Beyond Creativity

Gatekeepers in the Innovation Process

In ECIS Galway in June 2008 Eoin Whelan and I will have a following session:

"Knowledge Diffusion in R&D Groups: The Impact of Internet Technologies"

Abstract:

Knowledge flows are the lifeblood of any R&D organisation. These firms are increasingly
discovering that the knowledge they require is often located beyond their boundaries. In this paper, we investigate how R&D groups acquire and diffuse external knowledge and the role Internet technologies play in this process.

The focus of our study is on the technological gatekeeper. Previous studies have found that gatekeepers are key nodes in the innovation process. These sporadic individuals have the skills to identify useful knowledge outside the firm and disseminate this among their local colleagues.

However, much of the seminal gatekeeper research has been conducted over two decades ago. In the time since, there have been huge advances in ICT and especially Internet technologies. These technologies have dramatically altered how knowledge workers source and share their information. Our objective is to advance the gatekeeper theory into an era where the knowledge worker is saturated with information. Using case study methods, we examine knowledge flows in the R&D group of an Irish medical devices firm.

Our results indicate that due to advances in Internet technology, the traditional gatekeeper no longer exists to any great extent. Instead, the modern R&D lab acquires and diffuses external knowledge through a combination of a ‘web gatekeeper’ and a
‘knowledge transformer.’

You are welcome to participate the session or comment the topic beforehand !

How can inventing be research?

Too often research and practise are totally separated tracks. I have met  inventors who dislike science and research, because "researchers have nothing practical to provide". Somehow I have a feeling that these sceptics do not really understand the current state of research and its methods.

True, the traditional, positivistic view on science does not accept inventing in the university.  However, design research and especially Herbert Simon's book "The Sciences of the Artificial" was the first attempt to introduce inventing in research and emphasise the importance of artefacts .

The term artifact is used to describe something that is artificial, or constructed by humans, as opposed to something that occurs naturally (Simon 1996).

"Building a system in of itself does not constitute research", saw Jay Nunamaker & Co. I agree. Theories need to guide the building process of systems and artefacts .

Artefacts are built, evaluated and demolished as part of design research. In Information Systems (IS) field this is called design science. If you are interested in building artefacts (software, models, prescriptions, etc) I recommend you to take a look at:

- Design Research in Information Systems, an overview by Vijay Vaishnavi and Bill Küchler (UPDATE D 20th Jan 2008) .

- Action Design - a method integrating action research and design science. Originally this was introduced by Chris Argyris. There is a company and a consulting methodology related to it. BUT, more interesting stuff is coming from Matti Rossi, Maung Sein, Ola Henfridsson & Co.  Please, keep on eye on their work.

- The evolutionary management-related work of Joan van Aken: "Prescription-driven research that provides solutions for management problems in addition to description driven research that enables us to understand the nature of problems but leaves undone the task of developing sound change programs".

- Theory of Design Science:  The latest article by Shirley Gregor and David Jones.

(If the links above do not work or you need more info about design research, please, let me know)

Afterword: Thanks to my advisor, professor Pertti Järvinen for advancing this field and my understanding.

Press release: Open Innovation and Intermediaries

A small press release, originating from 23rd August 2007:

Open Innovation Challenges Companies to Utilise Intermediaries

Traditional, closed innovation activity has a limited effect in an organisation. External specialists and innovators could provide novel insights and additional value. Internet-based innovation markets enable companies and innovators to buy and sell IP (Intellectual Property) as well as to develop ideas collaboratively to the level of innovation. This creates savings in R&D expenses.

The Hypermedia Laboratory at the University of Tampere in Finland investigates the Open Innovation phenomenon. We focus on innovation intermediaries who confidentially integrate companies and innovators to solve problems and challenges.

Currently Hypermedia Laboratory conducts future research of Open Innovation with leading academics. Additionally, a web-based survey is targeted to intermediaries and their customers. Innovators and their motivational factors, interests, brokering and creative problem-solving methods are inspected in this survey. Summaries of these research results will be embedded in a business book, planned for publication at the end of 2008.

This research is part of Tekes (http://www.tekes.fi) funded Parteco project which is focused on social media and participatory economics. In Hypermedia Laboratory this research closely links to our open source research area.

