IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhb/cbslpf/2002_007.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Creative Knowledge Environments in the Innovation System

Author

Listed:
  • Hemlin, Sven

    (Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School)

Abstract

4 Background This paper summarises a grant proposal to the Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA). The aim of this research project is to increase our understanding for factors that are crucial for creative working processes and innovative results in knowledge organisations. Its objective is to make a contribution to the construction of a model, which describes how to increase creativity with work teams in knowledge organisations. The reason to pursue this project is first that knowledge workers are key-persons in the innovation system, and second that we know surprisingly little about what is important for knowledge workers to develop creative processes. This research is based on two assumptions. One is that innovations are based on creative processes. Another is that social scientists argue that we now have a society, which can be seen as a knowledge and network society. Research about innovations deal to a great extent with conditions and mechanisms conducive to innovations. In this research we include the question of how to organise and manage innovative activities. A related problem is how creative research and knowledge environments should be organised and managed. These two problem areas are linked in several ways. First, R&D and knowledge are needed for innovations, since universities, research institutes and industry labs belong to the innovation system. Second, a commercial environment, entrepreneurs and companies are needed for knowledge to be transformed into and contribute to innovations. Third, we are now in a state where knowledge production and use of knowledge is increasing, but where knowledge about leadership, organising, management and work processes in ´the new knowledge production´ is scarce. In the recent and highly debated literature about the new knowledge production (Gibbons et al., 1994; Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1997), it is argued that we now face a changed and contextualised knowledge production, where various producers join into new coalitions, networks and organisations between universities, industry and government. Mode 2 and Triple Helix are the concepts used for this new phase in the changed institutionalisation of knowledge development. In research and technology policy literature a new contract between the academy and society is discussed (Martin et al., 1996; Bragesjö, 2001). The previous contract meant that society left researchers free to do research in line with their own ideas and objectives. This was regarded by politicians to lead to progress, development and prosperity for citizens and society as a whole. The new re-negotiated contract means that society and its actors (e.g, companies, public organisations and NGO: s) participate in knowledge production in a more active, direct and leading capacity. In the private sector changes in knowledge production towards ´learning organisations´ are taking place. But also in the mediating fields between societies´ public and private spheres an increasing development of knowledge production and knowledge use in networks is taking place. And the development of regions described in the literature is typical for what we call a ´network society´ (Sörlin & Törnqvist, 2000). Studies on new knowledge producers are so far few and empirical studies of knowledge workers and their working environments are even scarcer.

Suggested Citation

  • Hemlin, Sven, 2002. "Creative Knowledge Environments in the Innovation System," Working Papers 7/2002, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Management, Politics & Philosophy.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhb:cbslpf:2002_007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://openarchive.cbs.dk/handle/10398/6339
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paulus, Paul B. & Yang, Huei-Chuan, 2000. "Idea Generation in Groups: A Basis for Creativity in Organizations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 76-87, May.
    2. Pfeffer, Jeffrey, 1997. "New Directions for Organization Theory: Problems and Prospects," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195114348.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xintian Wang & Hai Wang, 2019. "A Study on Sustaining Corporate Innovation with E-Commerce in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-16, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang Kai, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Idea Generation Techniques," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 65-80, January.
    2. Gu, Jifa & Tang, Xijin, 2005. "Meta-synthesis approach to complex system modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(3), pages 597-614, November.
    3. Peter Dobers & Lars Strannegård & Rolf Wolff, 2000. "Union‐Jacking the research agenda. A study of the frontstage and backstage of Business Strategy and the Environment 1992–1998," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 49-61, January.
    4. Scherhag, Christian & Boenigk, Silke, 2010. "Relationship Fundraising: Stand der empirischen Forschung, theoretischer Bezugsrahmen und zukünftige Forschungsfelder," ZögU - Zeitschrift für öffentliche und gemeinwirtschaftliche Unternehmen, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 33(4), pages 354-367.
    5. Emich, Kyle J. & Vincent, Lynne C., 2020. "Shifting focus: The influence of affective diversity on team creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 24-37.
    6. Y. Sekou Bermiss & Benjamin L. Hallen & Rory McDonald & Emily C. Pahnke, 2017. "Entrepreneurial beacons: The Yale endowment, run‐ups, and the growth of venture capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 545-565, March.
    7. Alexander Brem & Rogelio Puente-Díaz & Marine Agogué, 2017. "Creativity and Innovation: State of the Art and Future Perspectives for Research," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem & Rogelio Puente-Diaz & Marine Agogué (ed.), The Role of Creativity in the Management of Innovation State of the Art and Future Research Outlook, chapter 1, pages 1-12, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Sarah Lister, 2000. "Power in partnership? An analysis of an NGO's relationships with its partners," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(2), pages 227-239.
    9. Ahmet Ilhan, 2020. "Comparison of Organizational Theory in the Axis of the "Pandemonium" Metaphor in Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Approaches," Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, Eurasian Publications, vol. 8(4), pages 292-304.
    10. Youngcheoul Kang & Nakbum Choi & Seoyong Kim, 2021. "Searching for New Model of Digital Informatics for Human–Computer Interaction: Testing the Institution-Based Technology Acceptance Model (ITAM)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-36, May.
    11. Belyaeva Zh S., 2011. "Transformation processes of the corporate development in Russia : corporate social responsibility," Экономика региона, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки «Институт экономики Уральского отделения Российской академии наук», issue 1, pages 142-142.
    12. Mohamed Zennouche & Jian Zhang & Bo Wen Wang, 2014. "Factors influencing innovation at individual, group and organisational levels: a content analysis," International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1), pages 23-42.
    13. Iryna Sikora, 2015. "Creative Production and Exchange of Ideas," 2015 Papers psi700, Job Market Papers.
    14. Ferraro, Fabrizio & Pfeffer, Jeffrey & Sutton, Robert I., 2003. "Economics language and assumptions: How theories can become self-fulfilling," IESE Research Papers D/530, IESE Business School.
    15. Johnson, Joseph G. & Raab, Markus, 2003. "Take The First: Option-generation and resulting choices," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 215-229, July.
    16. Pornsit Jiraporn & Yixin Liu & Young S. Kim, 2014. "How Do Powerful CEOs Affect Analyst Coverage?," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(3), pages 652-676, June.
    17. Boone, C.A.J.J. & van Witteloostuijn, A. & van Olffen, W. & de Brabander, B., 2003. "The Genesis of top management team diversity : selective turnover among top management teams in the Dutch newspaper publisher industry (1970-1994)," Research Memorandum 006, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    18. Sandra A. Slaughter & Laurie J. Kirsch, 2006. "The Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer Portfolios in Software Process Improvement: A Field Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 301-320, September.
    19. Alessandra Tognazzo & Paola Angela Maria Mazzurana, 2017. "Friends doing business. An Explorative Longitudinal Case Study of Creativity and Innovation in an Italian Technology-Based Start-Up," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 13(2), pages 77-103.
    20. Liu, Zuoming, 2020. "Unraveling the complex relationship between environmental and financial performance ─── A multilevel longitudinal analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 328-340.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; working processes; knowledge organizations; creativity; knowledge workers; network;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhb:cbslpf:2002_007. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lars Nondal (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbschdk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.