Innovation Spaces: New Places for Collective Intelligence?

Morel, Laure; Dupont, Laurent; Boudarel, Marie-Reine

doi:10.1002/9781119557883.ch5

Cited by 17 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, some projects require the implementation of real‐size demonstrators in the real situation of use (Dupont, Morel, & Guidat, ). Third, innovation laboratories are open spaces where various cultures intersect. Studies (Dupont, Gabriel, Camargo, & Guidat, ; Morel, Dupont, & Boudarel, ) show that we can view stakeholders as a “community of interest” or “community of practices”. It is necessary to adapt the physical environment and the technologies according to the stakeholders' motivations and practices. Also, the collaborative aspects must be integrated as these behaviours around the innovation laboratory generate profitable opportunities for innovation (Del Vecchio, Elia, Ndou, Secundo, & Specchia, ; Pallot, Trousse, Senach, & Scapin, ).…”

Section: Exploratory Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Third, innovation laboratories are open spaces where various cultures intersect. Studies (Dupont, Gabriel, Camargo, & Guidat, 2017;Morel, Dupont, & Boudarel, 2018) show that we can view stakeholders as a "community of interest" or "community of practices". It is necessary to adapt the physical environment and the technologies according to the stakeholders' motivations and practices.…”

Section: Towards An Updated Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Design and management of innovation laboratories: Toward a performance assessment tool

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a strong emergence of new spaces to foster innovation all over the world (Fablabs, Living Labs and Design Factories, among others). Past experiences have shown these types of projects involving “innovation laboratories” are at risk of not succeeding in their goals. Although several studies have tackled the problem of design, development and sustainability of innovation laboratories, there is still a gap in understanding how the capabilities and performance of these environments are affected by the strategic intentions at the early stages of design and functioning. Throughout this work, eight frameworks from the literature that analyze innovation laboratories are identified and compared. Then, based on both literature and the authors' experience, an updated framework is proposed as the basis for a guidance tool for researchers and practitioners aiming to assess or to adapt an existing project. As part of the operationalization process of the framework, a maturity grid‐based assessment tool is proposed to evaluate the maturity degree of an innovation laboratory. Afterwards, to evaluate the viability and to integrate the perception of innovation laboratory managers, an exploratory study with answers from fifteen laboratories from five different countries is performed. Insights and implications for emerging and already existent projects of innovation laboratories are then discussed.

show abstract

Section: Exploratory Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Towards An Updated Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and management of innovation laboratories: Toward a performance assessment tool

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The development of innovation laboratories (hereafter innovation labs) within different contexts including business, public and educational is having a growing interest in recent years in the academic and industrial landscape [1], [2]. Some reasons include that these spaces can favor the development of competences of innovation and collective creativity [3] and new working practices that rely on collaboration, co-design, co-production, co-creation approaches [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, to what degree of expertise their practices and processes could be determined by proposing a maturity grid-based assessment tool [2]. The structure of these innovation labs depends upon the strategic intention and the context they are participating [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Connecting the strategic intent of innovation labs and projects: the case of the Green Fablab

Roux-Marchand

Cruz

Dupont

et al. 2020

2020 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The creation of innovation laboratories within universities arises from the need to consolidate pedagogical and research aspects. These innovation laboratories are becoming key spaces for the development of innovation competences. In this article, we describe the experiences of developing a pilot project on distributed recycling approach. The results showed how the development of this project can play a role in strategy development at the innovation laboratory level. These insights are pertinent for the managers of these spaces to identify competencies to develop in the middle/long term. The development of methodological tools to connect the operational, tactical and strategic levels and competences for these spaces are important future paths of development Index Terms-innovation labs; strategic intent; distributed recycling; Green Fablab

show abstract

“…Within this context, mobile technology, thanks to its affordance (Ahonen, 2011;Volkoff & Strong, 2013) and its contextuality (Cochrane et al, 2016), can enable creativity which supports the Cognitive Process Dimension (Anderson et al, 2001). Scilicet, mobile devices become the interface between people and processes (Morel et al, 2018;Dampérat et al, 2019) in relation to innovative practices (Makri et al, 2017) and real-world learning (Saleh et al, 2019) in formal and informal contexts. Moreover, it can enhance the developing of ideas inner/outer an organisation, or a classroom (Hall et al, 2020), and the serendipity flow of learning experiences (Makri et al, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobile Technology

Antonczak

2021

pjtel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The digital transformation of society is reaching a state of maturity, which provides people with new and exciting possibilities (NESTA, 2019) and implies a preponderant change in terms of inclusive collaboration, human-centred global economy and governance. Conjointly, ‘knowledge is the impetuous for communication’ (Carayannis & Clark, 2011, p. 203) with respect to foster ‘social capital’ and to thrive ‘cultural knowledge’ (Levallet & Chan, 2019, p. 182). Within this context, mobile technology, thanks to its affordance (Ahonen, 2011; Volkoff & Strong, 2013) and its contextuality (Cochrane et al., 2016), can enable creativity which supports the Cognitive Process Dimension (Anderson et al., 2001). Scilicet, mobile devices become the interface between people and processes (Morel et al., 2018; Dampérat et al., 2019) in relation to innovative practices (Makri et al., 2017) and real-world learning (Saleh et al., 2019) in formal and informal contexts. Moreover, it can enhance the developing of ideas inner/outer an organisation, or a classroom (Hall et al., 2020), and the serendipity flow of learning experiences (Makri et al., 2015). To a certain extent, mobile technology can bolster ‘collective knowledge’ (Pont, 2013; Levallet & Chan, 2019) by enabling quick decision-making and by connecting with a glocal network (Antonczak, 2021). From a transdisciplinary approach, amidst learning sciences (Sommerhoff et al., 2018), management and organisational research, this presentation canvasses mobile technology (Jones & Marsden, 2006; Ahonen, 2011) as being a key apparatus and interface for collaborative innovation (Demil & Lecocq, 2012; Suire et al., 2018), which allows organisations to develop their ‘information ecology’ (Nardi, 1999) through a dynamic sense of what is inside and what is outside their boundaries. Said differently, it deciphers how mobile technology can enable exchange information and co-creative practices beyond formal structures and systems across industries and/or academia. To start, the presentation quickly outlines some key concepts from an inter-disciplinary literature reviews (Baumeister & Leary, 1997), including collaboration, creativity, knowledge dynamics such as knowledge creation and/or conversion (Sawyer, 2008) as well as ‘knowledge retention and/or knowledge loss’ (Levallet & Chan, 2019). Next, it epitomises a few technological enabling conditions (Makri, 2017; Levallet & Chan, 2018; Cheng et al., 2019) such as autonomy, diversity, interactivity, contextuality through mobile social media and mobile-first applications (Apps) in relation to collaboration and learning practices beyond the limits of a physical environment. Then, it introduces the methodological and qualitative approach used for the analysis and findings, as well as the interpretations of practices in Education and Business. Finally, this presentation concludes with some features about how mobile technology practices support collaborative and innovative learning environments, the co-creation of new frameworks, and it suggests further avenues for supplementary research.

show abstract

Innovation Spaces: New Places for Collective Intelligence?

Cited by 17 publications

References 18 publications

Design and management of innovation laboratories: Toward a performance assessment tool

Design and management of innovation laboratories: Toward a performance assessment tool

Connecting the strategic intent of innovation labs and projects: the case of the Green Fablab

Mobile Technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About