Pecs2011-new-LiFE-wp4- Aleksandra Gawel

667 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
667
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Pecs2011-new-LiFE-wp4- Aleksandra Gawel

  1. 1. WP4.
 Integrated
innova1on
and
 coordina1on
of
research,
innova1on
and
industrial
policies

 WP
leader

 Aleksandra
Gawel
 Poznan
University
of
Economics,
Poland

  2. 2. State
of
the
art
•  Innovation
as
research
=ield
started
to
be
explored
with
works
of

Joseph
 Schumpeter
(1934)
who
was
the
=irst
one
highlighted
the
importance
of
 innovation
for
economic
development.

•  According
to
Schumpeter:
innovation
is
treated
as
new
combinations
in
the
 economy,
including
new
combinations
of
goods,
methods
(production
 technology),
markets,
suppliers
and
organization
and
the
source
of
 companies’
pro=its.

•  Innovation
is
very
wildly
understood
phenomena,
f.e.:
 –  an
interactive
process
which
refers
to
the
behaviour
of
enterprises
in
planning
and
 implementing
changes
to
their
activities
(Nauwelaers
and
Wintjes,
2002)
 –  the
introduction
of
new
economic
activity,
including
both
the
introduction
of
 innovation
into
the
marketplace,
as
well
as
entering
as
a
new
imitative
competitor
 (Koellinger,
2008)

 –  as
successful
implementation
of
creative
ideas,

 –  Innovation
requires
the
departure
from
existing
technologies,
practices
and
 venture
beyond
the
current
state
of
the
art
(Dess,
Lumpkin,
2005).

  3. 3. Direc1ons
of
research
on
innova1veness

•  process
of
innovation,

•  types
and
determinants
of
innovation
 (Gudmundson,
Tower,
Hartman,
2003),

•  the
analyses
of
entrepreneurs
as
creators
of
 innovation

•  research
on
economic
geography
as
the
clusters
of
 innovation
(Kalantaridis,
Pheby,
1999).

  4. 4. The
sources
of
innova1on
•  science‐push
innovation,
the
innovative
initiative
comes
from
the
science
 departments
of
companies.

•  demand‐pull
innovation,
the
initiative
for
innovation
comes
from
the
marketing,
 sales
or
production
departments
of
a
company
(Jovanovic,
Rob,
1987).

•  In
2000,
the
idea
of
Triple
Helix
‐
innovation
is
treated
as
a
result
of
university‐ government‐industry
relations
(Etzkowitz,
Dzisah,
2008;
Papagiannidis
et
al.
2009).

•  Quadruple
Helix
‐
university‐government‐industry
+
“media‐based
and
culture‐ based
public”
as
fourth
helix
(Carayannis,
Campbell,
2009)

•  Quintuple
Helix
‐
university‐government‐industry
+
“media‐based
and
culture‐ based
public”
+
helix
of
environment

(Carayannis,
Campbell,
2010).
In
this
 approach,
social
ecology
is
incorporated
into
the
framework
where
knowledge,
 innovation
and
the
environment
are
connected.
With
this
latest
approach,
the
 importance
of
sustainable
development
and
“eco‐innovation”
are
highlighted.

  5. 5. Innova1on
policy
of
the
European
Union
•  formulated
in
the
"Broad‐based
innovation
strategy
for
the
EU".

•  Industry‐led
and
society‐driven
innovation
together
with
 competitiveness
and
public
policies
are
a
key
element
of
the
 renewed
Lisbon
strategy.

•  R&D
and
innovation
policy
should
focus
on
major
challenges
for
our
 society
like
climate
change,
energy
and
resource
ef=iciency,
health
 and
demographic
change
and
should
strengthen
every
link
in
the
 innovation
chain,
from
research
to
commercialisation
(http:// ec.europa.eu/europe2020/priorities/smart‐growth/index_en.htm).

  6. 6. WP4
goes
beyond
the
state
of
the
art
•  In
WP4
of
new‐LiFE
project,
the
way
beyond
the
state
of
the
art
is
 results­oriented
and
is
to
be
of
two­steps.

