Innovation Processes In Networks Research Articles

New forms of innovation: critical issues for future pathways

Purpose Although new forms of innovation such as open innovation, user innovation or crowdsourcing have been intensively discussed in the past decade, there is little systematic exploration of their wider positive and negative effects on economy, society and environment. Based on the recent debate in the literature and findings from a European foresight project, this paper aims to discuss the critical aspects of new forms of innovation such as increased participation, the use of information technologies and the increased pace of innovation and their challenges for innovation policy. Design/methodology/approach Based on a collection of international practice examples from industry and society, innovation visions have been generated and assessed by different experts across whole Europe. Findings A generic trend identified can be best described as open, distributed and networked innovation process. Although many new innovation models accelerate the innovation process, there are also some counter trends which in some fields may slow down the innovation process. In addition, the increased use of web-based tools, algorithms and information technologies raises new questions concerning the protection of intellectual property and data security. This reveals new questions for policymaking, which have not gained much attention on the European level so far. Originality/value Although there is an established discourse around potentially negative impacts of the outcomes of the innovation processes notably in the field of technology assessment, innovation capacity is usually seen as a desirable characteristic of innovation systems. In this paper, the possible negative aspects of new innovation models, an issue hardly addressed in the innovation literature so far, are discussed.

Collaborative Innovation in Food SMEs: A Practice Approach

The work focuses on the collaborative innovation. It emphasizes the role of relationship and of the resource integration process for the development on innovation and aims to define a practice to support management in the development and fostering of networked innovation process in SMEs. This paper addresses the topic of collaborative innovation in the food SMEs by presenting the results of two studies. The study 1 concerns empirical evidences from 155 Italian food SMEs. It describes the state of the art of the innovation in the Italian food SMEs context. The study 2 relates an in-depth analysis of 10 Italian food SMEs. It frames the innovative behaviour of the firms investigated according to the practice theory.

Facilitating innovation in networks composed of non-mandated relations

IntroductionThe concept of networking has gained significant attention from those involved in the comprehension of innovation processes. The ability of inter- firm networks to innovate may be considered an outcome of the energy actors intentionally inject into the process (Thorsrud, 1972). It is well-established knowledge that organisational development can be regarded as political processes in which actors' ability and willingness to exercise power plays a significant role (Clegg, 2002; Coopy, 1995; Coopey & Burgoyne, 2000; Elg & Johansson, 1997; Lukes, 2005). In the same way as the most powerful actor influences the outcomes of organisational development, innovation in networks can be understood as a consequence of interaction among mutual and conflicting interests (Elg & Johansson, 1997; Fox, 2000; Hâkansson & Johanson, 1988). Bringing in a perspective on political dynamics in inter-firm networks allows one to critique of the contemporary literature on networks, for such literature has a tendency to overlook how interdependencies become organised and established, due to willingness and ability of individuals to influence the process (e.g. Elg & Johansson, 1997; Foucault, 1980; Fox, 2000; Swan & Scarbrough, 2005; Vince, 2001). The question of how to utilise the participant's interests to speed up the process of innovation in inter-networks is fundamental to developing industrial clusters and firms' that prevail in the era of hyper-competition (Grabher, 1993).Power has traditionally been perceived in structural terms, i.e., as the constant influence party A holds over party B. If we, on the other hand, learn from the Machiavellian approach, power may be regarded as something that is distributed and exists as a consequence of actors' changing abilities and motivations to mobilise others for shared ends. Leaning from this perspective, power is not a constant force, but rather something that circulates due to the fact that different individuals' possess different intentions and abilities to explicate the interests of others who may not strive towards the same goals. Ideas stemming from Actor Network Theory have made substantial contributions to our understanding of how innovation processes in networks of nonmandated exchange relations materialise, due to the ability of strategic actors to set agendas and provide the underlying energy and reasoning required to obtain particular achievements (Callon, 1986). This perspective adheres well to the notion that power operates discursively, and that social transformation can be regarded as a consequence of the way in which words are used and arguments conveyed (Foucault, 1980). The study of how power operates discursively may be an appropriate approach for explaining the process that transforms networking into innovative, interdependent, and complementary roles. Although the structural characteristics of innovative networks have been thoroughly scrutinised, there is a relative lack of understanding of the methods and practices that transform non-mandated exchange relations into innovative and sustainable business networks.This paper, which builds on a seven years endeavour into facilitating an inter-firm network, argues that to speed up innovation processes among actors neither linked by value chain nor other task dependencies, requires facilitation that makes dialogical inquiries a part of the participant's everyday conversations. Building on Wittgenstein (1953 [1997]), language simulates reality and our ability to present meaningful pictures of this reality depends on how words are used in accordance with the rules embedded in a particular language game. Wittgenstein never provided any definition of languagegames. What he does, however, is emphasise the relational aspects of language-games and the situational dependence of language. Accordingly, meaning is difficult to develop solely by conceptualising a particular phenomenon, but develops on the background of a specific context where the vocabulary is taken into use (Wittgenstein, 1953 [1997]). …

Interview: Paul Paulus on Group Creativity

Paul Paulus is Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington. Paul Paulus's research interests revolve around Group Creativity: On the one hand, creative processes are often conceptualized as individual‐level phenomena. On the other hand, complex problems in innovation management often need the collaboration of various experts to create novel solutions. Interestingly, although common sense suggests that individuals are more creative in a group context, research indicates that this is oftentimes not the case. The question on how to structure creative processes in groups in such a way that groups can actually benefit from their creative potential is therefore crucial. Paul Paulus has spent much of his academic career addressing this intriguing question. He and his research team have discovered many factors that influence group creativity and have been able to demonstrate conditions under which group interaction enhances creativity. For the past eight years he has been working with a multidisciplinary team to better understand the cognitive, neural and social factors that underlie the group creative process (Paulus et al., ). They are presently funded on a three year project to investigate innovation processes in networks.

