The business world today is characterized by extreme competence. Clients are going for super made goods and services. They want to feel the value for their money. In this regard, the idea of core competence emerged. Fundamentally, core competence refers to an organization’s strengths that make it ahead of other organizations and these strengths make it possible for the company to add value to its end products through innovation (Prajogo & Ahmed, pp.499-515). Through the concept of core competence companies are able to concentrate on what they are best gifted in and outsource what they cannot do. This ensures that the products they produce cannot be copied easily be ...view middle of the document...
Actually, leadership is everything in an organization. This insight shows how important leadership is in all the operations of the organization, which include innovation.
Innovation is highly depended on the will of the leaders in an organization. A leadership structure that does not acknowledge the importance of innovation in its operations will never initiate such activity. Unfortunately, such organizations face immediate extinction, especially in these modern times where globalization is tearing out all barriers that have been in market places and across borders. Innovation is depended on leadership in the sense that leaders make and influence all decisions made in an organization. Decisions on R & D are obviously not small to be made by only one person because they involve a lot of capital whose time of yielding results is not deterministic. It is a big risk. Therefore, leaders are very categorical in this scenario so that they can give support, through their decision, to fund R & D programs (Sampson, pp.364-386).
Leaders play the role of promoting innovation in organizations from two approaches. First, it is a basic obligation for leaders to motivate their employees in all areas. This means that leaders have the obligation to motivate the employees to come up with new ideas on how to better the products and the production processes. This approach seems weak because managers seem to have less control on coming up with new ideals. It is a formula that highly depends on the relationship between employees and their leaders.
However, the second approach presumes that everything flows from the leaders to the employees. The leaders are the bearers of the company’s vision and mission. This is effective in the sense that the leaders have the control on the innovation process. The aspect of leaders bearing the burden of coming up with the ideals makes them invests a lot on innovation. This is even boosted by the fact that their performance is pegged on the level of innovation they bring into the organization. The good thing about this is that the R & D program receives full attention and support (Sampson, pp.364-386).
However, despite the role of leaders in innovation, it is argued that the people in the field are the key determinants of the next innovation idea to be tabled. The clients meet people in the field, not the leaders. The people in the production line have the first hand experience. The experience they have and the challenges they encounter trigger ideas on how better they can do what they are doing. This has been the core source for ideas that revolutionize production processing units. In this regard, the leaders seem not to have a hand in this and hence the argument shifts on the favor of employees. Nevertheless, considering that it is leaders who make things happen in an organization, then their importance cannot be underscored. It is only through leadership that a favorable environment for the ideas flowing from the people in the...