•  First
step
(task
4A)
‐
a
general
theoretical
re=lection
of
innovation
 process
as
a
result
of
cooperation
among
different
group
of
 participants
(society,
research,
business
and
policy)
and
the
 description
of
the
best
practices
of
such
cooperation.

•  The
second
step
‐
connected
with
results‐orientation,
the
research
 assumption
is
to
analyze
the
results
of
innovation
in
different
areas
 of
usage,
meaning
economy
(task
4B),
social
activity
(task
4C)
and
 employment
(task
4D).


  7. 7. References
•  Amo
B.W.,
Kolvereid
L.
(2005),
Organizational
Strategy,
Individual
Personality
And
Innovation
Behavior,
Joumal
of
 Enterprising
Culture
Vol.
13,
No.
1,
pp.
7‐19
•  Carayannis,
E.
G.,
Campbell,
D.
F.
J.
(2009),
“Mode
3”
and
“Quadruple
Helix”:
Toward
a
21st
Century
Fractal
Innovation
 Ecosystem.
International
Journal
of
Technology
Management,
46(3/4),
201–234.
•  Carayannis,
E.
G.,
Campbell,
D.
F.
J.
(2010),
Triple
helix,
Quadruple
helix
and
Quintuple
helix
and
how
do
Knowledge,
 Innovation
and
the
Environment
relate
To
Each
other?
a
Proposed
Framework
for
a
Trans‐disciplinary
analysis
of
 Sustainable
development
and
Social
Ecology,
International
Journal
of
Social
Ecology
and
Sustainable
Development,
1(1),
 41‐69.
•  Dess
G.G.,
Lumpkin
G.
T.,
2005,
The
Role
of
Entrepreneurial
Orientation
in
Stimulating
Effective
Corporate
 Entrepreneurship,
Academy
of
Management
Executive,
2005,
Vol.
19,
No.
1,
pp.
147‐156.

•  Etzkowitz
H.,
Dzisah
J.
(2008),
Rethinking
development:
circulation
in
the
triple
helix,
Technology
Analysis
&
Strategic
 Management,
Vol.
20,
No.
6,
pp.
653–666
•  Gudmundson
D.,
Tower
C.B.,
Hartman
E.A.
(2003),
Innovation
in
Small
Businesses:
Culture
and
Ownership
Structure
Do
 matter,
Journal
of
Developmental
Entrepreneurship,
vol.
8(1),
pp.
1
–
17.

•  Jovanovic
B.,
Rob
R.
(1987),
“Demand
–
Driven
Innovation
and
Spatial
Competition
over
Time”,
Review
of
Economic
Studies,
 vol.
177,
pp.
63
–
72.
•  Kalantaridis
Ch.,
Pheby
J.
(1999),
Processes
of
innovation
among
manufacturing
SME’s:
the
experience
of
Bedfordshine,
 Entrepreneurship
and
Regional
Development,
vol.
11,
pp.
57
–
78.
•  Koellinger
P.
(2008),
„Why
are
some
entrepreneurs
more
innovative
than
others?”,
Small
Business
Economics,
vol.
31,
pp.
 21‐37.
•  Nauwelaers
C.
and
Wintjes
R.
(2002),
“Innovating
SMEs
and
Regions:
The
Need
for
Policy
Intelligence
and
Interactive
 Policies”,
Technology
Analysis
and
Strategic
Management,
vol.
14,
no.
2,
pp.
201‐215.
•  Papagiannidis
S.,
Li
F.,
Etzkowitz
H.,
Clouser
M.
(2009),
Entrepreneurial
networks:
A
Triple
Helix
approach
for
brokering
 human
and
social
capital,
Journal
of

International

Entrepeneurship,
vol.
7,
pp.
215–235.
•  Schumpeter
J.
(1934),
„The
Theory
of
Economic
Development:
An
inquiry
into
proIits,
capital,
credit,
interest
and
the
business
 cycle”
•  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/priorities/smart‐growth/index_en.htm
(13.01.2011)

  8. 8. WP4
objec1ves
•  Socio‐ecological
transition
means
the
change
of
economic
live
as
a
 result
of
innovations
introduced
to
the
market.

•  Innovation
fostering
the
sustainable
development
should
be
result
 of
cooperation
among
different
group
of
stakeholders
such
as
 society,
research,
business
and
policy.

