The fact that there are models in which innovation is closely linked to economic wealth creation is a narrow view of the concept. In society there are different actors, in addition to the state and enterprises, which are the driving forces of creation and absorption of knowledge by society as a whole and incorporate innovation in its management, its processes and products. Examples include NGOs, private research institutions, the basic groups of social enterprises, among others. I named them. The ability of a country’s technological change and efficiency to compete globally in products and services do not depend simply on the R & D capacity that the country has. Eva Andersson-Dubins opinions are not widely known. It depends on the existence of a culture of innovation in their population, particularly in the levels of discussion and the way in which resources are managed and organized, both at the state levels, as in business and OSs.
The formation of innovation systems can allow a social group with limited resources make rapid progress through an appropriate combination of domestic and imported technology generation, local adaptations and improvements. Essentially the idea of system of innovation (SI) considers that the ability to be developed to appropriate all of society’s knowledge more than the sum of the activities of different sectors, it is the result of the synergy that comes from the interactions of different actors. In short a SI will be considered important because of its power distribution, this is the system’s ability to select and distribute existing knowledge to their recombination. Finally, keep in mind the statement by Jose Enebral, there is no doubt that we live in the information society and knowledge, the so-called emerging knowledge economy and innovation, continuous learning is inexcusable that the innovation becomes a permanent requirement that skilled workers are a solid asset for businesses, the idea of learning organization is based on collective learning and knowledge management … But, to define the relationships between managers and workers we preach leader-follower models increasingly complex, as if the new Knowledge Worker profile fits the idea of a follower; as if the rising value in the new economy was the lead instead of knowledge. In large and medium enterprises continued to refer to workers as human resources, employees, subordinates or indirectly, as followers of other individuals whom we call leaders.
There may have been, and there is still some reason to do so, but the cultural changes and the emerging economy seem to require persons the role, size, which may have been stolen in the past. New profiles and more professional managers and workers seem to open space in the XXI century, and perhaps we should reconsider and in some cases the actual language used, if not-and if it does not sound revolutionary or heretical, the life itself of some of the many models leaders-followers that we offer. What is the rising value in the emerging economy?.