Artificial intelligence is reshaping industries, yet its productivity impact remains elusive. This Innovation Insight argues that the real challenge lies in outdated models of measurement and policy. To navigate the AI era, governments need a new playbook—one that measures transformation, not just outcomes, and builds the adaptive capacity of national innovation systems.

The push for productivity in Australia must turn to *how* change is implemented. Cameron Begley and Greg Harper argue that innovation is the missing catalyst, a change that must be led from the boardroom. They revisit Porter's Value Chain to frame how boards can set the culture, risk appetite, and strategy needed to drive real productivity gains.

As AI reshapes labour markets, Australian policymakers find themselves reactive rather than strategic. Geographic isolation intensifies the risk. Political economy thinking offers better tools for governing technological transitions strategically, but these remain outside mainstream policy practice. Bringing them back requires political action: building institutions, allocating resources, and challenging existing distributions of influence.

New research examining 80+ international innovation districts reveals what drives success. From MIT's Kendall Square to Singapore's One North, thriving ecosystems integrate placemaking, economics, business development and governance. Success comes from institutional capabilities and relationships, not impressive buildings. Australian policymakers can learn from global best practices whilst avoiding common pitfalls like property-led development models

Australia’s search for an industrial policy has been long and contested. Centralised models drawn from small unitary states do not fit the realities of a vast federation with diverse regional economies. This Insight argues that the way forward is mission-oriented and place-based: the Commonwealth defines national missions and platforms, while States and regions adapt and deliver through their own specialisations, building resilience, competitiveness, and innovation.

Research analysing 26,000+ startups globally reveals founder personalities predict success with 82.5% accuracy. Teams combining diverse personality types are twice as likely to achieve successful exits. Six distinct founder personalities identified, from technical "Fighters" to business-focused "Leaders." For Australian innovation policy, this suggests moving beyond supporting individual entrepreneurs to fostering personality-diverse founding teams through redesigned policies

Australia’s innovation system is world-class in research inputs,but falters when it comes to commercial outcomes. This is our long-standing "innovation paradox." What if we could finally solve it? Drawing on the case of Kaiserslautern, a small German city transformed into a global tech hub through the establishment of Fraunhofer Institutes, this Insight makes the case for introducing Fraunhofer-style applied research institutes in Australia.

At a time when the language of innovation is everywhere yet the architecture for delivering it is so often absent, the need for honest, grounded, and practical thinking is urgent. The goal of this book is not to predict the future, but to inform and provoke those with the responsibility and agency to shape it.

Software is the invisible engine of Australia’s real economy. It silently powers everything from energy grids to medical diagnostics, mining automation to advanced manufacturing. Too often, software is left out of economic plans, policy settings, and capability strategies. It’s time to treat software as national infrastructure — a strategic enabler, not just commercial code. If we want productivity growth, energy transition, and sovereign control of critical systems, we need

For the first time in many years, there is a genuine opportunity to move beyond the oppositional politics that have hindered structural reform. This new parliamentary composition—more diverse but potentially less fractious—opens the door to building coalitions of the willing for major national reform. If we are to grasp this political moment, we must also confront the structural ambiguity that has long undermined innovation policy in this country. 

Australia's innovation policy faces a blind spot: the systematic neglect of common knowledge that enables breakthrough innovations to scale and endure. While current frameworks excel at measuring patents and R&D expenditures, they overlook the tacit expertise, institutional practices, and professional networks that serve as innovation's connective tissue. This Insight reveals how integrating common knowledge with proprietary systems can transform Australia's innovation perfor

I've been analysing Australia's innovation policy and discovered something striking: the Administrative Arrangements Order (which allocates government responsibilities) doesn't mention "innovation" anywhere. Departments are assigned responsibility for research, science, and technology, but no department is given responsibility for innovation itself. This helps explain why we keep cycling through reviews, Ministerial statements, and "renewed" strategies without delivering tran

With 30 Ministers and a growing cohort of Assistant Ministers, the Second Albanese Ministry is structured for delivery. But is that enough? This new Insight explores how administrative consolidation may be masking a retreat from bold reform, especially in research, innovation, and productivity

Innovation has shaped prosperity and progress, yet its virtues are increasingly threatened by political opportunism and corporate betrayal. How can governments, firms, and individuals protect innovation’s role as a force for good? This Insight from Professor Mark Dodgson shows the way

How can innovation policy become both empirically rigorous and open to wisdom that cannot easily be measured? This new Innovation Insight examines the strengths of evidence-based policymaking in building accountability and transparency, while also questioning whether excessive reliance on measurable outcomes risks excluding critical interdisciplinary perspectives. As research and innovation challenges become more complex, the need for richer, integrative policymaking grows.