=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1684/paper11
|storemode=property
|title=Towards a Capability Maturity Model for Regional Innovation Strategies
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1684/paper11.pdf
|volume=Vol-1684
|authors=Tanja Woronowicz,Michael Boronowsky,David Wewezer,Antanas Mitasiunas,Karsten Seidel,Ignacio Rada Cotera
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/bir/WoronowiczBWMSC16
}}
==Towards a Capability Maturity Model for Regional Innovation Strategies==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1684/paper11.pdf
1
Towards a Capability Maturity Model for Regional
Innovation Strategies
Tanja Woronowicz1, Michael Boronowsky1, David Wewezer1,
Antanas Mitasiunas2, Karsten Seidel3 and Ignacio Rada Cotera3
1
Universität Bremen, Bremen, Germany
{worono|mb|wewetzer}@tzi.de
2
MitSoft, Vilnius, Lithuania
antanas.mitasiunas@mitsoft.lt
3
IkerConsulting, Bilbao, Spain
{ignacio.rada|karsten.seidel}@ikerconsulting.com
Abstract. This paper presents the methodical approach of an INTERREG
project aiming to improve the implementation and evaluation of European
Research & Innovation strategies. The P2L2 project applies interregional policy
learning and exchange of experiences on aspects influencing the regional
innovation ecosystems in the field of advanced materials. The key enabling
technology “advanced materials” complements the regional economic and
research tissue of six participating regions with a stable opportunity for future
growth and jobs. P2L2 goes beyond traditional 'good practice sharing' and
results are expected not only to improve policy instruments. All activities
related to the definition, implementation and evaluation of the RIS3 and smart
specialization strategies are described in terms of an ISO/IEC 330xx
conformant Process Reference and Assessment Model (PRM/PAM).
The improved process capability aligns regional policies and strategies
between sectors in order to facilitate the establishment of real innovation
ecosystems beyond administrative regional boundaries and identifies overlaps,
gaps and complementarity for European collaboration.
Keywords: Research and Innovation, Smart Specialisation Strategy,
Entrepreneurial Discovery Process, Process Capability Maturity Modeling,
Process Reference Model, Process Assessment model
1 Introduction
The work described in this paper is part of the INTERREG EUROPE Project “Public
Policy Living Lab” (P2L2). The project has started in 2016 and is running for four
years. The overall objective of the P2L2 project is to improve the effectiveness of
regional development policies in fostering research and innovation in advanced
materials and related sectors thereby contributing to the economic modernisation and
increased competitiveness of Europe. Advanced materials have been identified as one
of the priority areas in many Research and Innovation Smart Specialisation Strategies
2
(RIS3) [11] and have developed to a vital field of activity. P2L2 is coordinated by the
Innovation Capability Center of the University of Bremen and brings together ten
partners from six European countries (Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, Lithuania
and Poland). The following sub-objectives will be achieved:
1. Improved, coordinated and more effective innovation policies fostering on
regional level through evidence-based policy-making by applying a process
oriented approach to RIS3 definition and implementation.
2. New knowledge of the European innovation supporting mechanism and how to
coordinate and align them, by exchanging experiences between partner regions and
developing a joint information base.
Pioneers of Research and Innovation Smart Specialisation Strategies stress the fact
that RIS3 defininion and implementation is a process oriented activity. This idea is
confirmed by many authors from Dani Rodrik who declares: „When it comes to
industrial policy, specifying the process is more important than specifying the
outcome“ [13] to Roberta Capello and Henning Kroll: „As one of the founding fathers
of Regional Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialization (RIS3) Dominique Foray
claims that RIS3 is „largely about the policy process to select and prioritize fields or
areas whether a cluster of activities should be developed, and to let entrepreneurials
discover the right domain of future specialization” [7]. Such characteristics of the area
give the ground for the P2L2 project to apply a process capability maturity modeling
approach for RIS3 improvement as a process oriented activity. Therefore, one core
activity is a limited mapping, i.e. policy evaluation methodology of the RIS3 policy
instruments of the participating regions. Starting from the RIS3 strategies of the
regions, the project identifies activities, initiatives and practices the partner regions
have used to support innovation in advanced materials domain. This will allow to
identify the best possible policy climate for fostering innovation in priority areas and
mainstream this into policy recommendations and a strategic policy framework.
