(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 15, No. 9, 2024 21 | Page www.ijacsa.thesai.org STAR, a Universal, Repeatable, Strategic Model of Corporate Innovation for Industry Domination Ronald Berman, Nicholas Markette, Robert Vera, Tim Gehle Grand Canyon University, College of Doctoral Studies, 3300 W. Camelback Road, Phoenix, AZ. 85017, United States Abstract—Within an existing organization, internal expertise, staffing, compensation, information systems, and market focus may complicate the introduction of new ideas while culture and aversion to risk may completely derail the organizations’ ability to innovate. The STAR model for corporate innovation provides a theoretical model on how to develop and execute innovative practices to overcome these obstacles and achieve significant market penetration and value. The model is a theoretical framework that empowers organizations of all sizes to construct the necessary structures and advocacy needed to create products, services, and internal processes that enable them to dominate the industry in which they participate. The model also provides the mechanism to support the identification, acceptance, and rapid deployment of relevant new technologies that offer an opportunity to create an unfair advantage, something that is very hard to replicate. Keywords—Corporate entrepreneurship; innovation model; market dominance; competitive advantage I. INTRODUCTION Few companies have strategic architecture to promote the creation and launch of bold new innovations that lead to market dominance. Without a strategic approach, they focus on fragmented tactical isolated activities. Processes do not exist that differentiate between minor product enhancements and bold new initiatives. While every organization has a culture, few, however, encourage and support innovation by fostering input from multiple diverse stakeholders. Innovation is not rewarded. Expertise is not acknowledged. Risk-taking is discouraged. Significant value creation is not considered. Rapid development and prototyping are not permitted until lengthy specification documents are prepared. Metrics do not exist to assess innovation initiatives. Thus, companies may theoretically support the notion of innovation, but the absence of an integrated strategic model limits their ability to actually innovate. These issues cited represent a small subset of the many challenges existing organizations face when attempting to strategically organize for innovation. When considering the millions of organizations who attempt to innovate, but ultimately fail, understanding how to better conceptualize and enable innovation within an existing organization is crucially important. To begin to understand this important topic, the authors thoroughly reviewed the extant literature then created and deployed a management survey to assess corporate innovation and the necessity to create a management innovation model suitable for use by existing organizations. Survey respondents cited the benefits of innovation while also reporting the challenges encountered in their own organizations and the need to have some type of model. Based on the survey results, the authors propose the STAR model for corporate innovation described in the remainder of this paper. II. LITERATURE REVIEW The literature is replete with tactical approaches for start- up companies to create successful new products rapidly and accurately. Over the last 15 years, much of this discussion has been based on the seminal work by Eric Ries [1], who after concluding that many new products fail, proposed tactical novel approaches to product development. Instead of completing a lengthy specifications document that sometime took years to write, he proposed creating a minimum viable product based on perceived customer need. Then, through rapid development and continuous improvement, the product is refined and marketed thereby resulting in accelerated market entry. He argued that continuous improvement and focusing on delivering value to customers produces better results than the creation of traditional business plans. Ries [2] stressed the importance of employing innovation accounting and continued the use of the term pivot (introduced in 2011) as a structured course correction. He explained that a “pivot” is a change in direction informed by feedback and data from the market, customers, or other sources. In most cases, it is not a complete change in direction, instead, it is a natural part of the iterative process. Ries [3] created a tactical step-by- step guide for implementing lean methodologies in product development. He expanded the discussion and use of a minimal viable product by incorporating practical tools and techniques to create and test customer value propositions. He also supplemented his approach with the creation of a leader’s guide in which he suggests the use of innovation accounting methods to measure progress, how to manage entrepreneurial employees, and how to sustain innovation. Reis successfully proposes tactical approaches for start-ups to create new products more rapidly. Adapting this approach to an existing company has limitations because it is proposed without consideration of an organization’s infrastructure, personnel, expertise, staffing and its market focus. He addresses value creation, rapid development, hypothesis testing, and metrics. However, an existing organization is different from a new company. Ries does not address an existing organizations’ structure, reward system, company culture and of course risk aversion. Most importantly, Reis does not address how to incorporate existing company resources [4], nor does he critically examine how to scale the initiative [5]. While it is known that there are tactical targeted approaches to enable innovation in start-up ventures, it is not