines and/or functions, but also possess a wealth of personal
experience of actual project management and problem-solving. Thus, company people
with extensive knowledge about how their own company tends to function, but little
experience of identifying issues in a much broader space, preparing and actually
carrying out project plans, and getting the solution implemented would not qualify.
Without competent staff, the organization would not work and would remain yet
another Council on Innovation and Competitiveness with few tangible results.
Another critical ingredient for the new organization is support staff. Support staff who

Summit which was held in September, 2005 in Nagoya.” Summit Report, Strategies for Global
Prosperity: A US-Japan Innovation Summit” COC, January 2006. However, collaborative efforts do notappear to have continued.

11are young (in their 20s and/or even student interns) and interested in working for global
hybrid (private-public) organizations would be a great help. They could be recruited on a
project-by-project basis and trained with problem-solving skills. Communication
capability in English, the global de facto standard today, will be a minimum
requirement for the support staff.
Conclusion
Globally integrated enterprises are expected to play a significant role in identifying
the issues which threaten the planet today. Issues such as energy efficiency,
environmental protection, and global health are NOT going away, unless we take action
to help resolve them soon and decisively. As these issues are very complicated, involving
many nations, sectors and disciplines, it will not be easy to identify their causes ordevelop a portfolio of solutions.
But for this very reason, I propose that private sector companies, in particularglobally-integrated enterprises, whether large or small and regardless of national origin,should and could make contributions in this field. Organizations and people will not beaware of the reality of operating in the global arena until they face both the potential
and risk of global reach, global collaboration and competition for themselves. It is time
for the companies who have already felt this reality and have learnt valuable lessons
through trial and failure to take a more proactive role.

12Bibliography
Aho, E., Cormu, J. Georghiou L. Subra A(2006) “Creating an Innovative Europe
Report of the Independent Expert Group on R & D and Innovation” appointed, following
the Hampton Court Summit, Rapporteur: Luke Georghiou, January 2006
http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/action/2006_ahogroup_en.htm
Ed. Fagerberg, Jan, Mowery David C. and Nelson, Richard, “Oxford Handbook of
Innovation” Oxford University Press pp.2
Ishikura, Y "Act Globally, Think Locally" Breakthrough Ideas for 2007, Harvard
Business Review, February 2007
Ishikura, Y “Business Strategy in the Web2.0 Era” (Japanese), Think, Winter, 2007
Palmissano, Samuel “The Globally Integrated Enterprise” Foreign Affairs, May/June,2006
Perez, Carlota, “Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of
Bubbles and Golden Ages” 2002, Edward Elgar Publications
Porter, Michael E. and Reinhardt Forest L “Grist: A Strategic Approach to Climate”
Harvard Business Review, September/October 2007
Porter, M.E, and Kramer Mark “Strategy and Society: Linking Competitive Advantage
and Corporate Social Responsibility” Harvard Business Review, December 2006
Porter, M. E “Clusters and the New Economics of Competition” Harvard Business
Review, November/December 1998
“What Matters 2007” McKinsey & Company, 2007
“Voices of Transformation 2” McKinsey & Company, 2006
“The McKinsey Global Survey of Business Executives; Business and Society” The
McKinsey Quarterly, January 2006
“McKinsey Global Survey, November 2007, retrieved on November 14, 2007
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_abstract.aspx?ar=2077&l2=21&l3=114&srid=17“CEOs on strategy and social issues” The McKinsey Quarterly, October 2007
“Investing in sustainability: An Interview with Al Gore and David Blood” The
McKinsey Quarterly, May 2007
“Innovate America” (2004) “Competitiveness Index: Where America Stands”(2006)
Council on Competitiveness, Washington D.C. http://www.compete.org“Five for the Future” 2007 Council on Competitiveness, Washington DC,“Summit Report: Strategies for Global Prosperity: A U.S.-Japan Innovation Summit”
Council on Competitiveness, January 200613

