An interview protocol was established to allow comparisons throughout the cases that could reveal the IF characteristics to be further discussed and the adequate categories to contain them. Based on previous theoretical discussion, twelve elements were considered to raise potential characteristics for an organizational function and were articulated among the questions of the protocol: (a) the mission or output of the innovation team; (b) activities undertaken to achieve the mission; (c) organizational form (department, transversal program, etc.); (d) budget allocation; (e) mechanisms to control and evaluate functional performance; (f) leadership and its coordination mechanisms; (g) people involved in the function and their profile; (h) career …show more content…
Elect-4 Institutional Relations Manager- R&D/ Innovation To perform the technological plan, and to monitor the innovation funnel.
Metal-1 Innovation team - board of directors To "orchestrate" technological innovation efforts regarding products, and processes (before the institutionalization of innovation team, these efforts used to occur in a decentralized manner), and to integrate these efforts to the routine of other areas of the company.
Min-1 Innovation Manager To promote adequate environment for technological innovation in the company through planning science oriented activities, open innovation partnerships, and funding for strategic projects.
Telec-1 Manager of innovation Committee Systematization, and organization of processes associated with radical innovation development. There is a perception that daily routine processes deal well with incremental innovations.
Transp-1 Manager of Innovation and knowledge management - "To take care" of innovation within the company: corporate policies, processes for innovation, organizational environment for innovation and knowledge
…show more content…
After categorization and data reduction, conceptual frames were built for each company, which combined primary (interviews) and secondary data. Then, these frames were returned to each company to be adjusted and/or validated. At this stage information was checked by individuals other than the first respondents, but also directly involved in IF. This was done in order to check for errors relating to the interpretation of data, personal biases and to fill some data gaps. After these steps, information was considered definitive for final analysis and the elaboration of