•  Coopetition,
cooperation
between
competitors,
as
new
way
of
 creation
and
implementation
of
innovation
in
socio‐ecological
 transition
should
lead
to
new
way
of
economic
growth
and
 companies
activities,
based
on
the
sustainable
development.

•  Innovation
introduced
in
socio‐ecological
transition
requires
the
 change
of
companies
strategies
and
employees
attitude.


  9. 9. WP4
objec1ves
•  Socio‐ecological
transition
requires
both
implementation
of
 economic
thinking
based
on
the
=inancial
effectiveness
to
socio‐ ecological
transition
and
implementation
of
socio‐ecological
 thinking
based
on
the
social
effectiveness
to
economy
at
 macroeconomic
and
company
level.
•  Innovation
in
socio‐ecological
transition
requires
the
change
of
 acting
way
of
stakeholders
(f.e.
enterprises,
employees,
 consumers,
policy
makers,
citizens…)
and
should
be
both
 economical
and
social.

•  It
means
that
studies
of
positive
experiences
of
social
and
 ecological
innovation
in
territorial
areas
are
needed.

•  It
should
be
the
basis
for
a
list
of
recommendations
specially
 addressed
to
policy
makers,
entrepreneurs
and
social
civil.


  10. 10. Task
4A.
<integra1on>
connec1ng
society,
research,
 business
and
policy
in
crea1on
and
introduc1on
of
 innova1ons
Aims:
•  To
develop
a
theoretical
framework
showing
the
main
relationships
between
 social
demands,
scienti=ic
research

and

business,

•  To
understand
the
role
of
innovation
in
socio‐ecological
transition

•  activities
will
be
measured
at
the
UE
and
the
countries
or
regions
levels

•  An
analysis
on
the
role
of
European
Universities
and
research
centers
are
playing
 in
order
to
enhance
socio‐ecological
innovation
by
means
of:
a)
Fostering
 researches
which
respond
to
present
and
future
socio‐ecological
problems:
aging,
 environmental
problems,
structural
unemployment….;b)
Transferring
knowledge
 from
Universities
and
Research
Centers
to
business
and
society
in
general,
and
 boosting
the
creation
of
new
=irms
based
on
knowledge
created
by
the
research
 (Spin‐offs).

•  the
role
that
play
both,
European
Innovation
Programs
and
regional
 infrastructures
in
supporting
innovation
in
fostering
cooperation
between
 enterprises.

Animator
of
task
4A:
Rafael
Cáceres,
Universidad
de
Sevilla
(Spain)

  11. 11. Task
4B.
<coope11on>
Coope11on
as
market
orienta1on
in
innova1on‐driven
and
knowledge‐based
society
–
animated
by
Marek
 Rekowski
(UEP,
Poland)
4B
Aims:
•  Innovative
entrepreneurship
constitutes
an
important
endogenous
factor
in
 sustainable
development
at
regional
level.

•  The
comparison
of
role
of
innovations
in
the
development
of
enterprises
will
 be
conducted
in
different
regions
and
time
periods.

•  how
innovation
factors
(investment,
new
technologies,
EU
funds,
access
to
the
 Internet)
affect
the
distribution
of
income
in
European
regions
(270
European
 regions
at
NUTS
2
level)
in
the
context
of
sustainable
development
and
the
 socio‐ecological
transition.

Animator
of
task
4B:
Marek
REKOWSKI
(UEP,
Poland)
•  Subtask
<<economy>>Economic
growth
and
sustainable
development
 driven
by
innovation,
animator:
Marek
REKOWSKI
(UEP,
Poland)
•  Subtask
<<company>>
Innovation
as
factor
fostering
companies’
 sustainable
development,
animator:
Barbara
JANKOWSKA
(UEP,
Poland)

  12. 12. 4C
<proposals>
Proposals
from
posi1ve
experiences
of
social
and
 ecological
innova1on
–
Proposi1ons
issues
d’expériences
•  4C
Aims:
•  to
show
and
study
social
and
ecological
innovations,
and
to
make
suggestions
 to
public
stakeholders
to
sustain
these
innovations.

