lack of organizational support, infrastructural conditions, employee efforts due to less motivation, lack of autonomy and risk taking.

I am Agree with Gupta and I am sending a test in which you can determine the main objectives of innovative activity, the sources and main obstacles, this test is developed by the professor Dra. Mercedes Delgado Fernández at the CUJAE in Cuba

For me the barriers for innovation are these, but the order depend of the context the organization+their environment:

• Organization and environment not supportive of innovation

• Traditional top-down management discourages front line empowerment and innovation

• Short term focus on execution with no time to think for the future

• Lack of resources, leadership and inadequate funding

• Organizational focus and value is on risk avoidance

• Lack of systemic innovation process

• Lack of end-to-end processes for bringing ideas to fruition

• Focus on immediate and unreasonable financial returns

• No incentives to innovate

• Inappropriate measures for managing innovations

• No common definition of innovation and how to measure success

• Lack of effective communication between individuals, managers, various disciplines, …

• Lack of understanding and interaction with the customers, market and industry

• Too much specialization, and lack the ability to cross-pollenate ideas or make connections

• Lack of focus, vision and direction from management and leadership ranks

• Lack of focus and support on innovation by senior management

• No infusion of new ideas, new problems or learning opportunities

• Resistance to change

I estimate that Innovation is mostly limited by three socioeconomic processes:

1) Corporate economic risk assessment based on optimized, near-term profit and its corollary - the need, and well protected right, to ignore downstream, long term impacts (costs) of not innovating;

2) The "Partial Cycle Ethic" or the (mis)perception that businesses or industries need only be responsible for portions, (i.e. the profitable parts), of any product or service's environmental life cycle impact, e.g, the price of gasoline does not include the cost of air quality remediation, or Pharmaceutical, Chemical and Agricultural Industries are not responsible for the (literal) downstream effects of millions of tons of chemicals, hormones, pesticides, etc. added to the ecology.

3) The myriad socioeconomic based justifications for avoiding, or at least indefinitely postponing, true innovation, e.g., "it would drastically undermine long standing supply chains..", or "that would result in massive unemployment and economic collapse..", or (my favorite) "that's just not the American way..."

Basically, true innovation undermines the status quo of existing, large scale, markets and the companies and governments which are their primary, (not to negate the fact that we all benefit), benefactors. What remains is incremental innovation which will likely result in the slow, painful death of all markets through the adherence to mediocrity and ignorance of its cumulative impact, beyond a point from which true innovation will have the time to alter our course enough to avoid near-mass extinction, create sustainable, (century after century..), technologies, equalize terrestrial living standards (for a sustainable terrestrial population, TBD), or provide the opportunity to experience where unrestricted innovation could actually take us.. But I'm a cynic and a human so these estimates may only be self-serving drivel...

Thank's for the answers, are really interesting points of view, and i mainly agree with both but I think we could add a missed factor, the laws. Laws are made for current existing technologies and rules, and innovation usually goes beyond current laws and rules, and breaks with exisiting ones (referring radical innovations), some times it seems that a new thing that is not characterized in any type can be blocked by laws or current rules and it cannot be really sucessful since it is tested, internalized and socially accepted and finally it makes policians to set up new rules and laws that support dose innovations, thus perhaps could it could be another factor to take in account as a big barrier for innovation? and furthermore it could make innovators spend longer time to the market or longer time to implmention. Finally I think that big companies interests in maintain current leadership and market share positions is another huge barrier, isn't it?

Perhaps we should differentiate 2 types or groups of big barrieres, (I) external barriers (environmental, status quo, ...) and (II) internal barriers (innovation culture of the company, leadership, communication, managing systems, etc..)

That's right Mr. Mir!!!!!!

You need to differenciate between internal and external barrier. And if you take into account that the innovation process is embedded in a continuous process of organizational learning which tend to an oriented change which provides an structural organizational coupling, internal and with its environment, guaranteeing its survival and development in a systematic and continuous way, through the collective learning, produced by the proper management system, enabling organizations to face the internal changes and to adjust its performance to interact with the other systems of the environment and in that way co-evolve with them.

Any barrier, external or internal, to develop organizational learning is a barrier to innovation.......

Main barriers for innovation are lack of enthusiasm, creative thinking, fear of taking risks and finance

Can I get basic papers related to team creativity and team innovation. I need them urgently .. My mail is is [email protected]

I haven't such papers, sorry for the delay answering I didn't entered in the site for a while neither realised this question, but if is not late for you, you can search for creartivity tools just like triz (Allsthuller), six thinking hats (Edward de Bono), lateral thinking, brain storming, etc..., on the other hand, fpr team innovation there is a wide amount of papers, a large quantity of contributions on innovation, models proposed, etc., but maybe nowadays the essential is Open innovation from Chesbrough.

Jones and Rickards had a very good measure of Barriers to Innovation that was published in the Creativity Research Journal. This was much better than most things cited because it was based on good theory, not speculation, and validated.