Innovation futures: new forms of innovation and their implications for innovation policy

While new organisational models of innovation were intensively discussed in the last decade, there is little systematic exploration concerning their potential for different sectors and areas and their wider implications for economy and society. We present findings from an international foresight project which analyses and discusses the emergence and diffusion of new innovation patterns and their consequences for innovation policy. Based on a collection of international practice examples from industry and society, innovation visions have been generated and assessed involving different experts from all over Europe. A generic trend identified can be best described as open, distributed and networked innovation process which is to a certain extent already addressed in current innovation policy making. However, other trends such as the increased use of information technologies or new spatial shifts related to organising and doing innovation have rather been underestimated so far and will require new policy responses in the future.

Asymmetric relationships in networked food innovation processes

Purpose – In innovation networks, SMEs' capability to innovate is both enhanced and restricted by more powerful or better positioned partners. The purpose of this article is to ask how managers of processing SME suppliers in Italian and Swiss food innovation networks experience their relationships with innovation network partners and how they configure modes of interaction with them.Design/methodology/approach – A series of problem centered interviews with managers of six Swiss and five Italian food sector SMEs was conducted.Findings – Findings describe how SME managers in the two regions perceive the nature of interaction as well as benefits and disadvantages resulting from asymmetric relationships within networked innovation process. Differences in the perception frame and their impact on behavior in innovation networks are analyzed.Research limitations/implications – The data are only valid for the food sector in the two regional markets. Furthermore, this paper only displays the perspective of manager...

The contrary forces of innovation: A conceptual model for studying networked innovation processes

In this paper, we argue that industrial innovation processes can productively be analysed as consisting of two sub-processes that over time create and mobilise contrary forces within both internal and external interactions of the innovation project. One of these forces emerges from the process of mobilising resources, activities, and actors in ensuring commitments to the project over time. The other is the process of explorative learning, which continues to create revised or even new propositions about the realities of the project and its opportunities. We argue that this analytical distinction permits us to expand our understanding of how friction forces develop over time in business networks (Håkansson & Waluszewski, 2001a,b), the patterns of divergence and convergence in innovation processes as identified by Van de Ven et al. (1999) and the processes of “path creation through mindful deviation” as argued by Garud and Karnøe (2001).

MANAGING AND OPTIMIZING INNOVATION PROCESSES IN COLLABORATIVE AND VALUE CREATING NETWORKS

Management and optimization of innovation processes are highly important for every company that depends on keeping up with market and technological evolution. Methods for the managing and optimizing of innovation processes in networks are just beginning to arise. Among different ways of creating value, successfully managed innovation processes bear the highest overall potential: On the operational level, it creates immediate value in terms of new products while on the strategic level, survival and competitiveness of the company can be assured by creating long-range, intangible values like technology leadership and a secured position in an ever-changing market environment. Therefore, innovation in networks has entered the spotlight of scientific research and industrial application. It requires new managing concepts and sophisticated information-technology-based tools. In this article, we present a model that allows to manage structural relationships within innovation networks and additionally to introduce a conceptual optimization approach.

A comprehensive framework for collaborative networked innovation

Amongst different types of Collaborative Networked Organisations, it is possible to highlight those created to boost innovation, the so-called Innovation Networks. In this type of networks, the challenge is to deploy an effective innovation business process in the very same operative mode of the Innovation Network. This article presents the main features of the TALAI-SAREA© framework, which includes a reference model, a set of analysis tools and a methodology for implementing the Collaborative Networked Innovation processes within a Collaborative Networked Organisation. The framework is based on the findings and conclusions extracted from the action research project carried out in the Fagor Group Innovation Network, a well-known industrial group of companies belonging to the home appliances sector.

The politics of networked innovation

Existing studies suggest that, because knowledge is becoming more widely distributed, innovation increasingly needs to occur ‘at the interstices’ of collaborating groups and organizations. Networked innovation processes are therefore emphasized, over more hierarchical or market-based forms, as having distinct advantages for the creation and integration of knowledge. Whilst the structural properties of networks have been heavily scrutinized, there is relatively less understanding of processes, in particular the political dynamics that shape networked innovation. This article aims to develop understanding of networked innovation processes, by identifying and relating the characteristics of networked innovation to the productive, or constraining, effects of different dimensions of power (power of resource, meaning and process). It does this through comparative analysis of three case studies of networked innovation, each involving the development of new technology. This analysis suggests that understanding the politics of networked innovation depends on understanding the generative (and sometimes degenerative) relationship between power, knowledge integration, network formation, and the role of technology. Moreover, the co-ordination of networks, rather than simply their formation, is found to play a particularly crucial role.