The preliminary research findings indicate that companies in Europe should put more emphasis on recognising outside expertise both in their innovation and human resource activities.

Original: http://www.uta.fi/hyper/news.php?item=14392

The press release is also available in Finnish. I did not dare to put an over-simplified picture in the actual press release. So, I put it here:

 

End note: I am still figuring out resources and time for editing that business book. Let's see.

EURAM Paris + Service Innovation Berkeley - Conference papers

Following joint-venture papers got accepted:

Ahonen, M., Antikainen, M., & Mäkipää, M. (Forthcoming). Supporting Collective Creativity within Open Innovation. European Academy of Management (EURAM) conference. Open Innovation Track. Paris

Ahonen, M. & Lietsala, K. (Forthcoming). Managing Service Ideas and Suggestions – Information Systems in Innovation Brokering. Tekes- Haas Conference on Service Innovation. Berkeley, CA.

I am so glad :-)

So, I will be visiting Berkeley/CA, Davis/CA and Murray,KY in April and Paris in May.

If these papers interest you, please, let me know and I can send you a draft.

Mass-customization and Open Innovation - Visit of Frank Piller

Open Innovation has many angles. One is definitely mass-customisation. Co-design and mass-customisation can be seen strategies of Open Innovation. Professor Frank Piller (MIT, TUM) is the expert in this area. We were fortunate to have him as a guest at the University of Tampere and as a speaker at the MCPF 2rd Mass-Customization and Personalization Forum in Finland.   

Frank's blog is full of interesting cases, so, take a look !

Interactive Value Creation (or Interaktive Wertschöpfung) is the term Frank is using in his newest book. Agree, the term "Open Innovation" is biased and it truly has many meanings (I will get back to this in my future postings.) I like this term 'Interactive' which means that companies and customers work (innovate) very closely to create new products and services. Support for creativity and problem-solving  are also crucial in this Interactive Value Creation process by Frank Piller. We discussed also about my research topic Intermediaries in the Open Innovation and Frank kindly advised me to look at the research done by Prandelli and Sawhney in this area.

Within mass-customisation those web-based toolkits and new Web 2.0 business models are truly interesting, see for example the latest Armapartners report. No wonder, in the MCPF-conference our presentation was called: "What motivates customers to innovate collaboratively? - Utilizing Web 2.0 Communities in mass customization and customer co-design  ".

Next Frank will join us (I, Maria (Antikainen) and Marko (Mäkipää)) in our paper towards the EURAM (European Academy of Management) conference and it's Open Innovation track.

Collective Creativity - Problem-Solving at Work

While many studies have focused on individual creativity, there is much less research focused on collective creativity or group creativity.

The latest article by Andrew Hargadon and Beth Bechky in the Organization Science Journal is therefore worth reading: When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives - A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work.

Hargadon and Bechky start by acknowledging previous research:

Finding novel solutions is inherently linked to the issue of defining problems — which definition of the problem is recalled identifies which set of solutions is considered relevant (Getzels 1975).

They continue:

"Organizations may therefore benefit when people
come together to collectively work on defining and solving
problems, and we need to deepen our understanding
of how such collective problem solving happens."

Analysis of the their field data reveals following 4 sets of interrelating
activities that play a role in triggering moments
of collective creativity:

1) Help seeking describes activities that occur when an individual who either recognizes or is assigned a problematic situation actively seeks the assistance of others.

2) Help giving, conversely, represents the willing devotion of time and attention to assisting with the work of others.

3) Reflective reframing represents the mindful
behaviors of all participants in an interaction, where
each respectfully attends to and builds upon the comments
and actions of others.

4) Reinforcing reflects  those activities that subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) reinforce the organizational values that support individuals as they engage in help seeking, help giving, and
reflective reframing.

OK, there are those 4 sets. Hargadon & Bechky (2006) successfully manage to illustrate practical cases and processes from consulting companies and design companies where those sets get realised.

Still, to me, their greatest contribution is to Amabile's Componential Model of Creativity. 

According to Amabile (1983, 67):

"The componential framework of creativity includes three major components: ... "Domain-Relevant Skills" can be considered as the basis of for any performance in a given domain... "Creativity-Relevant Skills " include cognitive style, application of heuristics for the exploration of new cognitive pathways, and working style. ... "Task motivation" includes motivational variables that determine an individual's approach to a given task.