Rickards, T., & Jones, L. J. (1991). Toward the identification of situational barriers to creative behaviors: The development of a self report inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 303 316.

That is available online.

Witt and Boerkem had something in the CRJ as well, as did Amabile.

My own view--values! If an organization (or culture, or school) values creativity, it will create a market for creativity, with benefits to be creative and few "costs".

Disruptive innovation requires specific processes. It challenges the existing. It offers a new vision of business. It does not mix well with the constraints of operational teams managing existing business. In fact, they derive their excellence in understanding, acceptance of mental dominant pattern. They have so much wrong with the question, the sine qua non of any breakthrough innovation. So accepting the reality of statuco, retrograde spirit, idea submission,

Here is the best paper I know of on the topic--and that includes what I have seen reading every issue of the Creativity Research Journal and Creativity and Innovation Management:

Rickards, T., & Jones, L. J. (1991). Toward the identification of situational barriers to creative behaviors: The development of a self report inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 303 316.

The biggest barriers to innovation are a lack of curiosity and an enquiring mind as well as lack of an active imagination. This is at the individual level. Several folks have suggested that innovation is a four-phased process comprising opportunity exploration, idea generation, idea championing and idea implementation. If one cannot get past the first base, then the other phases are non-starters. The first two phases (opportunity exploration and idea generation) are generally regarded as the creativity phases; where novel ideas emerge. That said, there are other barriers in moving to each stage. From creativity to getting internal buy-in (idea championing) within the firm has its own challenges. So too to get from the buy-in state to actual implementation of a successful new marketable product or service.

I saw an interesting post, I share it here http://inarticleszone.com/?p=3330

An analysis of this question can be found in my paper: "Simulating resistances in innovation diffusion over multiple generations: an agent-based approach

for fuel-cell vehicles" published in CJOR this year. See chapter 3 and Figure 2.

Many thanks! I'll take a look on it.

The context of the workplace has a significant influence on the encouragement or discouragement of the innovative behaviour of employees.  The leaders of firms set this context and so shape employee performance and innovativeness.  Sumantra Ghoshal characterises the context of the workplace as "the smell of the place".

See video below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUddgE8rI0E

Silburn

You should review the methodology of "innovation barriers" based on heat transfer and it´s application in 200 companies in Colombia

http://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/79908

Assuming with "innovation" you are referring to the development of new products / services potentially coupled with business models that differ from the core products/services provided by the company, and not referring to operational process innovation or management innovation, then my answer would be frequently the main barrier is budgetary cycles coupled with company values such as minimum rate of return of investments. "Innovation to the Core" by Skarzynski & Gibson does a good job of addressing some of the barriers.  

Hi,

Complacency and "I am the best" attitude as major impediments for innovation.

 hope this helped

I attach a link I found recently that I hope it may help

https://paul4innovating.com/2016/05/24/coaching-helps-overcome-the-ten-innovation-intractables/

The rCAB creativity test battery has a measure of "Creative Settings and Climates." 

That measure is based on a review of Amabile and Conti (1999), Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby, and Herron (1996), Anderson and West (1998), Ekvall and Ryhammar (1999), Isaksen, Lauer, Ekvall, and Britz (2001), Rickards and Jones (1991), and Witt and Boerkem (1989).

It is called the RESC and has scales for both Barriers and for Supports. Reliabilities were quite good. 

I think you wanted to know about specific factors. I can summarize  them here very soon.  I do strongly recommend the article on Barriers by Jones and Rickards in the Creativity Research Journal. 

Dear Moises,

Now, innovation research is focusing on organizational syndromes as a huge barrier. Please check our last publication.

Regards,

Article NOT-INVENTED-HERE SYNDROME AND INNOVATION PERFORMANCE: THE C...

According to my thinking barriers of management consist following points;

i: Lack of funding: Innovation is only helpful if its implemented

Lack of funding for implementations is a barrier to innovation that exist in the organization.

Be sure that management is committed to funding ideas before beginning an innovation project.

ii: Un-analyzed Data: Innovation projects generates a lot of data especially, if they are done with crowd sourcing, without proper planning an un-analyzed data can become a major barrier to innovation projects.

Make sure, you have a plan for handling large amount of data.

iii: Lack of Follow: Innovations is not about coming up with ideas, its about implementing those ideas.

iv: There's no Time Already Busy:

When staff is already busy, you need a dedicated team for innovation.

v: No project Ownership:

The project needs clear ownership in order to be prioritized and successful.

A project team should have a clear leader.

vi: Lack of Key stakeholder contribution:

Key stakeholder need to be consulted and they need to contribute their ideas.

1) Government. Specifically when its lawmakers or elected officials are not innovators themselves. They will enact laws which are innovator killers, most often they do it not because they like it but because they don't know it will.

2) Organization leaders/policy implementer in the organizations (heads of units in the offices). Same as item 1, when they do not know what is the business of the organization, they tend to impose or develop policies that kills innovation.