Translated with DeepL
Switzerland has once again taken first place in an international innovation ranking, namely that of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). For the fifteenth time in a row, Switzerland has taken first place in this ranking.should we now smugly pat ourselves on the back as proud "innovation world champions" - or would it be wise to look at what is actually measured in these innovation rankings?
The WIPO ranking determines 78 individual indices and calculates the overall index by averaging them. The majority of these indices relate to so-called "innovation inputs", such as government spending on education or the proportion of knowledge-intensive jobs. The number of patents or expenditure on software, for example, are measured as "innovation outputs". A good example of such an innovation output is domestic feature film production, measured in feature film minutes per capita. What is not taken into account, however, is how many viewers watched these feature films in the first place.
This is precisely the main problem with many innovation indices: they take innovation output into account, but not its success with customers, and only this determines the economic success of innovation efforts. It's great that Switzerland gets such good marks for innovation diligence, but the actual innovation performance is the deciding factor!
So let's be honest and not lie to ourselves. As a country with few raw materials, we have no choice: we have to hold our own against our international competitors in the innovation competition. And that is why we need to be able to properly measure, compare and improve our actual innovative strength. After all, in the high jump, the winner is not the one who gets the most run-ups, but the one who jumps the highest. Accordingly, we need to measure our innovative strength with indices that assess our economic performance and not our diligence.
The decisive factor is therefore whether innovations actually find their way onto the market, generate added value and thus secure jobs and prosperity. Switzerland invests heavily in knowledge, but too many stages of value creation take place outside our country.
A look at the current political discussions shows that various approaches are being examined to narrow this gap between innovation effort and innovation impact. These include, for example, the motion to strengthen research, development and production. Additional deductions for production costs and targeted tax credits for research and development could create a political lever that not only enables innovation, but also deliberately anchors it domestically.
If we no longer want to be satisfied with indicators that mask our real problem, we must also change the framework conditions. Incentives are needed to strengthen the phase that is barely visible in the rankings but is crucial for national competitiveness.
In short, if you want a strong innovation nation, you can't just measure what looks good. They must promote what works for the location. The combination of more precise innovation indicators and cleverly set tax policy incentives thus opens up a twofold opportunity: firstly, Switzerland can assess its innovative strength more realistically, and secondly, it creates the prerequisites for developing this strength economically.
Read the small print! Make sure that you really measure and compare the innovation indicators that are important for you - and for our country. It is much more difficult to measure the impact of innovation than the innovation effort. Therefore, make sure that you use studies that deal with the difficult aspects, even if the sparse data available only allows for an incomplete analysis. See, for example, the SATW study "Innovation Power Analysis of the Swiss Manufacturing Industry" (as of 2024). Ultimately, the old insight applies to innovation rankings and the conclusions drawn from them: honesty is the best policy.
The SATW offers room for different professional perspectives. This contribution represents a personal categorisation of the specialist.
