Skip to content

Managing Global Innovation

Global Innovation Management - TUHH Institute for Technology & Innovation Management · part of my Technology Management MBA · study notes for revision.


So far we have treated innovation as something a firm does - mostly at home, in its own labs. This chapter breaks that assumption. Modern innovation is increasingly a global activity: R&D happens on several continents at once, knowledge is pulled in from wherever it lives, and - the twist most people don’t expect - the cleverest products are sometimes designed for poor countries first and sold to rich ones afterwards. We’ll cover why firms globalize their innovation, how the practice has evolved, where the world’s knowledge now sits, and the striking idea of reverse innovation.

1 · A motivating example - Mercedes-Benz R&D India

Section titled “1 · A motivating example - Mercedes-Benz R&D India”

Start with a concrete puzzle. A quintessentially German engineering firm advertises hundreds of R&D and design jobs - and a large share of them are not in Stuttgart but in Bangalore (Bengaluru), India.

Mercedes-Benz R&D India (MBRDI) was founded in 1996 as a captive unit - a wholly-owned in-house R&D centre, not an outsourcing contractor - to support the company’s research, IT and product-development work. It began with fairly basic tasks (CAD, CAE and IT programming) and steadily moved up the value chain: today it works on advanced vehicle engineering, control-unit software, head-unit software and critical engineering tools. It now employs over 5,600 skilled engineers and is one of the largest development centres Mercedes-Benz runs outside Germany.

1996 · Foundedcaptive unit - CAD, CAE, IT programming
↓
Move up in valuevehicle engineering, control-unit & head-unit software, engineering tools
↓
Today · 5,600+ engineersone of the largest Mercedes-Benz development centres outside Germany
MBRDI in Bengaluru - a captive R&D centre that grew from support work into serious engineering, part of Mercedes-Benz’s deliberate strategy to build a global R&D footprint and attract the world’s best talent.

Why would a company do this? Not simply to save money - a captive centre doing frontier engineering is a bet on talent, capability and reach, not just low wages. MBRDI is our doorway into the real question: what drives firms to spread R&D and innovation around the world at all?

The background pressure is easy to state. Peter Drucker warned decades ago that the world economy would stay “highly turbulent and highly competitive, prone to abrupt shifts”, with no single dominant economic power and knowledge work rising in importance. In that environment, firms face a demand that used to feel contradictory - the BFC paradigm: develop products and services that are Better, Faster and Cheaper, all at the same time.

BetterQuality
FasterTime
CheaperCost
The BFC paradigm - three goals that once seemed to trade off against each other must now be met together. Quality up, time-to-market down, cost down.

The old logic said you could have any two of quality, speed and cost - pick two, sacrifice the third. The BFC paradigm insists on all three. Why bother? Because getting there improves the firm’s competitive position and enhances profitability and stability. And one of the most powerful ways to hit all three at once is to stop treating innovation as a single-country activity - to reach out for the best knowledge, talent and cost structures the world offers.

3 · Where in the process can globalization help?

Section titled “3 · Where in the process can globalization help?”

To see where going global adds value, it helps to strip the innovation process down to three phases. (This is a deliberately simplified version - the full messy reality has many loops back.)

Conceptionthe fuzzy front end
→
Implementationbuild it
→
Marketingtake it to market
A simplified 3-phase innovation process. Globalization can help in every phase - see the table below.
PhaseWhat happens hereWhere globalization helps
ConceptionRequirement analysis, idea generation, idea evaluation, project planningTap ideas and unmet needs from other markets; access specialist know-how and lead-user insight abroad
ImplementationDevelopment / construction, prototype development, pilot application, testingSplit development across time zones to shorten cycles; use lower-cost, high-skill engineering centres; test in tough local conditions
MarketingProduction, market launch and penetration (national or international)Launch across many markets at once; adapt to local tastes, geography and regulation

A Booz Allen Hamilton study made a sharp point here: the high-leverage innovators - the firms with the best overall performance - stand out not by how much money they spend, but by the capabilities they demonstrate in mastering the vital phases of the process. Globalizing innovation is one way to build those capabilities.

4 · What “Global Innovation” actually means

Section titled “4 · What “Global Innovation” actually means”

The word “global” gets thrown around loosely, so Tiwari gives it a precise meaning. Global Innovation is the opening of the organizational innovation process across national - and in many cases across organizational - boundaries.