This paper describes the initial steps towards a methodology to address the process
capability of activities related the the RIS development, implementation and
monitoring. The process oriented approach provides a solid starting point for regional
analysis in the participating regions. Guiding principle of this approach is to analyse
the process capability of a regional innovation eco-system to develop a strong and
successful RIS3 – following the ideas of quality management that “product quality is
the result of processes quality”[14].
1.1 The need for Policy Learning
Innovation policy is a strongly interconnected area. In [9] it is described that
systemic approaches are currently the most accepted models for promoting the
development, diffusion and efficient use of new products and processes. The different
actors in an innovation system are part of a very complex network of relations and
dependencies. Developing innovation policies therefore has to deal with this
complexity in an adequate way. In [2] it is stated ”that many regions have faced
notable difficulties in implementing e.g. RIS3 strategies for reasons related to lack of
3
interest, lack of ability and general politics” and that “with great likelihood, therefore,
many RIS3 exercises that had been implemented at inadequate […] levels of
governance, in political cultures averse to bottom-up participation or simply in
regions where limited administrative and professional capacities precluded
meaningful RIS3 processes from the outset will fade out and, at some point in time,
become discontinued”.
Based on this observation a basic assumption of the P2L2 project is that the
development of a suitable research and innovation strategy needs a certain capability
on personal, organizational but also on system level. Furthermore, to be able to
manage the development of a RIS and to monitor and improve this process
accordingly, a management framework on different dimensions is needed. In these
terms process improvement can be understood as “policy learning”.
1.2 The need of effective Smart Specialization and Regional Innovation
Strategies
The principles of “Smart Specialization” are an important element of the 2014-2020
cohesion policy of the European Commission. The Guide to Research and Innovation
Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) of the European Commission explained the
need for smart specialization as follows [5]: “Europe is facing major economic
challenges that require an ambitious economic policy for the 21st century. Investing
more in research, innovation and entrepreneurship is at the heart of Europe’s 2020
strategy and a crucial part of Europe's response to the economic crisis. So is having a
strategic and integrated approach to innovation that maximises European, national
and regional research and innovation potential.” The following definition of RIS3 is
given [5]: “National/regional research and innovation strategies for smart
specialisation (RIS3) are integrated, place-based economic transformation agendas
that do five important things:
[…] policy support and investments on key national/regional priorities […];
[…]build on each country's/region’s strengths, competitive advantages and
potential for excellence;
[…]support innovation and aim to stimulate private sector investment;
[…]get stakeholders fully involved and encourage innovation and experimentation;
They are evidence-based and include sound monitoring and evaluation systems.”
“Smart specialisation relies on key concepts and stages: knowledge of the
economic fabric and innovation ecosystem, ”entrepreneurial discovery” (close
involvement of the private sector), specialisation in specific technological fields or
sectors, an associated diversification strategy to ensure a sustainable economic fabric
over time, openness to other European regions, definition of an action plan and
budget, establishment of a governance and coordination of the innovation ecosystem,
implementation of a monitoring and assessment system” [10]. Each region applying
the concept of smart specialization is characterised by a specific context relating to
unique socio-economic attributes. Its RIS3 strategy should rely on a territorial
innovation diagnosis. These characteristics determine its approach towards the
4
concept and therefore are constituative in the definition and deployment of the RIS3.
Analysing a number of indicators helps to underline the economic and innovation
diversity of the European regions and helps distinguish territorial characteristics.
Hence, the development of a RIS3 strategy can be understood as a process oriented
activity. The Guide to RIS3 proposes six steps to design a RIS3:
STEP 1. Analysis of the regional context and potential for innovation
STEP 2. Governance: Ensuring participation and ownership
STEP 3. Elaboration of an overall vision for the future of the region
STEP 4. Identification of priorities
STEP 5. Definition of coherent policy mix, roadmaps and action plan
STEP 6. Integration of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
Based on this six step approach and an identification of three critical factors for
each of these steps a (self-) assessment approach is presented in [6]. The assessment
results in a spider graph.
Fig. 1. RIS3 Assessment Wheel [6]
RIS3 is a new policy approach applied for the first time during the ESIF 2014–
2020 programming period. This policy instrument has never been field-tested before,
hence leading to a necessary in-itinere evaluation aiming at constantly improving it.
2 Project Setup
P2L2 follows an novel approach for improving innovation delivery policies: the focus
on a specific policy field (advanced materials and sectors of application) selected as a
regional priority area of specialization, varied policy instruments and a partnership
5
with different regional combinations. It goes beyond the traditional 'good practice
sharing' and results are expected not only to coordinate the evaluation of
implementation of S3 strategies, but are expected to add value identifying overlaps,
gaps, complementarity and opportunities for cross-border collaboration.