•  to
mobilize
entrepreneurship
of
the
social
economy
sector
in
order
to
enlarge
 the
survey
of
such
innovative
and
drafting
of
suggestion
at
European
level
•  To
analyse
how
politics
stakeholders
and
public
policies
can
help
social
and
 ecological
innovation

•  good
practices
in
socio‐ecological
innovation
Animator
of
task
4C:
Jean­Guy
HENCKEL,
COCAGNE
(France)
•  Subtask
<<widening>>
How
politics
can
help
ecological
and
social
 innovation?
‐
animated
by
Julia
FERNÁNDEZ
QUINTANILLA,
ACCEM
(Espana).
•  Subtask
<<experiences>>
Inventory
of
existing
innovative
experiences
‐
 animated
by
Évelyne
BRUNAU,
Relais
Emploi
(France)

  13. 13. 4D.
<employment>
innova1ve
employment
–
humanis1c
workplace
for
 crea1vity
and
personal
development
of
working
people
•  Aims:
To
understand
new
economic
activities,
employment
and
ways
of
working
 which
are
needed
in
socio‐ecological
transition
and
innovative
forms
of
work
to
 develop
not
only
the
performance
of
companies
but
personal
development
of
 people
as
well.

•  The
use
of
the
living
lab
paradigm
and
methodology
as
a
support
tool
of
open
 innovation
ecosystems
process.
Liven
lab
should
empower
citizens,
as
end‐user,
to
 in=luence
the
development
of
innovative
services,
industry
to
develop
new
 sustainable
ideas
and
also
policy
makers
for
exploring
new
policies
and
regulations
 in
real‐life
scenarios
to
evaluate
their
potential
impacts
before
their
 implementations.

•  The
cooperation
among
stakeholders,
as
a
source
of
innovation
for
creation
of
new
 economic
activity,
will
be
re=ined,
implemented
and
experimented
on
several
 themes,
domains
and
regions
in
our
living
lab
through
seven
key
variables
(new
 jobs
and
employment,
high
performance
organizations,
creative
work,
collective
 intelligence,
social
performance,
participatory
processes
and
digital
socialization)
 which
will
enable
socio‐ecological
transition
success.
•  Animator
of
taks
4D:
Eddie
SOULIER,
UTT
(France)

  14. 14. Subtasks
of
task
4D
•  Subtask
<<Innovative
employment
and
job
prospective>>
Job
prospective
and
new
forms
of
occupational
 choice
needed
in
socio‐ecological
transition‐
animated
by
Aline
SCOUARNEC,
IAE
de
Caen
and
ESSEC,
and
 Mohamed
TISSIOUI,
IAE
de
Caen
(France).
•  Subtask
<<High
performance
ecosystems
and
organizations>>
Organizational
characteristics
related
to
high
 performance.
Cross‐territorial‐sectoral
assessments
of
high
performance
(organizational
design/innovation,
modes
 of
learning,
professional
development,
deployment
of
skills
over
lifecycles
–
including
employment
of
older
 workers)
and
socio‐economic
environments
that
foster
it.–
animated
by
Robert
LINDLEY,
IER‐
University
of
 Warwick
(United
Kingdom).
•  Subtask
<<Creative
workplaces>>
Cases
and
strategies
to
create
places
where
we
live,
work
and
participate
 which
promote
creativity,
self‐expression,
rich
human
interaction
and
social
dynamics
with
productivity,
security
 and
less
risks
–
animated
by
Eddie
SOULIER,
UTT
(France).
Team
members:
Francis
ROUSSEAUX,
Reims
University
 and
IRCAM
(France).
•  Subtask
<<Social
capital
and
collective
intelligence>>
Factors
that
facilitate
collective
intelligence,
de=ine
as
 groups
of
individuals
doing
things
collectively
that
seem
intelligent,
to
transform
collaborative
work,
in
the
 perspective
of
socio‐ecological
transition
‐
Animated
by
François
SILVA,
ESCEM
(France)
•  Subtask
<<
Participatory
processes
and
contemporary
forms
of
controls>>
Put
out
of
balance
the
increase
in
 participation
(including
eParticipation
or
e‐Democracy
in
a
context
of
the
development
of
social
media
in
the
public
 sphere
and
the
building
of
new
forms
of
"social
authority")
and
variables
expressing
news
power
relations
and
 forms
of
control
into
the
organizations
in
order
to
understand
and
evaluate
if
these
new
forms
of
power
are
a
 crucial
factor
of
sustainable
innovation
–
animated
by
Geraldine
de
La
RUPELLE,
ESCEM
(France).
•  Subtask
<<Digital
socialization
>>
With
a
survey
which
will
explore
the
uses
and
practices
in
ICT
organizations
 from
both
the
commercial
sector
and
non‐pro=it
sector
and
institutions
(local
administration)
anchored
in
distinct
 territories
in
Europe
(City,
State
or
province,
country),
we
intend
to
question
the
link
between
the
establishment
of
 CSAI
(Community
Services
and
Applications
on
the
ICT)
in
intranets
2.0,
ownership
by
employees
for
reasons
of
 social
coherence
and
managerial
ef=iciency,
and
the
positive
impact
of
these
CSAI
on
the
well‐being
of
employees
–
 animated
by
Olivier
GALIBERT,
University
of
Burgundy
(France)
and
Carsten
WILHELM,
University
of
Burgundy
 (France).

