日本語 English 中文 한국어
| ◆Contact Information
Faculty Profile
・Profile
・Messages
・Learning Style
Faculty Profile
■Profile



Tatsuhiko INOUE, Ph. D.

Professor, School of Commerce,
Waseda University

ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT
・Professor, Waseda University, School of Commerce, 2008-Present
・Senior Fellow, The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, 2012-2014
・Faculty Fellow, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry, 2011-2013
・Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs Waseda University, School of Commerce, 2008-2010
・Assistant Dean, Waseda University, Graduate School of Commerce, 2006-2008
・Associate Professor, Waseda University, School of Commerce, 2003-2008
・Associate Professor, Hiroshima University, Graduate School of Social Science, 2001-2003
・Lecturer, Osaka University of Economics School of Business Administration, 1999-2001
・Lecturer, Surugadai University School of Economics, 1997-1999

ACADEMIC BACKGROUNG
・Ph.D. in Business Administration, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration,
Kobe, Japan, 1997. Dissertation: A Study of Business System Evolution.
・Master of Business Administration, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration,
Kobe, Japan, 1994
・Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Yokohama National University,
School of Business Administration, Yokohama, Japan, 1992

ACADEMIC HONORS AND AWARDS
・Best Paper Award 2003 in Japan Society for Management Information

RESEARCH INTERESTS
・Business Model Design
・Cross-border Transfer of Business Models
・Value Creation Systems (Business Systems)
・Business Ecosystems
■Messages for Prospective Students
Ever since joining Waseda University, I have gone through various trials and tribulations regarding what ideal higher education should be. I have refused to confine myself to the world of academia; participating in new product and new business contests, actually partaking in the development of things, and conducting investigations in a way customarily favored by journalists.

However, I have come to realize that, in the end, the best thing to do at a university is research. Why? Because I discovered that research is not only useful to the researcher, but is also of great service to the practitioner as well.

University research first entails the setting up of a research problem that would have value if solved. Next, an overview of previous research is conducted; a hypothesis is formed, and then analyzed by actually performing interviews and building databases.

There are 3 methods to guide new knowledge. 1) To add new insight by relying on existing research, 2) contradict existing research by advancing an antithesis, or 3) drawing a new conclusion from a higher plane of understanding.

Even in new product development it is exactly the same: an appropriate theme is decided on; existing products are thoroughly comprehended; a hypothesis about a product which will add new value is formed; actual market testing is conducted; and the new product is created. This process also pertains to adding new insight or creating something at a higher plane of understanding.

Both research and new product development require the support of data before there can be any meaningful output: that is, both must possess value for there to be meaning. The only difference between the two is that the value of research is determined at academic conferences while the value of a product is determined by the market. In terms of creating something new, the process is not all that different.

If this is the case, a university becomes an opportune place to acquire this proficiency. If you think about it, the reason why universities have been acknowledged for centuries may be exactly because this is so.


■Learning Style
In our laboratory, we adopt the producing of a master thesis in order to acquire proficiency in practical knowledge creation. You will acquire the methods of practical knowledge creation within a community of practice environment known as a seminar effectively implemented in a Japanese university setting.

A community of practice environment is different from coursework found in an American university, or the 1 on 1 dialogue with faculty found in England. It is a method where each member of the laboratory understands the other member's research and helps each other in a cooperative fashion. In this learning method, it is not adequate to simply be competent in one's own research.
For a community of practice to work, it is undesirable for the research themes to be too similar or too unrelated. One reason why is because it is necessary to align the terminology and knowledge base to an extent. Specifically, the following 4 principles will facilitate our mutual learning.

1) Themes in the laboratory will not directly compete with others

2) The basic mindset and concept of the research will be shared to promote smooth communication

3) An environment of mutual learning will be created


4) Each will have a research theme that will be pursued hands on and with the insight of others

By having your own theme, it becomes possible to learn by observing the successes and mistakes of other member's research. Comments by other members won't end as merely criticisms of faults or inadequacies of your research, but will be followed up with proactive support by offering concrete ideas to improve your work. You will also have the opportunity to think deeply about the themes of members like it was your own. In this way, you will learn about as many themes as there are members.

It goes without saying that this experience will be fruitful for those who will progress into doctorate programs and eventually become professional researchers, but also for those who will graduate with a masters degree to tackle the corporate world.


Copyright(C)2013- INOUE SEMINAR