Published: Tue 11 Feb 2014.
Modified: Wed 01 Mar 2017
Please fill in a message
Find out more about our projects.
We document our ongoing research in various publications.
Meet all the researchers active in MiB.
In this blog we will share news about our activities – hope you’d like to join us!
The MIB group is continuing their efforts to explore and problematize collaborative innovation practices, in order to extend our knowledge about what happens as different actors (both on an individual and organizational level) engage in interaction to innovate together. This time we encourage interested scholars to submit their empirical or conceptual research papers to our special issue in Creativity and Innovation Management Journal, edited by Anna Yström, Chalmers University of Technology and Marine Agogué at HEC Montréal!
Our motivation for editing such a special issue is that despite the increased interest of practitioners and researchers in collaborative innovation, we know surprisingly little about what practices it involves and how to support them. In a recent review, Bogers et al. (2016) concluded that more research is needed, especially research related to the micro-foundations of collaborative innovation. It is also clear that in the innovation management literature, research has primarily focused on investigating technical, contractual or business aspects of a firm engaging in innovative activities outside of its boundaries, and often has not taken into account the influence and roles of individuals in such interactions. Furthermore, organization scholars have, over the past two decades, argued the need for a practice turn (Barley and Kunda, 2001, Corradi et al., 2010), thereby implying that theories need to be constructed based on what happens in practice rather than researchers’ conceptualizations.
In this special issue, by specifically addressing collaborative innovation practices, we recognize the centrality of human actions to organizational outcomes, which also reflects an increasing recognition of the importance of practices in the ongoing operations of organizations. We hope to see a diverse range of submissions that can shed new light on collaborative practices!
The deadline for paper submissions is July 31st, 2018, so you should have plenty of time to spread the word to those you think might be interested as well as prepare your paper. If you have any questions or want to discuss an idea for a paper, please contact either Marine Agogué or me, Anna Yström!
You can find the full Call for papers here!
Still, being the first time attending the IST conference, we felt a bit like outsiders in a club with unwritten rules about what theories, frameworks and references to use when working on transitions. Nevertheless, most of the individuals I talked to also came from different disciplines and research traditions and seemed to feel like newcomers to the field of transitions, and it was a great comfort to hear that we were not alone in this regard!
Securing a prominent MIB-presence always at the front row in the plenary room, also had the upside effect of Sanne being selected as a guinea pig to help the communications experts make their point during the final session. Under the instructions from the actor Andreas T Olsson, Sanne was asked to move glasses of water (topped off with some Swedish vodka) across the stage during great suspense, in order to teach us that emotions are stronger than facts, and that we need to engage our emotions in order to truly learn and remember things. Sanne’s water walk easily became one of the most memorable moments from the conference!
After three intense days at the conference, with lots of interesting, inspiring and confusing insights, we are proud of our efforts and impact at the conference, with no less than 2 presentations, 4 sessions chaired and 1 track organized. We are now boosting ourselves up to manage a just a few more days of work before summer vacation begins! /Anna
The Organization Development and Change Division at AoM has awarded the paper – Developing a Learning Method in an Open Innovation Project Through Action Research – as the ODC Best Action Research Paper!
This seems to have been very unexpected news, with tales from Anna of checking all the boxes when submitting the paper without thinking about the chance of winning.
The paper explores methods to support action learning in open innovation and how such learning helps create a platform for future collaboration.
Full details on the paper:
Yström, A., Ollila, S., Agogué, M. & Coghlan, D. 2017. Developing A Learning Method In An Open Innovation Project Through Action Research. Academy of Management. Atlanta, Aug 4-8.
Ann argued that a process perspective is valuable as it highlights e.g. the centrality of time to fully understanding and experiencing the world and because we not only need to understand not whether A is better than B (variance), but how to move from A to B over time (process). Furthermore, with a process perspective, it is equally of not even more interesting to study stability, rather than change, in organizational life and the multiplicity and temporality of consequences (short-term vs. long term; rippling effects over time). At the seminar, she built on her experience of editing a recent special issue in AMJ, which was focused on process studies, and she shared valuable insights on why certain papers were rejected and why others were not. This gave the audience a much appreciated crash course in how to position papers and contributions based on qualitative research in general, not only process studies.
Those who are particularly interested in process studies might want to check out the PROS conference that Ann is part of organizing in Greece in June. I will represent the MIB group there, by presenting the paper “Institutionalizing work in the context of open innovation: a process perspective” co-authored with Fernando Fachin from Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston. /Anna
Anna has co-authored a paper with Hedvig Aspenberg that looks at regional collaboration for innovation. The paper is based on interview material with managers of 14 different clusters in Sweden, and discusses the importance of the practices of narrating and orchestrating for fostering collaboration between cluster members.
My paper is based on participant observation of meetings of a coordinating team for a partnership between 15 organisations. The paper discusses how the coordinators drew on the organisational identities of their home organisations and the collective meta-organisation to keep alive their joint work.
