Knowledge processing and ecosystem co-creation for process innovation: Managing joint knowledge processing in process innovation projects

Process innovation drives industrial competitiveness and sustainability but remains elusive since it requires co-creation and the sharing of idiosyncratic design knowledge in ecosystems of providers and customers of process equipment. This paper investigates how firms can manage knowledge processing through co-creation in joint process innovation projects. Analysis of cross-comparative case studies –including nine industrial ecosystem actors – identifies three types of technological challenge (complexity, novelty and customization) that creates knowledge-processing requirements (uncertainty, equivocality) during the value co-creation process. To manage these knowledge-processing requirements, this paper explains how three joint knowledge-processing strategies (joint problem solving, open communication and end-user involvement) help ecosystem partners make sense of the requirements and demands in process innovation. In this context, the procurement approach (such as contracting and relationship development) helps to facilitate higher levels of joint knowledge processing, drawing on the diverse knowledge of ecosystem actors to secure successful process-innovation outcomes. The present study contributes to the emerging literature on co-creation in process innovation by developing a framework that highlights the knowledge-processing dynamics in ecosystem relationships for process innovation. The implications for management extends to a practical tool that guides project managers in ensuring appropriate levels of joint knowledge processing among ecosystem actors.

     

Innovation ecosystems as a service: Exploring the dynamics between corporates & start-ups in the context of a corporate coworking space

The desire to create innovative organizational spaces has led to various instantiations of innovation ecosystems. Towards this direction, there is a growing interest in establishing corporate innovation ecosystems in the form of ‘corporate coworking spaces’ (CWS). From a relational ontological standpoint, this study builds on the collaborative spaces literature with the aim to investigate the emerging dynamics between corporates and start-ups in an innovation ecosystem. Through an abductive research strategy (ARS) as well as service design methods, we explore how co-creation between corporates and start-ups emerges (or not) in an innovation ecosystem that serves as a collaborative space in Denmark. Our empirical findings challenge the mostly overenthusiastic connotations and thus the study contributes to the critical coworking research stream. More specifically, we give emphasis on the co-constructive entanglement of socio-spatial arrangements and we propose a framework for revisiting the design of CWS through 1) balancing the engineered and evolving parts of the ecosystem, 2) facilitating stakeholder alignment, 3) adopting a service-oriented approach and 4) developing inclusive strategies. Apart from the implications for scholars and practitioners who study and design CWS, we argue that future research would especially benefit from building on a service-oriented approach of innovation ecosystems and we call for more interdisciplinary research.     

Renewing a dysfunctional innovation ecosystem: The case of the Lalejin ceramics and pottery

The innovative output of nations is partly explained by the strengths of its innovation ecosystems. The Iranian Lalejin city has been home to a ceramics and pottery industry for at least 200 years. Despite showing resilience over the years and occasional success; e.g. the 2016 “World Pottery Capital” designation; the industry is facing plummeting demand for consumer artifacts and rivalry from competitors. Innovation is the key to survival and sustainability but innovation capacity is low. This study adopts the “innovation ecosystem” lens to address the problems. Interviews provide information for understanding the historical evolution of the industry, mapping the status quo, highlighting the barriers and drivers of innovation, and crafting a renewal plan. The proposed renewal process pools regional authority, expertise, and stakeholders to craft an effective and sustainable solution. While the study does not proffer a new theory of ecosystem renewal, there are important implications for research and practice. For practitioners, understanding the ecosystem evolution and the cultural underpinnings of the observations will help craft a detailed, sustainable ecosystem renewal plan. A cultural turnaround program may also be needed. For researchers, linking cultural characteristics, ecosystem evolution and outcomes is a viable and fruitful research avenue.     

Dynamic capabilities for orchestrating digital innovation ecosystems: Conceptual integration and research opportunities

While most previous research on orchestration of digital innovation ecosystems has examined governance structures, our knowledge of relevant dynamic capabilities remains abstract and lacks conceptual integration. This imbalance limits current knowledge to the extent that digital innovation ecosystem orchestration is mainly considered a structural issue. Based on a synthesis of related literature, we present a novel dynamic capabilities framework that builds on sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring capabilities for digital innovation ecosystem orchestration. We differentiate two major challenges addressed in orchestrating such ecosystems: component challenges and complement challenges. We propose six concrete routines that collectively help address these challenges. These include co-creating architectural knowledge, cultivating boundary objects, renegotiating system integration, screening complementors, co-specializing interfaces, and restructuring complementarities. We illustrate each of these routines with examples from the automotive sector. In addition, we sketch trajectories for future research both at the level of the individual routines and at the level of the overall framework.     