Starting from the S3 strategies of the regions, P2L2 identifies activities and initiatives
the partner regions have used to support innovation in the advanced materials domain.
At the same time, the participating regions will exchange experiences in the
methodology for implementing, monitoring and evaluating their S3 strategies. Core
activities of project phase 1 are the development of a limited mapping model and
policy effectuation.
The limited mapping methodology is based on the ISO/IEC 330xx 1 conformant
process capability maturity modelling approach. It will result in a process reference
model (PRM) and a corresponding process assessment model (PAM). Guided self-
assessment within each partnering region will evaluate the limited mapping model
during the first project year. The process capability determination detects the current
innovation capability and helps to further increase the ability to improve the
regionally selected policy instruments. The assessment reports form the basis for
future policy recommendations and a strategic policy framework. The project follows
a bottom-up approach in line with the entrepreneurial discovery process followed for
the definition and improvement of the regional S3 strategies. This will be ensured
through the active participation of a remarkable stakeholders group representing
interest of the industry.
The partner regions started their initiatives within the ERDF 2 and RIS3 context
already in the last programming period. Hence, political decisions which had been
taken are currently being implemented in the period 2014-2020. P2L2 is thus
complementing ongoing policy actions with a collective approach. The regional
Policy Instruments (PIs) which are due for adjustment in the mid-term review of the
Operational Programmes initiate, support and accompany industrial and research
activities. Considering information obtained from analysis (assessments) and the
feedback obtained during study visits, 3 case studies will be performed in order to
define scenarios considering regional variables, best practices and lessons learnt. With
these results, each partner region will prepare one policy brief with recommendations
to be adopted at regional level and will submit to the internal procedures for the
regional approval (regional internal procedures for preparing the adoption of the
recommendations and the improvements in the selected policy instrument) informing
all involved authorities at the highest level. After making necessary modifications to
be approved, the partners will prepare 6 regional Action Plans, with a clear roadmap
for the implementation of the improvements and all legal, administrative and political
procedures for ensuring the success of the process.
Key stakeholders will play an important role in both phases: Formall, they take an
advisory role but, the project will apply a ‘bottom up’ learning approach that
1 Currently in revision – see chapter 3.1
2 ERDF = European Regional Development Fund, OP = Operational Programme of the
respective region
6
represents a move away from the top down planning of previous regional innovation
strategies where public authorities were expected to steer innovation processes. In this
new model, priorities are supposed to emerge out of the entrepreneurial discovery
process and the role of public authorities is rather to create the right conditions for
and support the entrepreneurial process of discovery building continuously on the
innovation capability of the actors.
3 Limited Mapping Approach
The above described task of the INTERREG project P2L2 is to assess existing
regional innovation strategies. There are a number of tools available including [6], but
we aim at a standardized methodology that recognizes challenging areas of the RIS3
development, defines improvement efforts and determines data-driven monitoring
mechnisms in a comparable and repeatable manner. „Regional contextual factors
must always be considered, and a pure copying of good practices is seldom
successful.“ [9]. Therefore we initially put emphasis on analysing the corresponding
processes of the genesis of a regional innovation strategy and assess for each
participating region which needs and background measures led to the description of
the current strategy. This process-based approach is using the ISO/ IEC 33001:2015
SPICE methodology and adapts principles of the entrepreneurial discovery process
(EDP). According to Forray entrepreneurial discovery has two faces in the design and
deployment of a RIS3:
“First, it is a mechanism to integrate and combine dispersed and fragmented
knowledge in order to open and explore a new domain of (market and
technological) opportunity. As such it is the initial step in many processes of
structural changes.
Second, it is a mechanism to produce information about the value of the considered
domain, in terms of potential innovations, spillovers and structural changes. This
information should be used by government when the time comes to choose.” [4].
Fig. 2. Entrepreneurial Discovery Process Roles
7
According to [12] societal model actors within a regional innovation eco-system
assume different roles (see Figure 2). Each of the three “role groups” shall have a
benefit from the respective intervention. The impact of each action shall be verified.
In the scope of the project’s limited mapping model, we focus on activities to foster
innovation in the domain of new and advanced materials in six piloting regions. Other
connected and adjacent policy or commercial areas obviously have links with this
model, but will be regarded as fixed for the analytical time frame (ceteris paribus
assumption).