Two things make this more than just “we sell abroad”:

More than product adaptation
  • It is not merely tweaking an existing product for a foreign market
  • It genuinely opens the internal innovation process - ideas, R&D, development - to outside contribution
Beyond the “Triad”
  • It goes past the old geographic concentration in the Triad: North America, Western Europe and Japan
  • Knowledge and R&D now flow to and from major developing economies too

5 · How it all developed - from international business to global innovation

Section titled “5 · How it all developed - from international business to global innovation”

Global innovation didn’t arrive overnight. It’s the last step in a long evolution, each stage widening what a firm sends abroad - first goods, then R&D, then the innovation process itself.

Internationalization of Business~1900 - 1990s
→
Internationalization of R&D~1900 - 1990s
→
Globalization of R&D1990s - ~2005
→
Globalization of Innovationsince ~2005
The evolution (Tiwari & Herstatt). Firms first sold and produced abroad, then set up scattered R&D outposts, then genuinely globalized R&D, and finally opened the whole innovation process worldwide.

The decisive move is the qualitative shift from “internationalization of R&D” to “globalization of innovation” - from a Triad-centred world to one that actively draws on major developing economies. Firms make this shift because they increasingly need global knowledge resources to:

  • shorten development cycles - hand work between time zones so development runs almost around the clock;
  • reduce development costs - access high-skill engineering at lower cost;
  • develop products for differing customer tastes, geographic conditions or regulatory requirements - you can’t design for India from a desk in Germany;
  • gain access to important “lead markets” - being present where an innovation is first adopted reduces risk and sharpens learning. (We give lead markets their own chapter next.)

6 · Where the world’s knowledge now sits - S&T clusters

Section titled “6 · Where the world’s knowledge now sits - S&T clusters”

If knowledge is the raw material of innovation, the obvious question is: where is it? The answer has changed dramatically. Science & Technology (S&T) clusters - entire regions or cities dense with universities, brilliant scientists, R&D-intensive companies and prolific inventors - are the backbone of any national innovation ecosystem. It’s the collaboration among those players, packed close together, that produces breakthroughs.

The Global Innovation Index (GII) 2024 maps the top 100 such clusters, and the headline is blunt: the world’s five biggest S&T clusters are all in East Asia. Knowledge creation is no longer confined to the Triad.

RankClusterEconomy
1Tokyo-YokohamaJapan
2Shenzhen-Hong Kong-GuangzhouChina / Hong Kong
3BeijingChina
4SeoulRepublic of Korea
5Shanghai-SuzhouChina
6San Jose-San Francisco (Silicon Valley)United States

To put the concentration in perspective: Tokyo-Yokohama and Shenzhen-Hong Kong-Guangzhou together account for almost one in every five international patent (PCT) applications filed globally. Other well-known clusters - Cambridge, Munich and Paris in Europe; Bengaluru in India - sit further down the same top-100 list. The centre of gravity of invention has genuinely moved east.

Globalization of R&D runs in both directions at once, and the patent data shows it clearly. Look at two mirror-image measures for 2018:

Domestic firms’ overseas R&D inventions made abroad, owned at home
  • Germany - 18.8%
  • USA - 15.4%
  • India - 8.1%
  • China - 4.2%
Foreign firms’ domestic R&D local inventions owned by foreigners
  • India - 43.2%
  • Germany - 18.3%
  • USA - 13.2%
  • China - 9.1%

Read the two panels together and the picture jumps out. German and US firms increasingly invent abroad (left). Meanwhile a striking 43% of inventions made in India are owned by foreign firms (right) - exactly the MBRDI story, multiplied across many companies. R&D has become a genuinely two-way, borderless flow.

7 · A taxonomy of the globalization of technology

Section titled “7 · A taxonomy of the globalization of technology”

To keep all this straight, Archibugi and Michie offer a clean three-way taxonomy. It sorts global technology activity by what is being globalized and who does it.

Global exploitation of technology
Who: individual firms - especially R&D-intensive ones based in small countries. What: taking technology developed at home and using / selling it worldwide to earn a return on the R&D.
Global technological collaboration
Who: firms, governments and the public sector together. What: partnering across borders - joint ventures, alliances, shared research programmes - to create technology jointly.
Global generation of technology
Who: multinational enterprises (MNEs). What: actually producing new technology in several countries - the deepest form, where R&D itself is spread worldwide.

