2017 OECD STI Scorebeord with comments by Bruno Lindorfer


The 2017 OECD STI-Scoreboard is focussed on ICT.

The EU 28 contries do show an alarmingly poor performance in ICT in the global competition. On average more than 75% of all 2012-15 global emerging ICT technologies stem from the USA, Japan, Korea, China und Taiwan.

In Artificial Intelligence (AI) patents the EU 28 show an alarmingly poor performance.   Die „BIG 5“ (JPN, KOR, USA, TWN, CHN) do held approx. 90% of all  AI patents, globally. The small Korea alone has more AI-patents than all EU 28 all toghether! Germany (4%) and France (2%) are very poor at Artificial Intelligence patents in the global competiton.

The EU 28, too, have a very weak performance in „Machine Learning“ (ML).  The USA are the global leader regardgin „top-cited scientific publications related to machine learning“. CHINA follows on rank 2.

Wachsender Ingenieurmangel in Österreich




Dipl. Ing. Bruno Lindorfer: 

„Technik und Ingenieure in Österreich – Zwischen Ablehnung und völliger Ignoranz“


In der Präsentation wird anhand von Fakten und Beispielen dargelegt, dass die Technikfeindlichkeit in Österreich besonders groß ist.

Es werden die 10 Haupt-Gründe für diese hohe Technikfeindlichkeit und damit den zunehmenden Ingenieurmangel in Österreich aufgezeigt.

Zum Thema „Technikfeindlichkeit“ und „Ingenieurmangel“ werden globale Vergleiche dargestellt, u. a. zwischen USA, Deutschland, China, Korea, Österreich etc.

Es wird dargestellt, dass die „Akademisierung“ global seit 1980 massiv zugenommen hat (d.h. der Anteil der jungen Menschen, die zumindest einen tertiären Bachelorabschluss haben). Allerdings hat sich bei diesen global stark steigenden Bachelorzahlen in den hochentwickelten, reichen OECD‑Industriestaaten das Verhältnis von MINT‑Absolventen/ NON‑MINT‑Absolventen deutlich verringert, d.h. zuungunsten der MINT‑Absolventen / verschlechtert. In den aufstrebende Schwellenländern – wie CHINA und Indien – war der Anteile der MINT‑Absolventen in den letzten 20 Jahre noch sehr hoch (ca. 30% an allen Bachelor enrolments), geht aber seit ca. 2015 nun auch zurück.




 2017_05_IAMOT 2017 Lindorfer_Paper_FINAL


In the paper the two aspects of Management of Technologies (“MoT”) are lined out:

a) Management of Technologies for Regions and Countries

b) Management of the Technology Portfolio for Enterprises

Strategic MoT for regions and countries is done to reinforce the competitiveness of the region in the ever harder global completion to ensure employment, the standard of living, social welfare and the quality of living (work‐life balance).

As far as the “MoT” for enterprises is concerned, it is good to remember that there is but one reason for innovation: TO MAKE PROFIT! Profit is the difference between the prices that can be achieved and the production costs. Better (premium) prices can be achieved with Product Innovation, the production costs can be lowered with Process Innovation.

In two chapters of this paper the “Most important Success Factors in Innovation of Technical Products in Enterprises” are described, in another chapter the “Major widest spread Misconceptions in Innovation of Technical Products” are line out. Within these two chapters many alleged doctrines of innovation management are disrupted! For example the “obsession for cooperation in innovation” is rebutted, but also some fairy tales about “Technology Transfer” and other myths of MoT. On the other hand the importance of some old, very basic rules for success in innovation are brought back into memory, like the “PIMS‐Concept”of the 1970‐ies , or the findings of some famous professors for innovation, Dr. Ansoff , Dr. Prahalad as well as Prof. Kondratjew in the 20th century

It is shown that Management of Technologies (“MoT”) with Digital Technologies is no Rocket Science but a professional task for Innovation Professionals ‐ no more –no less!

According to the author, much less MoT‐projects will fail in the 21rd DIGITAL Century NOT because of NOT‐knowing the specific rules for innovation of digital technologies, but because the new young CTOs in the 21rd century do not any longer remember the “Lessons Learned” for successful innovation of the 20th century!

It is ‐ however –lined out in the paper that for “INDUSTRY 4.0”, one major application of digital technologies, Europe is falling behind the global leaders in terms of IPR relevant for  INDUSTRY 4.0. A list with the global TOP 40 enterprises regarding IPR relevant for INDUSTRY 4.0 is presented and discussed in the paper.

At the end the author outlines his “Twelve Commandments to increase the Probability for Success in Innovation” – as his legacy from his 18 year experience in innovation as CTO of large global Engineering Industries!