Pairs in Innovation: How Working in Pairs Helps Organisations to Move Into a New Shared Direction

Bellis, Paola; Verganti, Roberto

doi:10.1142/s1363919620500723

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The human side of this "attitude" is not only highly related to the individual perspective emerging in the innovation field (Arrowsmith and Parker, 2013) but also to the design-driven literature that sees the innovation process as an inside-out process that starts from the innovator as a human being (Verganti, 2017). Similarly, the second subcluster, which takes the organizational perspective, is highly correlated with the evolution that organizations are facing, from the agile culture (B€ acklander, 2019) to the need to have an organizational climate coherent with what innovation needs (Bellis and Verganti, 2019;Verganti and Norman, 2019).…”

Section: Brief Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Attitude vs involvement: a systematic literature review at the intersection between engagement and innovation

Trabucchi

Bellis

Marco

et al. 2020

EJIM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIn a world where innovation became a “buzzword” and everyone within companies is required to foster innovation, the engagement of people toward innovation is fundamental to prompt individual motivation and actions to make innovation happen. However, despite the relevance of the relationship between engagement and innovation, the literature on the topic appears still fragmented. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the topic through a systematic literature review.Design/methodology/approachA final sample of 108 papers has been selected and analyzed through co-citation and text mining analyses. The former enabled the analysis of the structure of the theoretical foundation of the filed, while the latter facilitated a systematic and unbiased content-driven review of the literature.FindingsThe results of the analysis indicated two main areas of interest describing the relationship between engagement and innovation. On the one hand, there is the focus on “engagement as an attitude,” intended as the capacity of individuals to generate and realize innovation. On the other hand, there is a stream of literature focused on “engagement as involvement,” which refers to co-innovation paradigms, involving both internal and external stakeholders.Research limitations/implicationsFrom an academic perspective, this paper highlights the relevance of the “human-side” of innovation, proposing avenues for future research that dig into the relationship between people's engagement and innovation dynamics. Moreover, it shows how the recent developments in the innovation management literature are coherent with this emerging relevance of the human perspective in innovation.Practical implicationsFrom a practitioner’s perspective, this paper helps managers by highlighting the two different approaches that they can have in terms of engagement. The study aims to help them in identifying the kind of engagement they are looking for in their employees and other innovation stakeholder having the support to find relevant studies in that direction.Originality/valueThe study unveils how the evolution of both areas over the years is strictly related to the megatrends of innovation fields, which are the main areas of knowledge not covered yet. Therefore, a research agenda is proposed.

show abstract

Section: Brief Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In doing so, companies need to set the right climate to let people engage and offer their constructive views on the innovative direction through active criticism and building on the others (e.g. Bellis and Verganti, 2019;Verganti and Norman, 2019).…”

Section: Brief Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitude vs involvement: a systematic literature review at the intersection between engagement and innovation

Trabucchi

Bellis

Marco

et al. 2020

EJIM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As the most intimate form of collaboration happens at the dyadic level, (Rouse, 2020;Svejenova et al, 2010) a dyadic relationship helps in the collaborative sense-making process. This collaborative sense-making process at the dyadic level then translates into group and team level relationships based on co-creation processes (Bellis & Verganti, 2019;Rouse, 2020). However, the feeling of an intimately close relationship that happens at the dyadic level cannot be replaced by a new group member or a team member.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Dimensional Structure of Intimate Co-creation: An Exploratory Factor Analysis

Shahzad¹,

Ishaque²

2023

NJSSH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different forms of value co-creation have been a source of literary debate in management literature. Management scholars got the early inspiration for this phenomenon of multi-stakeholder engagement from the field of design engineering in the 1970s. Intimate co-creation is a new concept that explores the immediate impact that a co-creation activity might have on an individual at the dyadic, group, or team level. Most of its benefits as conceptually theorized by Rouse (2020) are very positive; however, it lacks a valid measurement scale for which an exploratory analysis of the dimensional structure of intimate co-creation is needed. The current study has addressed the same research gap. For this purpose, a mixed methods study was conducted to explore the dimensional structure of intimate co-creation and operationalize the concept for development of relevant items. This exploratory factor analysis is the prime step in a series of studies to develop a new measurement scale on intimate co-creation.

show abstract

“…This argument is consistent with that of Amabile (1996), who emphasized that cocreative processes have to be facilitated in order to foster creativity and innovation (see also Bin Saeed et al , 2019). Such an intersubjective process is already enabled in the transition from individual to pair sensemaking (Bellis and Verganti, 2020). Typically in LSP, teams of 6–12 participants are guided by a specifically trained and often certified facilitator who follows the LSP core process.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alone but together: flow experience and its impact on creative output in LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY®

Zenk

Primus

Sonnenburg

2021

EJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeDo LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® (LSP) workshops result in improved experience of flow components as well as higher levels of creative output than traditional meetings (MEET)? This research studies the extent to which LSP, as a specialized material-mediated and process-oriented cocreative workshop setting, differs from MEET, a traditional workshop setting. Hypotheses for differences in individual flow components (autotelic behavior, happiness, balance), group flow components (equal participation, continuous communication) and creative output were developed and tested in a quasi-experimental comparison between LSP and MEET.Design/methodology/approachThe study was conducted with 39 practitioners in six teams from various industries. In total, 164 observations were collected during two workshops using the Experience Sampling Method. The creative output was assessed by peer evaluations of all participants, followed by structural analysis and quantitative group comparisons.FindingsThe results show that two components of individual flow experience (autotelic behavior, happiness) were significantly higher in LSP, and one of the components of group flow experience (continuous communication) was, as expected, significantly lower. Regarding creative output, the LSP teams outperformed the MEET teams. The study suggests that a process-oriented setting that includes time for individuals to independently explore their ideas using a different kind of material in the presence of other participants has a significant influence on the team result.Practical implicationsLSP can improve the components of participants' flow experience to have an impact on the creative output of teams. In cocreative settings like LSP, teams benefit from a combination of alone time and high-quality collaborative activities using boundary objects and a clear process to share their ideas.Originality/valueThis is the first quasi-experimental study with management practitioners as participants to compare LSP with a traditional and widespread workshop approach in the context of flow experience and creative output.

show abstract

Pairs in Innovation: How Working in Pairs Helps Organisations to Move Into a New Shared Direction

Cited by 10 publications

References 76 publications

Attitude vs involvement: a systematic literature review at the intersection between engagement and innovation

Attitude vs involvement: a systematic literature review at the intersection between engagement and innovation

Exploring Dimensional Structure of Intimate Co-creation: An Exploratory Factor Analysis

Alone but together: flow experience and its impact on creative output in LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY®

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About