  15. 15. Transversal
task
<<Living
lab
as
a
support
tool
to
the
 WP4
innova1on
process>>
•  As
a
response
to
the
socio‐economic
transition,
we
propose
to
establish
a
 living
lab
as
a
support
tool
to
the
(open)
innovation
(ecosystems)
process.
 Our
main
hypothesis
is
that
the
seven
variables
of
our
research
framework
 ‐
new
jobs
and
employment,
high
performance
organizations,
creative
 work,
collective
intelligence,
social
performance,
participatory
processes
 and
digital
socialization
–
constitute
main
factors
that
will
in=luence
 innovation
process
in
socio‐ecological
transition.
In
order
to
prove
it,
the
 living
lab
paradigm
is
the
best
way
to
experiment
the
ideation
of
the
 innovation
process
as
a
result
of
cooperation
among
different
group
of
 participants
(society,
research,
business
and
policy)
and
to
analyze
the
 results
of
innovation
in
different
areas
of
usage,
in
particular
on
 employment
and
humanistic
work
(task
4D).

•  Animated
by
Eddie
SOULIER,
UTT
(France).


  16. 16. 4E.
Synthe1c
Report
•  The
aim
of
this
task
is
to
integrate
the
results
of
task
4A‐4D
into
one
 research
report.

•  The
series
of
working
papers
“Innovation
in
socio‐economical
 transition”
will
be
published
based
on
the
best
practices,
practical
 solutions
and
empirical
models
of
integrated
innovations.



















•  Animator:
Aleksandra
Gawel,
Uniwersytet
Ekonomiczny
w
 Poznaniu
(Poland)
•  Team
members:
Rafael
Cáceres,
Marek
Rekowski,
Jean‐Guy
Henckel,
 Eddie
SOULIER


  17. 17. Deliverables
The
main
deliverable
of
WP4:
book
“The
models
of
integrated
innovation
in
socio‐ecological
 transition”
The
deliverables
of
tasks:
•  Task
4A:
Report
•  Task
4B:
 –  Report:
“Recommendations
to
the
central
and
regional
institutions
of
solutions
fostering
 entrepreneurship
and
sustainable
development
of
a
region”

 –  Book:
“Innovations
as
production
factor
in
territorial
perspective”

 –  Book:
„Regional
map
for
socio‐economic
development
model”

 –  Report:
“New
solutions
and
practical
application
of
sustainable
development
in
the
district
heating
 companies”
 –  Book:
“Implications
of
coopetition
for
socio
ecological
transition”

•  Task
4D:
 –  Sub‐task
:
“digital
socialization”
 –  Report
:
Recommendation
to
develop
the
well‐being
according
to
ef=icient
et
cooperative
uses
of
 Intranet
2.0
solutions

 –  Book
:
“Perspectives
and
limits
of
the
cooperative
and
collaborative
Intranet
on
the
well‐being
 employees”


  18. 18. Thank
you
for
your
attention
Dziękuję
za
uwagę


×