Many of today’s challenges that confront society are complex and dynamic and require new perspectives, new ways of looking at problems and issues, in order to be able to come to solutions that could not be found before. This process is called reframing and we suggest that one of the key stages in this process is thematic research, the search for themes that underlie these complex challenges. These themes generally turn out to be human themes, related to socio-emotional aspects of life. In this paper we report our experiences and lessons learned from a series of cases in which we experimented with various approaches to do this thematic research.
DOCUMENT
De informatieprofessional 3.0 moet niet bestaande dingen beter doen, hij moet betere dingen doen. Een van de essentiele vaardigheden is inhoudelijke verdieping: sleutelen aan kaders in plaats van binnen kaders te werken.
DOCUMENT
Co-creation and social innovation are currently linked concepts in both policy and academic research. Almost always, the attitude towards these concepts is intrinsically positive, although evidence of their added value is lacking. In my research, I looked at the development of social innovation and co-creation in theory and practice. By analysing the use of these notions in EU policies, EU grants and awarded EU projects, I was able to show that both concepts are not only unclear, but are also mutually strengthen and add value to each other. For example, co-creation is seen as an integral part of social innovation and therefore stakeholder involvement is sufficient to qualify as good social innovation, without further evidence. A systematic literature review supports these findings.Because of the ambiguity of both concepts and the fact that they reinforce each other, there is hardly any attention to the quality of co-creation as such within social innovation. We witness this not only in social innovation projects, but also, for example, in so-called living labs. In order to monitor and improve the quality of co-creation within social innovation, an evaluation framework was developed based on a systematic literature review. This framework can be used by both policy makers and participants in social innovation projects.
DOCUMENT
This article examines internal organizational factors and external antecedents of sus-tainable value creation by small medium enterprises (SMEs) and constructs a frame-work that integrates, at both levels, the theories of psychological distance andconstrual level from the field of psychology. This research provides an explanation asto why sustainable value creation remains a complex issue, and why many SMEs'engage with sustainable value creation to varying degrees. This paper particularlyhighlights how owner/managers of SME may construe different dimensions of psy-chological distance and apply their understanding to their response to different ante-cedents of sustainable value creation. Finally, by adopting the psychological distanceperspective, this paper highlights the conditions under which internal and externalorganizational and factors can affect SMEs' propensity to create sustainable value. Itfurther concludes by highlighting areas for further research
LINK
In BOP ventures the notion of “selling to the poor” has steadily been replaced by business approaches that suggest sustainable value creation. This has certain implications, in particular the development of strategies that serve triple bottom-line goals. These include economic, social and environmental benefits, in other words, the well known goals of people-planet-profit. However to optimise value-creation one ideally needs to follow a strategy that is based on some form of conceptual model that can serve as a frame of reference. This paper proposes such a conceptual model. The research was undertaken in 8 BOP projects involving multinational information and communication technology companies in Africa. ICT is relevant here because of frequently high expectations that it contributes positively to development goals. A study of the BOP literature reveals that several elements need consideration when trying to create value in developing areas. In addition it emerges that these elements are somehow interdependent. Using information found in the literature as guide a study of 8 cases was undertaken. The research approach was the case study method and the data was analysed for emerging patterns. Primary and secondary data was collected through interviews as well as a close study of archival and other sources. The analysis revealed three high level factors that may need to be aligned in order to ensure optimised value creation of BOP ventures. These three factors are BOP strategy, partnerships, and products & services development. It is also confirmed that neither BOP strategy nor partnerships nor products/service development can be synthesised independently from the rest. There is a delicate balance and interaction between the three where all three are interdependent and mutually influence each other.
DOCUMENT
Amsterdam Science Park (ASP) is a pearl in the crown of the Amsterdam knowledge economy, with its high-level research institutes (the Faculty of Science of the University of Amsterdam, several institutes of the NWO, the Dutch national science organisation) and a growing number of knowledge-based companies that reside in the multi-tenant Matrix buildings at the park. At ASP, the number of examples of co-creation is steadily growing. Larger tech firms (including Bosch and ASML) have located there and engage in deep collaboration with university institutes. Many more companies have expressed interest in collaborating with researchers located at ASP, not only in order to gain access to promising talent, but also to more extensively involve university researchers in their R&D processes. Another trend is the growth of science-based start-ups, now hosted at ASP’s Start-up Village: an appealing hotspot, made of sea containers. Players from business and university signal a rising need for new and more integrated concepts that facilitate collaborations between larger firms, start-ups and research groups. And also, the ASP management would like to see more co-creation. From its spatial and organisational design, the park is however characterised by a separation of activities: each faculty and institute operates its own building and facilities, with the firms hosted in the multitenant Matrix buildings. ASP is being developed along the lines of a masterplan based on strict zoning (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2013). This study explores how, and under what conditions further co-creation could be facilitated at ASP.
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
In this study, we regard co-creation as a collaborative process where students, lecturers and working field professionals from outside the university jointly develop innovative products, processes or knowledge. In co-creation all stakeholders equally contribute to the collaborative process and aim to create beneficial outcomes for each participant. Co-creation can be used as a valuable pedagogical method to support continuous interaction between learning and working in higher education to foster innovation. However, this process is not necessarily mastered by co-creation groups. In order to identify which components of this collaboration process can be further improved, we developed a questionnaire to assess co-creation processes in higher education. Students, lecturers and working field professionals participating in co-creation projects completed the questionnaire. We validated the questionnaire using a principal component analysis. The seven extracted scales proved to be sufficiently reliable. The final questionnaire consists of seven components: positive interdependence, individual accountability, collaboration, shared mental models, safe and supporting conditions, creative community, and group evaluation. We described how the tool can be used in practice.
DOCUMENT
This paper analyses co-creation in urban living labs through a multi-level network perspective on system innovation. We draw on the case House of Skills, a large, multi-stakeholder living lab aimed at developing a ‘skills-based’ approach towards labour market innovation within the Amsterdam Metropolitan Region. Ouranalysis helps understand stakeholder dynamics towards system innovation, drawing on an innovative living lab example and taking into consideration the multi-layered structures that comprise the collaboration. Our conceptual framework provides an important theoretical contribution to innovation studies and offers a practical repertoire that can help practitioners improve co-creation of shared value in living labs, towards orchestrating flexible structures that strengthen the impact of their initiatives.
LINK