Hargadon & Bechky Extension: "Because collective creativity takes place in moments when any one individual does not hold all of the necessary knowledge to construct a creative solution, the potential for a creative solution requires the domain-relevant skills of multiple participants". ... "Considering the moments in which help seeking, help giving, reflective reframing, and reinforcing behaviours encourage motivation would help us to understand the role of intrinsic motivation in creativity processes".

   This article of Hargadon and Bechky had a tremendous impact on my artefact building :-)

Creativity in Management - Review of Rooke & Torbert in HBR

How can managers and leaders develop themselves over time? What kind of learning process is needed? What does creativity mean in connection to management and leadership?

Rooke and Torbert (2005) wrote an article in the Harvard Business Review called "Seven Transformations of Leadership".

Their introduction:

“Different leaders exhibit different kinds of action logic – ways in which they interpret their surroundings and react when their power or safety is challenged. In our research of thousands of leaders, we observed seven types of action logics. At least effective for organizational leadership are Opportunist and Diplomat; the most effective, the Strategist and Alchemist. Knowing your own action logic can be the first step toward developing a more effective leadership style."

Then they present the following table with various leadership styles: 

                                                               

Action Logic	Characteristics	Strengths
Opportunist	Wins any way possible. Self-oriented; manipulative; “might makes right.”	Good in emergencies and in sales opportunities.
Diplomat	Avoids overt conflict. Wants   to belong; obeys group norms; rarely rocks the boat.	Good as supportive glue within an office; helps bring people together.
Expert	Rules by logic and expertise. Seeks rational efficiency.	Good as an individual contributor.
Achiever	Meets strategic goals. Effectively achieves   goals through teams; juggles managerial duties and   market demands.	Well suited to managerial roles; action and goal oriented.
Individualist	Interweaves competing personal and company action logics. Creates unique structures to resolve gaps   between strategy and performance.	Effective in venture and consulting roles.
Strategist	Generates   organizational and persona transformations. Exercises the power of mutual inquiry,   vigilance, and vulnerability for both the short and long term.	Effective as a   transformational leader.
Alchemist	Generates social   transformations. Integrates material, spiritual, and societal transformation.	Good at leading society-wide transformations

Interestingly, these styles are also like psychological developmental phases of children, Opportunist style being the worst one ;-)

The categorisation of Rooke and Torbert could perhaps integrate also personal styles (like shown by MBTI) and could allow utilisation of different styles in different situations?

Csikszentmihalyi (1997) sees highly creative people complex, able to change their way of action according to situation. He further lists following complexities aka counterparts:

1. Energetic vs. relaxed

2. Smart vs. naïve

3. Playful vs. disciplined

4. Imagination vs. rooted sense of reality

5. Extrovert vs. introvert

6. Ambitious vs. selfless

7. Masculine vs. feminine

8. Traditional vs. rebellious

9. Passionate vs. extremely objective

10. Sensitivity vs. unsensitivity

(Csikszentmihalyi, 137, 1997)

When we are talking about a managerial board, should this board consist of multiple manager
archetypes? Can a skilful manager (or leader) change his leadership style based on current situation?

Furthermore, what are those correlations between design thinking maturity and leadership maturity? Please, take a look at the Thinking and Making blog.

Finally, the leaders and managers have also been studied based on biographies. This kind of historiometric studies have revealed following leaders: charismatic, ideological and pragmatic. Each of these leader types has different behaviours in problem-solving, leader-follower interactions, communication and politics. (Mumford, 2006 <-- I recommed Mumford's latest book).

Any comments on these leadership styles?

Zotero - Networked Creativity for R&D + Connections to del.icio.us

What does networked creativity mean? With Zotero's network model are close to Roger Schank's definition of creativity: search and alteration processes. Research results and sources will be more and more searched...and altered from one area to another. Wait a second a second, what is Zotero?

Zotero is a revolutionary Firefox 2.0 extension that enables you:

1. To store (download) full reference information to your machine. Supports library databases, Amazon, journal databases etc.
2. To save time tremendously, because you don't need to type those references. Additionally, typos are minimised, because those professional librarians can do the job more accurately ;-)
3. Update: To do internet research, Zotero allows you to take snapshots of WWW-pages and create a reference.  Similarly, a piece of text on screen can be highlighted and with the right mouse button stored as a reference.
4. To organise those downloaded references to a bibliography on your machine. (Works also off-line!)
   
