Исследование полезности конкурсов для развития инновационных проектов
the paper is dedicated to estimation of what influence on the project development does contest victory have. The data collected from different ecosystems is being compared. It is shown that contest usefulness, estimated by the winner projects management is also different in different ecosystems.
The article describes the methods of economic evaluation of innovative projects. The special attention is given to the positive and negative sides of the static evaluation methods and techniques with the flexibility that is built into the project. Keywords: discounted cash flow, real options and innovations.
In terms of actual tendency of innovations being the driven part of the world economy development it is necessary to describe the situation with innovations and standardization in Russia. The article is describing Russian innovations eco-system, regulations in innovations and standardization of innovations. Main standardization bodies and challenges in standardization are briefly described. Possible ideas for the development of innovations system in Russia are proposed.
Abstract: Nowadays innovation development and creation of the link between science and business becomes actual more and more. This problem could be decided by making conditions which facilitate innovation ecosystem emergence. Theoretical aspects of innovation ecosystem are considered in the article. By the example of Silicon Valley, case study of innovation ecosystem is observed. As a result of the paper, we provide some recommendations on innovation ecosystem emergence and management.
The article discusses questions of related to the valuation of the innovation projects. For this in addition to the use of standard methods (methods based on discounted cash flow), the use of a real option. The object of analysis selected a specific innovation project submitted to the contest Russian innovation. On the basis of the data (the original data of the project have been changed), was estimated additional cost of the project with the "flexibility" of leadership.