3.1 A Process Capability Modelling Approach for RIS3
For more than two decades, capability maturity models are applied in different type of
organisations to assess and improve the level of capability of relevant business
processes. “There are well accepted Process Capability / Maturity Models (PCMMS),
such as ISO/IEC 15504, CMMI, iCMM. […] These models are used as an evaluative
and comparative basis for process improvement and/or assessment, assuming that
higher process capability or organizational maturity is associated with better
performance in terms of predictability of process results.” [8].
A process in this syllabus is a collection of activities designed to produce a specific
outcome for a particular purpose. The ISO/IEC 15504 conformant process reference
models imply a strong emphasis on what should be done. How the specific practices
are performed remains in the responsibility of the defined process owner. A process is
thus an organization specific or independent ordering of activities across time and
place, with a defined beginning and end, defined inputs and outputs.
As the P2L2 project aims to apply a methodology allowing European regions to
assess, compare and improve their materials-related regional strategies, the well
established process capability determination approach is fullfilling the requirements
of all phases of regional innovation eco-system management. Latter processes allow
to modify the strategy where appropriate. Different levels of measurable capability
and their expected improvements are the benefits for the societal actors (institutional
organisations as facilitators and demand-driven entrepreneurial agents ).
The proposed model takes into account each of the role agents’ (see above)
expectations and presumed (both explicit and tacid) action paths. The interaction of
the specific competences and process knowledge is based on the acknowledgement of
each role actor’s competence. Industry, for example, will know exactly what
knowledge area including staff resources and machinery they have, whereas a
regional development agency has specific connaissance on policy processes and to
how to apply for ERDF funding. The newly drafted process reference and assessment
model cope with this role-oriented approach and condense the activity model into a
generalizable and standard conformant format.
As the development, implementation, monitoring and improvement of RIS3 in a
region is connected with the transparency and the democratic level of public
consultation whilst defining the discoveries and priorities, it is included into the
model on process level. Likewise, the drafting of the regional strategy (RIS3) brings
together various elements of demand-for-support (DfS). The DfS result in being
8
implemented in concrete actions. These concrete actions lead to Policy Instruments
being evaluated by each region.
Both, the RIS3 definition and its implementation are processes of transformation to
a region. Supposedly, a center piece of the RIS3 establishment is the consulatation
process embedded into the Entrepreneurial Discovery process (EDP). In contrast to a
traditional top-down regional development strategy, RIS3 is understood as a bottom-
up exercise in terms of its decision-making. The direction of decision-making
processes depends on the process owners. As it is indicated in Figure 2, RIS3 and
EDP have three roles of actors: institutional organizations, entrepreneurial agents and
the remainder of civil society. Conventional top-down decision-makers for regional
development strategies are institutional organizations. In the case of RIS3, they are
also main decision-makers; the difference is that in RIS3 the decision-making process
is a distributed one. The degree and extent depends on the institutions’ and
entrepreneurial agents’ capability to engage in a shared decision-making process.
Like an elephant cannot be eaten at once, the challenge of RIS3 development cannot
be resolved at once. This “elephant” is the accumulated knowledge for regional
transformation. RIS3 cannot dispense without regional macro level analysis, context
of neighbouring regions, EU strategies and global trends. The phase of drafting the
macro level analysis is very sensitive to undesirable (dominant) influences from any
of the role actors. It must be performed in mutual trust and very consciously and
treated as preliminary, informative, non-binding. A further psychological factor has to
be considered as well: The threshold to change a decision is much higher than the
threshold to take decisions.
The RIS3 Guide defines “Identification of priorities” as follows: “Priority setting
in the context of RIS3 entails an effective match between a top-down process of
identification of broad objectives aligned with EU policies and a bottom-up process of
emergence of candidate niches for smart specialization, areas of experimentation and
future development stemming from the discovery activity of entrepreneurial actors.”
[5]. According to project experience, the establishment of RIS3 often is not a bottom-
up process as stressed by many RIS3 related materials.
As provided above in subsection 1.2, RIS3 consists of six structural parts
according to the RIS3 wheel. At logical level, these structural parts can be divided
into three groups as RIS3 process capability process model categories and
subcategories: governance, macro level and micro level.
The governance group consists of Step 2 “Set up of a sound and inclusive
governance structure” and Step 6 “Integration of monitoring and evaluation
mechanisms“.
The macro level group consists of Step 1 “Analysis of the regional context and
potential for innovation” and Step 3 “Production of shared vision about future of
the region“.
