The Future of Health Innovation in the USA and Canada

The final chapter focuses on commonly used innovation indicators that can be measured objectively throughout time. The European Commission created a system for rating the innovative performance of EU members and non-EU comparator countries, including Canada. Canada ranked 17th out of 37 countries on the Summary Innovation Index (Box 9). Sweden rated first, followed by the United States in ninth place. The business media routinely publishes global rankings that assess corporate competitiveness and innovation performance across countries using CEO and stakeholder polls. Rankings may include real data, but the weights used to create specific indicators are totally discretionary. Survey-based rankings can be useful if the sample size is sufficient and the technique is consistent across years and nations.The World Economic Forum (WEF), which has updated its standards throughout time, looks to be the most reliable source of rankings. Table 4 shows that Canada ranks mid-to-low among comparable countries for corporate innovation, which aligns with the overall message.In 2008, Canada's ranking and average score on the WEF's six tabulated questions assessing "innovation fitness" were consistent with the quantitative indicators outlined earlier (WEF, 2008).

Canada has world-class research facilities and a large workforce of scientists and engineers

In Canada, university-industry collaboration and the country's "capacity for innovation" are regarded as inadequate (see Table 4 for definition). The WEF's omnibus Innovation Index is a weighted average of results from separate questions. Figure 3.20 demonstrates a strong relationship between the index and BERD intensity, with Canada closely following the simple regression line. The link with BERD intensity is anticipated given the index's emphasis on innovation through advanced science and technology.The strong correlation shows that BERD intensity is a reliable predictor.The EIS Summary Innovation Index (SII) summarizes national innovation performance in one number. (The weights of the numerous subindicators in the final index cause significant arbitrariness.) Some nations, such as Canada, have a limited collection of subindicators for their SII, making their ranking relative to EU countries less trustworthy. In 2007, Canada ranked 17th with a score of 0.44, while the United States finished ninth with 0.55. Sweden finished first, with a score of 0.73. The quantitative metrics presented in this chapter show that Canadian firms' innovation performance lags behind those of their industrialized counterparts.However, it might be claimed that indicators such as R&D, M&E/ICT, and patents only target specific parts of Canadian business sector productivity, implying that the country does not thrive in areas of innovation not quantified by standard metrics such as R&D and M&E. The educational gap between Canadian and US firm managers means that Canadians may take longer to adapt new business processes and marketing methods.  potential benefits of innovation under certain conditions. Although a single company's strategy may be incorrect, it cannot be applied to the entire Canadian corporate sector, especially over time. Canadian firms' concentration on innovation reflects the country's unique characteristics, including businesspeople's attitudes towards growth and risk-taking.

Weaknesses in less quantifiable components of innovation have led to Canada's low

MFP growth. Canadian businesses are falling behind in ICT adoption across all industries, indicating a lack of innovation in the necessary organizational change. Canada's lack of export aggressiveness outside North America, despite significant opportunities in Asia, demonstrates complacency, stifling advancement in non-technological corporate innovation. Statistics According to Canada's innovation surveys, businesses have made significant advances in process innovation and labor-management interactions.Canadian auto factories excel in productivity and quality because they employ innovative manufacturing techniques and cutting-edge US and Japanese technology (see Chapter 10's automotive case study). According to Harbour Consulting (2008), four Ontario auto plants, including those placed second and third, are among the top ten in North America for the fewest worker hours per vehicle. Labour agreements in Canadian enterprises have been imaginative in dealing with modern competitive realities.Despite successful examples of Canadian company innovation, the benchmark indicators in this chapter show that Canadian businesses' overall innovation performance is far lower than that of the US business sector and many of Canada's OECD peers. Innovation is also significantly lower in sectors that account for nearly one-quarter of the Canadian economy. Chapter 3 demonstrates that Canadian businesses invest less in innovation compared to peer group nations, resulting in mediocre innovation outcomes and a drag on labour productivity growth. The lack of business innovation in Canada is not attributable to irrational behavior by firms or a failure to comprehend the.

Some firms prioritize innovation in their business strategy, whereas others don't

To understand business innovation performance in Canada, it's important to examine the strategic decisions made by Canadian firms. Why are innovation-focused strategies more common in the US, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, South Korea, and Japan than in Canada? Why are innovation-focused corporate strategies more prevalent in Finland, Norway, Japan, Korea, and Australia/New Zealand (Figure 4.1)?27 Although natural resource endowment and industry structure play a significant role, Finland's example demonstrates that a resource-based tradition can quickly shift to a knowledge-based focus. R&D is limited in scope and concentrated on specific areas (see Table 3), so it is not a reliable indicator of overall business innovation. However, innovation in any industry demands investment, particularly in ICT. In comparison to the United States and other countries, the ICT investment deficit outpaces the R&D gap.Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, Israel, Denmark, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States were among the most innovative countries in 2007. Innovation leaders thrive at all five of the aforementioned criteria. Luxembourg, Iceland, Ireland, Austria, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, and Canada rank in descending order of inventiveness. In practically every case, they outperform the norm.The other two categories are moderate innovators (eight countries) who are close to or below the average in all dimensions, and catching-up countries (11 countries) who are below the EU average in all dimensions.The results of Mngful.