5. To export your whole bibliography or parts of it in APA or other formats. (Works also off-line!)

A video demonstration of Zotero was useful for me. Although Zotero is in 1.0 beta phase, I have found it to be rather stable and reliable.

Zotero is a production of the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University. It is funded by the United States Institute of Museum and Library Services, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Actually, it is a very large open source software (OSS) project and indicates how powerful those OSS communities are.

The new OSS-developed Mozilla Firefox 2.0 browser is a pre-condition to use Zotero.

A good reason to abandon your MS Internet Explorer ;-)

Many of you are familiar with del.icio.us. It is an extensive social bookmarking service, nowadays owned by Yahoo!. If you are a user of del.icio.us, please, ask my del.icio.us address and let's get networked!

I and my colleagues working with social media have been wondering, what is the connection between del.icio.us and Zotero. There is no data exchange or interoperability between these services (yet). Still, del.icio.us can be modified to include 'Tag Bundles'. One such tag bundle could perhaps be the Personal Library, with links pointing at your exported Zotero bibliography in HTML-format?

It won't take long before Zotero enables us all to share our bibliographies. This will definitely chance the our conception of research (and R&D). These activities will become more and more networked in nature. Update: There are many things happening in the Web 2.0 research and educational scene. Solution Watch has a nice overview of latest services and information systems.

BTW, What will happen to services like Citeseer, will they disappear or become some sort of aggregators?

Google for Educators + Mass-Customisation Conference article

One part of this Open Innovation phenomenon seems to be crowdsourcing and providing addictive user experiences.

In that sense the latest opening of Google was interesting:

Welcome to Google for Educators

In their own words: "We are inviting teachers to share your best ideas for using Google technology to innovate in the  classroom."...." The Google Teacher Academy is a pilot program designed to help K-12 educators get the most from innovative technologies."   

This is actually nothing new, for example Microsoft has had similar programs: Partners in Learning. Still, I see that Google's invitation is more addictive, just look at those teacher interviews behind every Google tool. Still, this kind of integration of business, teachers and kids is not an easy topic. I wonder what Professor Nigel Thrift would say/write about this? His latest article "Re-inventing invention: new tendencies in capitalist commodification" is worth reading.

C-o-n-n-e-c-t-i-o-n : I am currently writing with Maria Antikainen and Marko Mäkipää an article for The Second Finnish Mass Customization and Personalization Forum - MCPF 2006. Our draft title (not a final one;-) "What Motivates Customers to Innovate and Participate for Free
- Web 2.0 Communities and Mass-Customisation". Perhaps Google for Educators will be one of the cases we will present?! We are not in a hurry, the article will be out in January 2007.

Any comments about the Google for Educators? Do you see the link with mass-customisation superficial ... or realistic?

Call for Creative Futures - Oulu, Finland

The 'Call for Creative Futures' conference will be held in Oulu, Finland between 10th and 11th October 2006. 

There are interesting keynote speakers, including:

- Sandra M. Dingli, The Edward de Bono Institute, University of Malta

- Judith Doyle, Ontario College of Art and Design, Canada

My contribution is a workshop called "The connections of creativity, innovation and IT". After my short introduction, the following presentations will take place:

- Johanna Still: The Influence of R&D Network Conditions on its Knowledge Creation - Cases New Mobile Service Development Networks

- Katariina Ala-Rämi and Tommi Inkinen: Information Technology, communication and innovative networking. The case of

Northern Finland

Key topics: open innovation, reorganisation of R&D, communities of practice, mobility, mobile learning, problem-based learning, Web 2.0, organisational learning, telework.

I am glad to chair with Professor Sanna Järvelä. She is an expert in motivation, learning and IT related topics.  I am still seeking the connection between Creative Problem-solving (CPS) and Problem-based Learning (PBL).

Let's hope that learning and education themes will be central in all creativity conferences in the future. It seems to me that many of those "Creative City" programs / conferences are not focused on learning and educational topics at all. In that sense The Call for Creative Futures Oulu -conference has a positive start :-)

Afterword: The Oulu conference is free of charge. So, get registrated!