Vol13-1-e47

3/24

3AIST TODAY 2013-1actively engaging in joint research and offering technical consultation services and other support to small- and medium-sized companies. Many executives of such companies participate in the Full Research Workshops held at each of AIST’s regional research bases. Although we do not have the accurate statistics, it seems that the majority of these small- and medium-sized companies have already made their move overseas. The largest motive behind their decision seems to be to comply with the requests of major Japanese manufacturers who are the customers for their products. These companies do hold a competitive edge for their products at the beginning of their move overseas, but sooner or later the products will become outdated and R&D will be needed for their next generation of products. However, this new R&D is a high hurdle for such small- and medium-sized companies that have moved overseas and tend to lack resources, and they must therefore be supported by both academia and public institutions.A change in the method of innovation from technology push to market pull is also required. The era in which the champions of the domestic market also became champions in the global market and in which all manufactured products were bought no matter how many were produced has ended. Although it is not easy, it is essential for Japanese companies to come up with ideal images of sustainable products and businesses that can withstand the highly competitive global environment surrounding Japanese companies and to formulate realistic innovation strategies from this starting point. In the linear innovation model originating in scientists’ intellectual discoveries, the difficulties encountered in the “valley of death” are something that must be overcome, but when viewed from the exit point—or, in other words, from the business side—numerous technologies that lie in this valley can be seen as a group of potential gems just waiting to be polished to shine. By starting with the formulation of a market pull business strategy, it can be expected that the direction of business selection and concentration, an ideal balance in the domestic-to-overseas ratio, the generation of IT based services that Japan is considered to be weak in, and other such positive developments will naturally begin to take shape.We must also reorganize our thinking on the connection between standardization and competitiveness. In this modern world, where not only the developed countries but also the developing countries with their large markets, workforces, and resources have a significant impact on the global economy, the importance of global standards is greatly increasing, as an intellectual infrastructure that can assure just and fair economic competition and support sustainable development. Some say that because everything is made open and accessible through standardization, our competitors, especially foreign companies in low-cost countries, can easily catch up with us. However, this is a major misunderstanding. As I mentioned earlier, since competitiveness is influenced by a wide range of factors including the strong yen and the tax system, etc., thinking that the cause lies solely in standardization only results in a misconception. Standardization does not mean that we make everything open and accessible. What is needed here is to strategically differentiate between areas that will be made open and accessible so that technologies developed by one’s company can be utilized by growing numbers of people, and areas that will not be made open and accessible and will be used to characterize and distinguish one’s business. It is very disappointing to see that there are many corporate executives who are still confused as to the meanings of global standards and corporate standards, which are used to improve business efficiency within a company and should be shared as much as possible.The decision as to whether to aim at the American model or the German model, or the Japanese model seen in the 1980s, is also important when planning to strengthen our competitiveness. Excluding the inconceivable return of the Japanese model of the 1980s, it seems that the majority of commentators’ views are strongly inclined toward accepting the American model as the ideal model for improving Japan’s competitiveness. The media are filled with criticisms such as that we have no Google of our own, that we failed to create the iPad, and so forth. However, on the contrary, the American model is not the only model that we should use as a benchmark when discussing industrial competitiveness. Since Japan is heavily dependent on the manufacturing industry, I consider that we need to look more closely at the German model, whether in making things or services. We should distance ourselves from superficial arguments and develop a model most suited to Japan’s current situation. By being conscious of the points mentioned above and with our sincere and hardworking character, I believe that a new competitive power befitting Japan, which may be close to the German model but surpasses it and even incorporates the advantages of the American model, will be born.AIST Workshop for Innovation Ecosystem in Thailand and the AIST Open Lab 2012The Full Research Workshops that I mentioned earlier are widely attended by participants from various local governments, the industrial sector, and academia. At the end of October 2012, we held the first “international version” of such workshops in Bangkok, Thailand.Many Japanese corporations are doing business in Thailand. People working for such companies must have an understanding of globalization based on actual work experience, but in fact a wide range of actions have been taken during the globalization process of Japan

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です