A system of intersecting, diverse, and coexisting structures for managing the innovative development of enterprises — able, under multivariate tasks and total uncertainty, to provide a synergistic effect in the form of a high innovative effect.
In times of unprecedented upheavals for Ukraine — devastating destruction of infrastructure, impossibility of strategizing due to uncertainty, falling demand, a colossal shortage of working capital, loss of highly specialized specialists, and significant destruction of logistics chains — the problems of management and regulation of small and medium-sized businesses acquire a constitutive nature.
The split in public administration in the field of innovation activity against the backdrop of war, distrust of state institutions, corruption, and the economic weakness of the country further makes it impossible to ensure its main functions — planning, organization, analysis, and control. As a result, a large number of development strategies remain unrealized, leaving documents with unsatisfactory results of statistical observation and an unimpressive comparison of the main economic indicators relative to successful countries.
The ability for innovative development consists in the search for new management methods, progressive technical and scientific ideas of the latest technologies, and the continuous development of personnel competencies even under martial law, since a number of unique features of innovations make their management different from other spheres of human activity — constant change in the content and types of innovative work and performers, the short-term nature of work on the creation and implementation of innovations, and the complexity of establishing criteria and indicators for evaluating innovations.
The article presents the methodological basis for the formation of an organizational and motivational mechanism for the innovative development of enterprises, which is the basis of the heterarchical system of management of the innovative development of small and medium-sized businesses.
Interdependent innovation-process management systems — exogenous (a component of the national economy management system that indirectly stimulates innovation processes) and endogenous (which directly manages innovation processes at enterprises) — determine the success of modern enterprises even in the absence of stability and sustainability.
Innovation management can be formalized and integrated into the enterprise management model, introducing innovative practices to develop creativity, flexibility, and openness to external influence.
A feature of modern entrepreneurship is the isolation of new subjects and objects — leaders of innovation platforms and the platforms themselves. The iPhone is an example: Apple acts as leader, offering partners a platform for value creation (iPod / iPad / iPhone) and a platform for value appropriation (iTunes).
The author synthesizes a set of principles that innovative development management should include — moving beyond idealized market-relation models toward analytical, open, and partnership-based decision-making.
A decision made by an individual who differs from other individuals in the social system.
A decision made collectively by the entire group of the social system.
Bureaucracy violates the so-called “triangle of interests” — government, business, and society — and inevitably leads to problems in innovative activity.
The methods of managing the innovation process and innovative development are identical and comprise the four families above.
All of these indicators are defined as unsatisfactory; their values vary greatly from the normative level, reaching critical levels. Most eased in the second year as relocation, factoring, affordable loans, and changed logistics channels paid off — but the loss of highly specialized specialists worsened.
Share of SMEs reporting each challenge, first vs second year of the full-scale war.
The shortage of working capital fell from 44% to 29%; demand loss eased from 77% to 57%. The loss of highly specialized specialists rose from 27% to 44%, indicating the ineffectiveness of government programs.
Share of fully operational enterprises, and those that temporarily ceased operations.
In 2022, 57% of SMEs were fully operational; in 2023, 85%. Temporary closures fell from 6% to 1% — momentum worth preserving amid a military levy rise from 1.5% to 5%.
of adult refugees are Ukrainian women.
of scientific human capital had left the country by 2023.
Talent Competitiveness Index, of 133 countries.
of R&D infrastructure damaged or destroyed.
The 2024–2027 strategies — restoration and facilitation of entrepreneurship; innovative, digital and green transformation; human capital and entrepreneurial culture; competitiveness; and increased exports — have, according to experts, the potential to deliver high indicators.
Current baseline vs the 2027 target for two headline indicators.
SME exporters should rise from 27,300 in 2021 to 35,000 or more by 2027.
R&D spending as a share of GDP — Ukraine over time, target, and the USA for scale.
Ukraine's science intensity fell to 0.3% (2022) from 0.5% (2019); the 2027 target is 0.7%, against 1.8% in the USA.
Ukraine's position among 133 countries (a lower rank is better).
The ranking dropped from 49th in 2021 to 60th in 2024. High-tech products accounted for only 5% of industrial exports even before the full-scale war.