The micro level group consists of Step 4 “Selection of a limited number of
priorities for the region” and Step 5 “Establishment of suitable policy mix“.
9
Fig. 3. RIS3 development process and RIS3 model’s primary process category
In terms of process capability maturity modelling, the macro and micro level
groups together compose the primary process category while the governance group is
the organizational process category.
Macro and micro levels groups are ilustrated here in Figure 3, where macro level
ends by strategic vision and allocative rule formulation and micro level – by action
plans as a response to the discoveries’ demand for support. A published analysis of
regional RIS3 strategies discovered some gap between the macro and micro levels or
more precisely between the RIS3 development and implementation. The expert group
concludes: „Across all RIS3, the elaboration of the implementation plans was very
weak. […] More problematic would be the explanation that the RIS3 strategy is
disconnected from the implementation of the Operational Programmes. This could be
due to functional divides (other authorities responsible for the OPs than the RIS3),
inertia of existing policy programmes and measures, local lobbying for certain
policies or lack of capacity with the public authorities to adapt and improve the policy
mix on the basis of the RIS3 exercises.” [3]. The authors agree on diagnosis “lack of
capacity”, however they discovered that the reason for such capacity lacking is a
methodological gap within the RIS3 explanatory materials – the link between RIS3
definition and its implementation is insufficient. The link provided is at very high
level only: {objectives} ~ {roadmaps, action lines}. There is an obvious need to link
the strategy definition and its implementation at lowest level: {discovery activity} ~
10
{actions, policy instruments}. The proposed process capability model therefore
addresses explicitly such linkage on process level. The RIS3 process capability
assessment model is an abstract generic model suitable to assess any regional RIS3
process. The process assessment model defines what to do, whereas the real process
must include knowledge on how to do it.
As a starting point for development of the RIS3 process capability assessment
model, the current preliminary RIS3 development process model is also provided in
Figure 3, containing process identification by process name for strategy definition
including macro and micro analysis levels and strategy implementation including
monitoring and evaluation.
The mapping of the identified processes to the RIS3 Assessment wheel [6] at the
level of its six steps is provided. The process owners in terms of institutional
organizations, entrepreneurial agents and remainder of civil society is indicated, too.
The purpose of the RIS3 process capability assessment model is the assessment and
continuous improvement of RIS3 process capability performed by institutional
organizations aswell as entrepreneurial agents.
References
1. Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., Poppelbus, J.: Developing Maturity Models for IT Management.
Bus.Inf. Sys.Eng.1, 213-222 (2009)
2. Capello, R., Kroll, H.: From theory to practice in smart specialization strategy: emerging
limits and possible future trajectories, European PlanningStudies, 24:8, 1393-1406 (2016)
3. Clar, G. et. al.: Perspectives for Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart
Specialisation (RIS3) in the wider context of the Europe 2020 Growth Strategy (2015)
4. Foray, D.: On the policy space of smart specialization strategies. European Planning
Studies, 24:8, 1428-1437, DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2016.1176126 (2016)
5. Foray, D. et. al.: Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for RIS 3 (2012)
6. Foray, D. et. al.: Annex III: A Practical Approach to RIS3 and its (Self-) Assessment.
Assessment Wheel; (2012)
7. Foray, D, David, P. A., Hall, B. H. Smart Specialisation. From academic idea to political
instrument. MTEI-Working paper. (2011)
8. Gökalp, E. and Demirörs, O.: Developing Process Definition for Finacial and Physical
Resource Management Process. In Government Domain, Software Process Improvement
and Capability Determination. ISBN 978-3-319-38979-0 (2016)
9. INTERREG IVC: Analysis Report Innovation Systems (2014)
10. Peltier, M.: Synthesis of the Research & Innovation Strategiers for Smart Specialisation of
French Regions; KNOWING European Programmes 2014-2020 (2015)
11. Pattinson, M et. al.: Analysis of Smart Specialisation Strategies in Nanotechnologies,
Advanced Manufacturing and ProcessTechnologies. Final report. (2015)
12. Rodriguez-Pose, A. Winkie, C.: Institutions and the Entrepreneuirial Discovery Process for
Smart Specialisation. Papers on Evolutionary Economic Geography. (2015)
13. Rodrik, D.: Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University, John F.
Kennedy School of Government (2004)
14. Stark, J. Product Lifecycle Management: 21st Century Paradigm for Product Realisation,
Springer Science & Business Media (2011)