Methods and Models for Estimating the Maturity of the Innovation Structure
https://doi.org/10.26794/2304-022X-2019-9-3-56-62
Abstract
The paper presents a systematic approach to the analysis of digital transformation management processes that is proposed to be estimated by means of data on the innovative complexity and maturity of processes and projects of a modern enterprise. The innovation complexity is formalized as a set of multidimensional data on enterprise management processes, including the external environment, architecture, communication infrastructure data, key indicators of management process efficiency and enterprise innovation activity. The production model of corporate knowledge about the enterprise’s readiness for digital transformation has been is presented. Also, there have been provided a review of methods and models for assessing the maturity of processes or projects of organizations. The author has proposed the way of a managerial content for decision-making processes on readiness for enterprise digitalization formed using BIG DATA cognitive technologies of multivariate data analysis that can let implement a systemic approach to managing a digital enterprise.
Keywords
innovation infrastructure,
maturity estimates,
innovation complexity,
production model of corporate knowledge,
digital transformations
Supporting agencies: The paper has been prepared as a part of the report for the International Scientific and Practical Conference “System Economics, Socio-Economic Cybernetics and Soft Measurements in Economics — 2019”.
About the Author
I. A. Brusakova
St. Petersburg State Electrotechnical University “LETI”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina A. Brusakova — Dr. Sci. (Tech.), Professor, Head of the Department of Innovation Management
St. Petersburg
References
1. Brusakova I.A. Training of the innovative engineer for operation in cyberphysical systems. In: Proc. 12th Int. sci.-pract. conf. “System Analysis in Engineering and Control” (St. Petersburg, 22–24 May, 2018). St. Petersburg: Polytechnic Univ. Publ.; 2018:343–347. URL: http://saiu.icc.spbstu.ru/media/files/sci/conf2018/SAEC_2018_Tom_2.pdf (accessed on 20.08.2019). (In Russ.).
2. Kondrat’ev V.V., Lorents V. Ya. Designing corporate infrastructure. Moscow: Eksmo; 2006. 576 p. (In Russ.).
3. Kleiner G.B. System analysis in economics — 2018. In: Proc. 5th Int. sci.-pract. conf.-biennale (Moscow, 21–23 Nov., 2018). Moscow: Prometei; 2018:5–14. (In Russ.).
4. Gorokhov V. L., Brusakova I.A. Cognitive visualization technologies of innovative complexity. In: Technological perspective within the Eurasian space: New markets and points of economic growth. Proc. 4th Int. sci. conf. (St. Petersburg, 13–15 Dec. 2018). St. Petersburg: Asterion; 2018:473–476. (In Russ.).
5. Ansoff I.H. Strategic management. Transl. from Eng. Moscow: Center for Humanitarian Technologies; 1989. 358 p. (In Russ.).
6. Brusakova I.A. Metrization of business solutions of cognitive economy. St. Petersburg: Polytechnic Univ. Publ.; 2010. 180 p. (In Russ.).
7. Dukhonin E. Yu., Isaev D.V., Mostovoi E.L. et al. Business efficiency management. Business Performance Management concept. Moscow: Alpina Business Books; 2005. 269 p. (In Russ.).
8. Brusakova I.A., Shepelev R. E. Innovations in the technique and economy for the digital enterprise. In: 2016 IEEE V Forum “Strategic Partnership of Universities and Enterprises of Hi-Tech Branches (Science. Education. Innovations)”. (16–18 Nov. 2016). New York: IEEE; 2016:27–29. DOI: 10.1109/IVForum.2016.7835844
9. Brusakova I. Cognitive technologies of information managements of business processes of the digital enterprises. International Journal of Advanced Information Science and Technology. 2016;5(1):73–76. DOI: 10.15693/ijaist/2016.v5i1.73–76
10. Panfil L.A., Murtazina E.E. Assessment of the effectiveness of the enterprise. Mezhdunarodnyi zhurnal prikladnykh i fundamental’nykh issledovanii = International Journal of Applied and Fundamental Research. 2016;(6–4):753–756. (In Russ.).
11. Oswald G. SAP service and support: Focusing on continuous customer satisfaction, Bonn: Galileo Press GmbH; 2006. 293 p.
12. Niven P. R. Balanced scorecard diagnostics: Maintaining maximum performance. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2005. 224 p.
13. Somasundaram G., Shrivastava A., eds. Information storage and management: Storing, managing and protecting digital information. Indianapolis, IN: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2009. 530 p.
14. Gilbert P. A business oriented architecture combining BPM and SOA for competitive advantage. BPTrends. March 2007. URL: https://www.bptrends.com/publicationfiles/TWO%2003–07-ARTABusinessOrientedArchitecture-Gilbert-Final.pdf (accessed on 20.08.2019).
15. Ilyin I. S., Levina A.I. Business architecture maturity management. Nauchno-tekhnicheskie vedomosti Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo politekhnicheskogo universiteta. Ekonomicheskie nauki = St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Economics. 2015;(2):109–117. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.5862/JE.216.13
Review
For citations:
Brusakova I.A. Methods and Models for Estimating the Maturity of the Innovation Structure. Management Sciences. 2019;9(3):56-62. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2304-022X-2019-9-3-56-62
Views:
950
Email this article 
