Abstract Many innovations in education are not completed, even if they are well thought out in advance. One of the main causes is the organization's lack of learning ability, combined with a shortage of teachers' and students' ownership with respect to the renewal of ideas and design. In communities of learners, teachers and students collaborate and learn together in order to shape innovations in their daily practice. Their ability to learn collectively is a key factor in developing a learning organization. So far, insights into how processes of collective learning can be designed effectively, and which critical factors play a role, have been based on limited empirical research. This article's goal is to contribute to the development of these insights, using the results of a study based on 48 cases of collective learning in communities of learners in primary schools and teacher education institutes. The results suggest that although collective learning rarely takes place in most cases many outcomes are created that affect all community members. This leads to the conclusion that some participants create outcomes, not only on behalf of themselves, but also on behalf of others.
DOCUMENT
Due to the variegated nature of the teaching profession system, different actors operating in this system (teachers, school leaders, policy makers) are inevitably intertwined and assumably influence each other’s sensemaking processes, especially when system-wide educational change occurs. Gaining insight into how different actors in the teacher profession system make sense of educational change is important, as it might hamper or enable the system's adaptive capacity. That is why we stretched Coburn’s model of collective sensemaking from a teacher-team lens to include different actors and focus on their interpersonal dynamics during sensemaking processes. Performing a conceptual review, we synthesized 87 articles which focus on collective sensemaking of the following actor groups: (1) teachers (micro), (2) school leaders (meso), and/or (3) district/state/national leaders, policy makers, professional development providers, curriculum developers, researchers, community members, and parents (macro). In the results we describe how actors’ involvement varied due to different role distributions and role perceptions of actors. In addition, four contextual factors influencing the interpersonal dynamics were distinguished that were closely related to leadership practices that enable actors to compare the change with their own beliefs and (organizational) practices. We describe three mechanisms which explain how actors valuate a change (valuating), how they are owning this change (owning), and which is shaped by gatekeeping of sensegivers in their social context (gatekeeping).
LINK
The digital era has brought about profound changes in how music is created, distributed, and consumed, posing a need for modernizing the Dutch collective management system of music copyright to match the rapidly changing digital music industry. This study aims to identify the key stakeholders and their perceptions of the Dutch system of collective management of music copyright. Utilizing qualitative document analysis, the study examines a range of public and non-public documents, including income statements, annual reports from Collective Management Organizations (CMOs), and contracts between publishers and creators. The research is further enriched by twenty-four semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders such as composers, lyricists, music publishers, copyright lawyers, and CMO executives. The findings of the study highlight several issues like the outdated IT systems and the lack of data standardization within the system. The research also notes a contrast in organizational effectiveness: major publishers are well-organized and unified in their negotiations with Digital Service Providers (DSPs) and CMOs, effectively advocating for their rights. However, music copyright holders, despite their legal homogeneity, are either unorganized or ineffectively aligned, displaying diverse interests and varying levels of access to information, as well as differences in norms and values prioritization. The study is grounded in the economics of collective management (ECM) and makes a significant academic contribution to this field by introducing new empirical findings to ECMs core constructs and integrating theoretical perspectives. The research offers valuable insights for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers, aiming to foster a more equitable music copyright management system in the digital context.
MULTIFILE
Processes of collective learning are expected to increase the professionalism of teachers and school leaders. Little is known about the processes of collective learning which take place in schools and about the way in which those processes may be improved. This paper describes a research into processes of collective learning at three primary schools. Processes of collective learning are described which took place in small teams in these schools. It is also pointed out which attempts can be made in order to reinforce these processes in the schools mentioned.
DOCUMENT
Our study elucidates collaborative value creation and private value capture in collaborative networks in a context of sustainability. Collaborative networks that focus on innovative solutions for grand societal challenges are characterized by a multiplicity and diversity of actors that increase the complexity and coordination costs of collective action. These types of inter-organizational arrangements have underlying tensions as partners cooperate to create collaborative value and compete to capture or appropriate value on a private or organizational level, resulting in potential and actual value flows that are highly diffuse and uncertain among actors. We also observe that network participants capture value differentially, often citing the pro-social (e.g. community, belonging, importance) and extrinsic benefits of learning and reputation as valuable, but found it difficult to appropriate economic or social benefits from that value. Differential and asymmetric value appropriation among participants threatens continued network engagement and the potential collective value creation of collaborative networks. Our data indicates that networked value creation and capture requires maintaining resource complementarity and interdependency among network participants as the network evolves. We develop a framework to assess the relational value of collaborative networks and contribute to literature by unpacking the complexities of networked value creation and private value capture in collaborative networks for sustainability.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to find determinants about risk resilience and develop a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises. This approach creates the ability to respond resiliently to major environmental challenges and changes in the short term and adjust the management of the organization, and to learn and transform to adapt to the new environment in the long term while creating multiple value creation. Design/methodology: The authors present a new risk resilience approach for multiple value creation of (agricultural) enterprises, which consists of a main process starting with strategy design, followed by an environmental analysis, stakeholder collaboration, implement ESG goals, defining risk expose & response options, and report, learn & evaluate. In each step the organizational perspective, as well as the value chain/area perspective is considered and aligned. The authors have used focus groups and analysed literature from and outside the field of finance and accounting, to design this new approach. Findings: Researchers propose a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises, based on a narrative about transforming to multiple value creation, founded determinants of risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience. Originality and value: This study contributes by conceptualizing risk resilience for (agricultural) enterprises, by looking through a lens of multiple value creation in a dynamic context and based on insights from different fields, actual ESG knowledge, and determinants for risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience.