We’ll report back soon on how the ISPIM community received the papers! // Jane
More info on The ISPIM Innovation Forum: http://www.ispim-innovation-forum.com/
NEWSFLASH: 21 MARCH 2017
Anna won the Knut Holt Best Paper Award and Jane won the Alex Gofman Best Student Paper Award at the ISPIM Innovation Forum. Anna’s paper will also be included in a special issue of the International Journal of Innovation Management, coming out in June 2017! This is the first time that researchers from the same university have won both awards at the same time. Great fun!
During the first two weeks of the new year, the four of us in the MIB group have been hard at work getting submissions done for AOM, ISPIM, PROS and EGOS; preparing to teach our Master’s course in Organising for Innovation; finalising a paper to send back for second round of reviews; reviewing submissions for the IST conference; and teaching in a PhD-level course on leadership. And that’s not to mention preparations for 2017’s time out-in-the-field, such as discussions with partners about the set-up for research projects. While 2017 stretches far ahead of us, we’ve even got 2018 in mind, already looking at funding opportunities and new ideas for research projects!
A highlight for me from 2016 was when Sanne turned to me, just after her promotion lecture, and before the speeches began over champagne, and said: Now you’ve got your own professor! Her promotion must be the biggest reason we had for celebration, but there were also lots of other big moments and successes along the way. In the Autumn, we seemed to get into our stride, re-discovering the secret recipe for how to be successful in writing funding applications. We start 2017 with money in the coffers. 2016 was a year of expanding our circle of friends and colleagues, too. Anna’s visiting researcher position at HEC Montréal, from what I’ve heard, seems to have been very productive on working through her pipeline of papers, as well as in meeting new research partners.
So, yes, back to business!
Our papers drew on research with various collaborative innovation arenas, platforms and intermediaries, and spanned topics such as identity work, joint value capture and managerial challenges in such settings.
With around 250 delegates, there were many presentations to draw inspiration from, and we were happy to find that many researchers are becoming interested in identity work in collaborative innovation processes.
Perhaps most exciting were the sessions around the Barça ‘playbook’ and elBulli.
Both took the audience away from their usual contexts for thinking about open innovation, and provoked us into thinking about how we define value and think about systems for innovation. //Jane
As part of the jury, I was impressed by Eleni’s clear-cut presentation at the defense, and she was calm and thorough when answering the questions from the jury. Although taking a resource-based perspective is in my opinion not the most exciting or original theory to use to explore this new role – Eleni’s work is a great step towards a better understanding RTOs, a type of organizational actor that is often, somewhat unfairly, lumped together with universities. Distinguishing and discussing what role and capabilities such an organization have and can have, is a valuable contribution to the academic community.
As of now, Eleni has decided not to pursue an academic career, but will continue working (as she have done for the past 2 years) at Eurostat in Luxemburg as a civil servant – producing reports and documents for the European commission. Hopefully, she will maintain an associate status with the BETA Lab in Strasbourg, to continue doing research “at her leisure” as her supervisor suggested
During my very short trip to Strasbourg from Montréal, I did not only have a chance to explore the extraordinary Christmas market, but also to make new, interesting connections with Professor Julien Pénin at the BETA Lab and Pierre-Jean Bartalier who are the ones who have worked closest to Eleni. They have a strong research interest in e.g. open innovation and intellectual property management, and I am sure it will be of great value for the MIB group to continue building a relationship with the BETA Lab./Anna
Giannopoulou, E., 2016. The role of RTOs in open service innovation – A dual perspective. Doctoral thesis, Faculty of Economics and Management, Université de Strasbourg. Supervised by Julien Pénin.
Agogué, M., Yström, A. & Le Masson, P. 2013. Rethinking the role of intermediaries as an architect of collective exploration and creation of knowledge in open innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17, 1350007-.
Giannopoulou, E., Yström, A. & Ollila, S. 2011. Turning open innovation into practice: Open innovation research through the lens of managers. International Journal of Innovation Management, 15, 505-524.
In complex co-operation projects with many stakeholders and when co-creation is key to success, new forms of leadership and organization are needed. This project is all about developing collaborative innovation as a way to increase the innovation capacity in such contexts.
Professor Sanne Ollila and PhD candidate Jane Webb will use action-research methodology within two large projects: Riksbyggen Positive Footprint Housing (PFH) and ElectriCity. Together these two projects involve more than 20 stakeholders and have a turnover of more than 500 million SEK. The key questions for the project is exploring together with project participants how collaborative innovation can be organized and led.
More info (in Swedish) about the project
This group of fifteen, calling themselves an innovation platform, worked together temporarily over the summer and I became a sixteenth member of sorts. The work was sponsored by three main organisations. I see the group’s interaction and work as an example of an in-between space shaped through inter-organisational collaboration.
It was great to have the luxury to focus on research outside of all the term-time commitments. I even managed to complete a 3000-word conference submission during the final weeks of the research setting out initial ideas about the frontstage and off-stage work that the participants engaged in to meet the expectations of the current or potential sponsoring organisations. Now that the new term has started, I need to somehow find time to go through all the fieldnotes, photos and documents and write the full paper! // Jane