Development of a multi-dimensional measure for assessing entrepreneurial ecosystems

ABSTRACT

Researchers and theorist have put great effort into defining and examining entrepreneurial ecosystems and how business clusters develop in certain regions. Favourable entrepreneurship ecosystems are thought to drive business and innovation. However, a commonly accepted measure of entrepreneurial ecosystem favourableness has yet to be developed. The purpose of the present research is to contribute to ecosystems research by taking a two-study approach to developing and validating a perceptual measure of entrepreneurial ecosystems. The perceptual measure is based upon prior conceptual frameworks that outline ecosystems. In developing this measure, we are able to further unpack and illuminate the factor structure of ecosystems, the results of which have direct scholarly and practitioner uses.     

Towards an open innovation ecosystem in the cultural industry: The bright side of trust and the dark side of measurement

The concept of open innovation ecosystems is receiving increasing attention in academic literature, but its application to the cultural industries and, more specifically, to philanthropically-funded cultural initiatives, remains a largely unexplored domain. This study, leveraging on in-depth interviews with stakeholders, observation and immersion in the field, employs primary qualitative data from a philanthropically-funded cultural initiative and applies the ecosystem-as-structure conceptual framework to study the factors that have enabled a nascent open innovation ecosystem in the cultural industries to emerge. Findings point to a number of essential components and characteristics of the emergent ecosystem that are crucial elements of success in the view of key stakeholders. The findings consequently shed light on the managerial practices and strategy that facilitate the success of a philanthropically-funded artistic initiative which fosters the creation of a new open innovation arts ecosystem.     

Charting service ecosystems flexibility: A museum setting

The service ecosystems perspective has rarely been applied in literature tackling the nonprofit and voluntary sectors. Service ecosystems are defined as self-adjusting systems of resource-integrating actors connected by shared institutional arrangements and mutual value creation. By addressing service ecosystems flexibility (i.e., the ability of service ecosystems to adjust to changes), this article seeks to provide a framework that charts service ecosystems flexibility and explains its pillars, as well as the ways in which new technologies affect visitors and arts. The study focuses on service ecosystems changes initiated by technology, visitors, and organizers, aimed at increasing the level of museum visitors' experience. The study is performed in a service ecosystem comprising a sculpture arts exhibition and its online extensions in the form of Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter accounts. Collected data consist of interviews with the exhibition visitors and organizers, participative observations performed in the exhibition context, and online posts and media coverage related to the exhibition. The research process is iterative and abductive, continuously combining insights that emerge from the literature and the analyzed data through triangulation. The main findings emphasize organizers' pivotal role as the actor that orchestrates value cocreation in the service ecosystem by steering this process based on emerging changes. Additionally, the findings flesh out the role of technology in a service ecosystem and offer a more comprehensive view of service ecosystems flexibility.     

Development of academic entrepreneurship in a non-mature context: the role of the university as a hub-organisation

This paper focuses on how the evolving roles of a university and its Technology Transfer Office (TTO) are stimulating academic entrepreneurship in a non-mature entrepreneurial ecosystem. A more mature entrepreneurial ecosystem was built gradually by these actors through their progressive creation of innovation intermediaries and coordination among the local players involved in the creation of start-ups. We analyse how the university became a hub organisation. We use the case of the University of Strasbourg to show that the university contributed to the development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem by acting as a boundary spanner and by building and orchestrating the network of the stakeholders in the local system of innovation. This ‘hub’ university became a leading regional organisation at the political level. The TTO played a central role in supporting academic entrepreneurship at the operational level based on its evolution from a revenue maximising model to a model that takes account of social and economic regional development. The progressive adoption of a more selective model of start-up creation requires good coordination among the local actors. Over time, the TTO’s boundary spanning function increased to encompass the development of operational network building and orchestrating functions.     

Knowledge flow and inter-firm networks: The influence of network resources,spatial proximity and firm size

The objective of this paper is to analyse the characteristics and nature of the networks that firms utilize to access knowledge and facilitate innovation. The paper draws on the notion of network resources, distinguishing two types: social capital–consisting of the social relations and networks held by individuals; and network capital–consisting of the strategic and calculative relations and networks held by firms. The methodological approach consists of a quantitative analysis of data from a survey of firms operating in knowledge-intensive sectors of activity. The key findings include: social capital investment is more prevalent among firms frequently interacting with actors from within their own region; social capital investment is related to the size of firms; firm size plays a role in knowledge network patterns; and network dynamism is an important source of innovation. Overall, firms investing more in the development of their inter-firm and other external knowledge networks enjoy higher levels of innovation. It is suggested that an over-reliance on social capital forms of network resource investment may hinder the capability of firms to manage their knowledge networks. It is concluded that the link between a dynamic inter-firm network environment and innovation provides an alternative thesis to that advocating the advantage of network stability.     

Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination

Publications pushing the “innovation ecosystem” meme have added valuable dimensions to the economic development discussion. The phrase has captured the imagination of policy makers and has motivated public initiatives of substantial magnitude. This paper reviews the concept of innovation ecosystems as it is set forth in the academic and trade literature, and asks, “What is gained from adding ‘eco-’ to our treatment of national and regional innovation systems?”The answer is, “Very little, and the risks outweigh the benefits.” Innovation ecosystem is not yet a clearly defined concept, much less a theory. Moreover, the idea carries pitfalls, notably its over-emphasis on market forces, and its flawed analogy to natural ecosystems.The prospect that the phrase “innovation ecosystem” is here to stay, in investment and economic development circles, implies a research gap, and indicates caution in using the phrase in rigorous research. The paper describes the gap, indicates directions for bridging it, and offers recommendations for prudent use of “ecosystem” terminology.     

Small-medium enterprises and innovative startups in entrepreneurial ecosystems: exploring an under-remarked relation

International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal - To date, contributions in the field of entrepreneurial ecosystems have mainly focused on definitions, actors, key attributes, consequences on...     

Coping with coopetition—Facing dilemmas in cooperation for sustainable development: The case of the Dutch smart grid industry

This paper is amongst the first to examine coopetition strategy for sustainable development at the network level. Companies who want to successfully implement complex innovative technologies that support sustainable development need to collaborate with other actors of the innovation ecosystem, including their competitors, so that they can develop standards, interoperable products, pool knowledge, and resources and bundle forces to compete against other technologies. Collaboration with competitors brings benefits, but also many risks. We investigated how firms cope with these risks when establishing an innovation ecosystem to implement a new technology in society. We conducted research in the Dutch smart grids sector and explored how these firms minimize inherent risks of coopetition. We found that system‐building actors in the Dutch smart grid field not only minimize inherent risks, but from the start of their collaboration they implement so‐called enablers to prevent these risks upfront.     

From circular business models to circular business ecosystems

The circular economy aims to minimize resource inputs and waste and emission outputs of the economy and its organizational subsystems. This can benefit both financial and sustainability performance of companies. To analyze industrial implementation of the concept, the prevalent unit of analysis on the firm level is currently the circular business model. Our investigation of nine Swedish biogas companies and one branch organization indicates a range of conceptual shortcomings that challenges this approach. Our comparative case analysis points towards circular ecosystems being a more appropriate concept to describe the high level of coordination between different stakeholders necessary to implement circular systems. This increases the suitability to analyze, plan, and communicate circular economy systems on an organizational level, especially if value chain integration is low. An ecosystem perspective can thus support innovation and entrepreneurship in the context of the circular economy.     

Grand Societal Challenges and Responsible Innovation

Grand societal challenges (GSCs) represent complex, multi-level, multi-dimensional problems that require concerted efforts by various actors – public, private, and non-profit – to be successfully addressed. Businesses – alone or in conjunction with governmental and non-profit organizations – are relevant actors in this regard, as they represent a source of innovation. Responsible innovation (RI) is a framework that allows for the governance and evaluation of innovations with regard to their potential harmful consequences and positive contributions to societal challenges. Moreover, it stipulates that this evaluation process should be facilitated by appropriate governance structures at various levels. The aim of this article is to expand theorizing on GSCs and RI and to encourage research that explores their links. We outline pertinent characteristics of GSCs that make current conceptualizations of corporate social responsibility and social innovation limited in addressing GSCs. We explicate the reflexive and participative capacities of RI governance as a complementary and promising way forward. Finally, we introduce the contributions to this Special Issue as illustrations of relevant theoretical and empirical groundwork around GSCs and RI, and outline the agenda for future research.     

Building responses to sustainable development challenges: A multistakeholder collaboration framework and application to climate change

The affirmation of open innovation and collaborative systems is enabling unprecedented opportunities to create business value while facilitating multistakeholder conversation on sustainability issues. In particular, platform‐based models are emerging as organization archetypes able to facilitate cooperative dynamics among industrial actors, policy makers, academicians, scientists, and citizens. In this article, we use interdisciplinary business management and collaborative innovation literature to build the conceptual framework of a multisided platform as a collaboration environment gathering actors willing to define responses to sustainable development challenges. We present five dimensions or “genes,” that is, the focus and strategic intent or orientation of the platform (what), the participating sides, actors and groups (who), the actions, flows and coordination mechanisms (how), and the value drivers, benefits and externalities (why), and the rules regulating the affiliation and interaction processes (governance). We also present and discuss 30 subtopics or management items that are associated with the five dimensions defined. We then apply the conceptual model to analyze a case in the climate change endeavor and to show how competitive and cooperative dynamics can be virtuously integrated to provide individual‐ and company‐driven responses to a timely socioenvironmental issue. The article provides a new perspective on collaboration to enhance social development, and it offers theoretical and practitioner insights for a broad interdisciplinary audience including scholars, practitioners, business, and platform managers.     