DOCUMENT
Co-creation as a concept and process has been prominent in both marketing and design research over the past ten years. Referring respectively to the active collaboration of firms with their stakeholders in value creation, or to the participation of design users in the design research process, there has arguably been little common discourse between these academic disciplines. This article seeks to redress this deficiency by connecting marketing and design research together—and particularly the concepts of co-creation and co-design—to advance theory and broaden the scope of applied research into the topic. It does this by elaborating the notion of the pop-up store as temporary place of consumer/user engagement, to build common ground for theory and experimentation in terms of allowing marketers insight into what is meaningful to consumers and in terms of facilitating co-design. The article describes two case studies, which outline how this can occur and concludes by proposing principles and an agenda for future marketing/design pop-up research. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Overdiek A. & Warnaby G. (2020), "Co-creation and co-design in pop-up stores: the intersection of marketing and design research?", Creativity & Innovation Management, Vol. 29, Issue S1, pp. 63-74, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12373. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. LinkedIn: https://nl.linkedin.com/in/overdiek12345
MULTIFILE
We are currently in a transition moving from a linear economy grounded on economic value maximization based on material transformation to a circular economy. Core of this transition is organising value preservation from various yet interlinked perspectives. The underlying fundamental shift is to move away from mere financial value maximization towards multiple value creation (WCED, 1987; Jonker, 2014; Raworth, 2017). This implies moving from mere economic value creation, to simultaneously and in a balanced way creating ecological and social value. A parallel development supporting this transition can be observed in accounting & control. Elkington (1994) introduced the triple bottom line (TBL) concept, referring to the economic, ecological and social impact of companies. The TBL should be seen more as a conceptual way of thinking, rather than a practical innovative accounting tool to monitor and control sustainable value (Rambaud & Richard, 2015). However, it has inspired accounting & control practitioners to develop accounting tools that not only aim at economic value (‘single capital’ accounting) but also at multiple forms of capital (‘multi capital’ accounting or integrated reporting). This has led to a variety of integrated reporting platforms such as Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), International Integrated Reporting Framework (IIRC), Dow Jones Sustainable Indexes (DJSI), True Costing, Reporting 3.0, etc. These integrated reporting platforms and corresponding accounting concepts, can be seen as a fundament for management control systems focussing on multiple value creation. This leads to the following research question: How are management control systems designed in practice to drive multiple value creation?
MULTIFILE
The implementation of innovative sustainability technologies often requires far reaching changes of the macro environment in which the innovating firms operate. Strategic management literature describes that firms who want to commercialize an innovative technology can collaborate in networks or industry clusters to build up a favourable environment for their technology. This increases the chances of successful diffusion and adoption of the technology in society. However, the strategic management literature does not offer advice on how to strategically build up this supportive external environment. We fill this gap with complementary insights from the technological innovation systems literature. We introduce the concept of strategic collective system building. Collective system building describes processes and activities networks of actors can strategically engage in to collectively build up a favourable environment for their innovative sustainability technology. Furthermore, we develop a strategy framework for collective system building. To underpin the theoretical analysis empirically, we conducted a case study in the Dutch smart grids field. The resulting strategy framework consists of four key areas for strategy making: technology development and optimization, market creation, socio-cultural changes and coordination. Each of these key strategic areas is composed of a set of system building activities
DOCUMENT
Articulating and illustrating how experience design can unlock experience innovation, this book offers a fresh perspective on effectuating corporate, public, social and whole system innovation by design. The book makes several contributions to the fields of innovation and design thinking by taking complexity science as its scientific point of reference. As such this is a highly provocative book for scholars, practitioners and students in the field of change and innovation.
LINK