The strategy aims to open markets for new technologies, build modern innovation infrastructure, simplify regulation, ensure financing for startups, develop human capital, protect intellectual property, and create centers of excellence (WinWin CoE) for each key industry.
The success of the single public-services portal “Diia” is sought to be adopted by Slovakia, Bulgaria, Moldova, and others — giving Ukraine a chance to become a leading state in technology and innovation. Obstacles remain: low gross capital accumulation, a slipping innovation rank, and the migration of 5.6–6.7 million Ukrainians (with 1.3–3.3 million who may not return).
In a time-constrained, hyper-information environment, convenient methods quickly visualize business models. Widely used among SMEs are the Lean Canvas (Steve Blank) and the business model of A. Osterwalder & Y. Pigneur — the Lean Canvas favouring resources over KPIs, partners over alternatives, and customer relationships over competitive advantage.
Target audience and strategy — B2B, B2C, or other; consumers split into innovators and early adopters.
Identification of the problem and existing alternatives.
What distinguishes the company from its competitors.
Developed taking into account key opportunities.
Professional specialists, insider information, patents, etc.
Monetization model, cost and value — with a turn toward value-based management.
Offline / online communication with customers.
Metrics that measure success, plus fixed, variable, and opportunity costs.
Creating a corporate business incubator within the office; collecting ideas online for a reward; or joining a hackathon to receive solutions to core tasks.
A platform for testing hypotheses, running pilots with startups, and implementing innovative solutions — alongside strategic-analytics and innovation centers.
Most enterprises lack separate financial and non-financial systems for innovation: rewards follow formal criteria, and non-financial motivation is used only episodically.
The success of a company is determined by the balance between two components: a culture that values continuous improvement of employees, and a technical system based on the principle of flow that effectively creates added value.
A system of purposeful organizational and motivational interactions between innovative enterprises and other subjects of innovation policy — capable of ensuring long-term economic growth by implementing functions through a set of tools, methods, levers, principles, levels, and strategies toward sustainable innovative development.
The innovation organon is a strategic tool woven from a set of rules and methods for developing innovation policy. The system demonstrates the multivariate nature of tasks, resources, and management decisions that form the potential of innovations and produce an innovative effect.
Achieving the innovation advantages of large enterprises.
Increasing enterprise value (creating added business value).
Fulfilling unmet needs of society.
Obtaining profit as a result of innovative activities.
Intellectual, financial, economic, IT, technical.
Assessment of the enterprise's IT architecture and nanoenvironment.
Progressive organizational structure of the submicroenvironment.
Innovation / competence / technological-expertise center.
Vision, mission, corporate, digital, innovation strategy; intrapreneurship.
Internal startups, venture funds, and ongoing idea factories.
If needed, destroying the old business model and creating a new one based on innovation.
Assessing strengths from the perspective of functioning in related industries.
An innovation outpost for monitoring innovation development.
Partnership interaction across the ecosystem; benefits for stakeholders.
Creating conditions for positioning in the core innovation market.
Strategy for added value of exports; supply-chain management.
Building financial, economic, investment and social potential.
Assessing market niches set for significant near- and medium-term growth.
Increasing critical, specific and interspecific resources.
Building intellectual assets — trademarks, industrial designs, patents, copyrights.
A management body — formed from leading specialists and scientists, business and government structures, and other stakeholders — should develop the innovation organon, form specialized working groups, and monitor the innovation strategy, presenting each step in a publicly accessible format. The main structural element is an innovative e-government model: electronic interaction, e-commerce and e-services, electronic identification, interoperability, and open data.
Innovative development management is defined as a continuous, complex process of qualitative changes in an enterprise based on innovations and the implementation of management functions. The presented system demonstrates the multivariate nature of tasks, resources, and management decisions that form the potential of innovations and produce an innovative effect.
Qualitative changes grounded in innovation and the realization of management functions — planning, organization, motivation, and control.
Economic growth and the restoration of innovative activity rest on a gradual rise in digitalization, advanced technologies, international cooperation, and institutional support across a long post-war recovery.
The organizational and motivational mechanism — interactions between innovative enterprises and other subjects of innovation policy — can ensure long-term growth tailored to society's new needs.
A heterarchical system of intersecting, diverse, and coexisting structures — under multivariate tasks and total uncertainty — is able to provide a synergistic effect in the form of a high innovative effect.