利益相关者品牌生态系统维度及关键要素研究

构建利益相关者品牌生态系统,识别关键因子,目的在于对复杂的品牌关系提供内涵解释,为品牌生存与发展提供理论支持。本文在品牌生态理论框架下,采用文献分析、深度访谈等研究方法,识别了品牌利益相关者关系的构成因子,发展了各维度及所属因子的测量量表,并以品牌营销者为调查对象进行了实证研究,通过探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析,逐步提炼了品牌生态系统的关键因子,最终形成了由外部环境关系、支持者关系、合作者关系、消费者关系和品牌社群关系等构成的利益相关者五维度品牌生态系统。最后,建议品牌管理者从"媒体的多元化运作""区域政府沟通""代理商对服务满意""代言人与品牌匹配""成分品牌嵌入"及"社群关系维护"等关键要素层面分析品牌关系和竞争态势,找到有利于自身品牌的市场定位方向,集中有限资源,通过优化关键因子,进行利基市场的竞争。     

Some Basic Issues Related to Contextual Performance and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Human Resource Management

This article examines some basic issues that might pose conceptual challenges in applying ideas related to contextual performance and organizational citizenship behavior to human resource management. It considers labeling issues and differences between the origins and definitions of the terms, contextual performance, and organizational citizenship behavior, and argues that the labeling issues are less important than careful definition and measurement of the behavioral dimensions that these terms embrace. It also considers the conceptual status of organizational citizenship behavior and contextual performance as latent constructs or aggregate constructs according to distinctions presented by Law, Wong, and Mobley. And finally, it explores questions related to consequences of behavioral patterns connoted by these terms for organizational effectiveness and individual motivation, job satisfaction, and commitment.     

Innovation, Identities and Resistance: The Social Construction of An Innovation Network

This paper explores the process of diffusion of a socio-technical innovation among workers of a large microelectronics firm. Actor–network theory (ANT), which draws on the sociology of science and technology, is applied to the analysis of socio-technical innovation in order to understand the actions of creating and putting the actors' arguments into action. Actors constructed and organized these arguments with the aim of diffusing innovation among workers whose support was essential to the project's success. The authors of the innovation project wanted to change the state of relations between different actors. In the present study, the aligment of identities was established according to the criteria defined by the managers and engineers but the expected benefits of the innovation, in this case, technology and teamwork, were not automatically accepted. Network analysis reveals how persuasive arguments that repudiate the old reality and justify steps to create the new reality are constructed. This article will reveal how innovation is constituted and the form it takes by following the chain of arguments and the responses of the actors involved.     

Caught in the web: the dual nature of networks and its consequences

Relations between a firm and organizations in its political and economic environment are increasingly seen as crucial for the successful functioning of that firm, both in the narrow economic sense, and at the broader level of reaching sustainability. However, attention seems to be focused on the positive qualities of such networks of organizations. In this paper it is argued that networks of organizations have a dual nature, and do not just provide possibilities for collective learning and problem solving. At the same time, such networks consist of dependency relations that provoke power strategies, which result in outcomes reflecting the distribution of power rather than leading to an optimal result. By means of a case study, this dual nature is explored. It is shown that the actors involved in the process of developing an alternative to the disposable milk carton in the Netherlands are embedded in dependency relations. Several of these actors attempt to create problem solving networks, and succeed. However, the already existing dependency relations between the actors involved influence the direction, outcome, and timing within these networks. Using criteria for network performance, this dual nature of networks is assessed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.     

Innovation and entrepreneurship in the academic setting: a systematic literature review

In the knowledge society, universities have assumed new missions and relations in order to contribute to economic and social development, while preserving their own sustainability. This article aims to explore scientific literature on innovation and entrepreneurship in the academic setting, describing how the field is organized, main terms and definitions, theoretical frameworks, and empirical models, in order to direct future research. A systematic literature review was conducted, in which articles indexed at Web of Science were initially submitted to a bibliometric analysis. Then, the content of a set of articles best fitting the objectives of the study was analyzed. Bibliometric analysis shows an increasing literature, with publications over more than 40 years. There are studies from many disciplines, with those in business and economics prevailing, mainly related to management and originating from the USA and Europe. Content analysis shows a fragmented literature, with definitions not showing a clear relationship between innovation and entrepreneurship, or their use within universities in coherence with their traditional definitions. Both theoretical frameworks and empirical models are very heterogeneous, but four groups of studies were identified based on their theoretical frameworks, and also based on their empirical models. With only a few exceptions, empirical models do not share many components and variables, and there are no clear boundaries between the different models. Despite the increasing literature, it is still fragmented and undertheorized, requiring more systematic and holistic studies, considering both the economic and the social aspects of innovation and entrepreneurship within universities.