Two caveats worth remembering. First, this taxonomy is often relabelled the “internationalization of innovation” and has been widely reused. Second, globalizing innovation is often - but not necessarily - linked with foreign direct investment (FDI): building a lab abroad usually means investing abroad, but not always (collaboration and licensing can globalize technology without an FDI stake).

The taxonomy is abstract; the location logic is concrete. Two examples show the same instinct - put R&D where the relevant knowledge and users are.

FirmR&D-location logic (in their words)
Sony (Japan)Has R&D sites around the world to do research and development “in environments closer to users while understanding their needs” - proximity to users drives placement.
SAP (Germany)A global footprint of 20 SAP Labs in 17 countries; the guiding theme is “applying local strengths to build global solutions” - each lab contributes its local strength, best practices are shared across the network.

SAP’s phrase is the neat summary of the whole idea: local strengths → global solutions. A site is not just a cheaper pair of hands; it’s a source of distinctive knowledge fed back into the whole organization.

8 · Reverse innovation - from East to West

Section titled “8 · Reverse innovation - from East to West”

Here is the part that overturns intuition. The traditional assumption is that innovation flows downhill: rich countries invent advanced products, then sell simplified, cheaper versions to poorer markets. Reverse innovation flips the direction. You innovate for an emerging market first - designing from scratch around its constraints - and then bring that product back to the rich world, where it turns out to have appeal too.

GE developed the MAC-i electrocardiograph (ECG - the machine that records the heart’s electrical activity) in India, aimed at doctors in rural areas and small towns. It was designed around the hard realities of that setting:

Designed for the reality
  • Portable - light enough for a rural doctor to carry between clinics
  • Simple - few buttons, so a nurse or assistant with limited training can operate it
  • Robust - runs ~500 ECGs on one charge, because power supply in remote areas is erratic
The price gap
  • GE MAC-i: about US$535
  • GE MAC 5500 (next range up): about US$10,000
  • Roughly 10× cheaper - a difference in kind, not degree

Here’s the reverse-innovation punchline: GE now sells many of these ECG instruments - originally conceived for India - successfully in France. A device built for erratic-power rural clinics found a market in a wealthy European country.

Example 2 - GE’s “Lullaby” baby warmer

Section titled “Example 2 - GE’s “Lullaby” baby warmer”

GE went further and designed a baby warmer, “Lullaby”, in India (2009) for the local market. The motivation was partly a stark welfare problem and partly a huge market:

Design driverDetail
Welfare needInfant mortality in India ~55 per 1,000 births (vs ~6 in the US)
Market size~35 million births a year
Ease of useVisually-coded control panel; intuitive for first-time users
RobustnessBuilt to survive heavy use, power cuts, heat and dust
Efficiency~60% less power on start-up
Price~US$3,000 - GE warmers in the US start at ~US$12,000

The result went global: Lullaby is now sold in 62 countries, including Brazil, Russia, Egypt, the UAE and Italy. A product designed for Indian hospitals became a worldwide line.

The same thinking isn’t limited to high-tech gear. P&G developed the Gillette Guard razor specifically for India - a genuinely re-thought, low-cost, robust design for local users and their needs, rather than a discounted version of a Western razor. It’s a reminder that reverse and frugal innovation apply to everyday consumer goods just as much as to medical devices.

9 · The challenges - What? / How? / Where?

Section titled “9 · The challenges - What? / How? / Where?”

None of this is easy. Opening the innovation process across borders creates real management headaches. A clean way to organise them is by the three questions a manager keeps asking - What are we doing? How do we run it? Where do we put it?

What? - the substance
  • Gaining and retaining global expertise & know-how - both the people and the intellectual-property rights (IPRs) that protect what they create
  • Financial constraints as costs keep rising
  • Market uncertainties - foreign markets’ peculiarities, size and demand are hard to read
How? - running it
  • Intra-organizational process management - coordinating an innovation process that now spans continents and time zones
  • Forming and managing cooperation - building and sustaining partnerships and alliances
  • Intercultural conflicts - different working cultures colliding inside one project
Where? - placing it
  • Identification of suitable locations - picking the right sites for the right knowledge (the subject of the next chapter’s site-role framework)

The upshot for firms: they must open their innovation value chains to global cooperation, and this is not just a big-MNE game - SMEs and start-ups can benefit too, especially now that digital tools enable real-time collaboration with global experts and users at very low cost. But the prize only comes to those who master knowledge protection, cross-border process management and intercultural teamwork.

Next: Lead Markets & the Global Innovation Footprint → - which countries lead adoption, and how each R&D site earns its place.