“An Innovation Mantra” Science, April 13, 2007
Institute of Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard Business School lists manycluster initiatives throughout the world. See http://www.isc.hbs.edu“Japan Vision 2050” Science Council of Japan, http://www.scj.go.jp/en.index.html“Global Competitiveness Report 2007-2008” November, 2007, World Economic Forum,
Switzerland“What should be done to realize Science-based Innovation now?” (2007, Japanese)
Center for Research and Development Strategy, Japan Science and Technology Agency“Overseas Science & Technology Trend Report” (Japanese) Center for Research andDevelopment Strategy, Japan Science and Technology Agency, 2006 and 2007
“National Innovation Ecosystem Initiative for Science-based Innovation 2006”(Japanese), Center for Research and Development Strategy, Japan Science andTechnology Agency,
http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/innovation/interimbody e.html
http://www.gies2007.com/en/symposium/summary/kurokawa.html
http://www.gies2007.com/en/symposium/summary/panel.html
http://www.nyas.orga/programs/borders.asp
http://crds.jst.go.jp/GIES/archive/summary.htm for summaries of GIES 2006
http://www.stsforum.org/
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007
http://www.who.int/en/
http://www.gatesfoundation.org
http://cordis.europa.eu/innovation/en/home.html
http://cordis.europa.eu/innovation/en/policy/cip.htm
http://www.iea.org/
http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/press/pressdetail.asp?PRESS_REL_ID=239
14

Exhibit-1

Issues we face today-Energy (Portfolio of energy
sources to meet the growing
demand)-Environment – global warmingetc.

All Global in Scaleand Scope-Demand for resources – Food,
Water, cause for tribal wars
-Healthcare – Basic health indeveloping countries, epidemics

Exhibit-2

Forces at WorkJAPAN
- Declining population andrapid ageing
ASIA-Rapidly Growing, but

Issues- Increasingly
threatenedsustainability ofhumankindwith pressing Issues
WORLD- Further development of aknowledge-based
network society- Accelerating progressof globalization- Explosive population
growth- Climate change andenvironmental degradation

New andunexplored era- Widening gap between
rich–poor divide

Innovation

ScienceTechnology

Social System

15

Exhibit-3

Explosive Population Growth

IssuesEnergyEnvironment

Resources

Healthcare

GlobalGAP

Initiatives

National
orRegionalInnovation Ecosystem
E.U
U.S. (Innovate
Japan
Singapore, SouthAmerica,(Innovative (Innovation 25)
Korea
Competitiveness Europe)
Index)

China

etc.

Exhibit-4

Prototypes

University/Enterprise
Research

Proof of Concept

VisionPolicy/Strategy

Human Networks
Networks of Technologies
Networks of Funds
Regional Clusters
Industry-Academia
Collaborations
IP/Standard
Regulation/Deregulation

OutputInnovation-friendly
Markets
Public Procurement

Funding
Human Resources/Education: nurture talents, brain circulation
Public Acceptance: consensus, consumer education, cultural issues
International Competition & Collaboration

16

Profit and Welfare/QOL Sustainability

Interaction Fields
“BA”

Input

Exhibit-5

Why Private Companies?
-Global area is the reality
Resources, markets from global and local- Management of complex VC activities throughout the world
Globally-Integrated Enterprise-Value /Wealth Creator> Value/Wealth Distributor-Corporate Social Responsibility beyond national boundaries- Social Entrepreneurs
Gates Foundation, Grameen Bank

Exhibit-6

EnergyGlobal Issues
Environment

Resources

Healthcare

Innovation Ecosystem Initiatives
China
Singapore
FinlandUK
GlobalHybridOrganization

U.S.
JAPAN

Social System
Academia

Government/Public

PrivateCollaboration

17

Exhibit-7

Requirement for Global Hybrid Organization-Global; Clearly beyond national borders- Private sector driven-Diverse, representing not one sector

Existing organizations?

- Innovation as main driver-Best use of current and updated ICT-Collaborative and competitive withother organizations overseas

NEW organization!
-Globally –networked Professional Staff- Young and dedicated support staff-Well versed in de facto global language

Exhibit-8

Typical steps in Problem Solving Process
1.Identify the high priority topics

2.Prepare budget and get funds
3.Prepare project plan and recruit staff

4.Organize virtual and real events

5.Manage project teams.

6.Prepare and Post report (web cast)

7.Design action plan
8.Monitor progress and fine tune action plans

18