IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v150y2026ics0166497225002172.html

Creating and sustaining space for play as leeway for innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Whitelaw, Lisa
  • Garcia-Lorenzo, Lucia

Abstract

Large established organizations face the 'paradox of institutionalizing spontaneity'. While they recognize the need for innovation and create enabling structures to support it, these very structures can inadvertently constrain the spontaneous qualities essential for breakthrough innovation. This longitudinal ethnographic study explores how organizational members navigate this paradox by following six innovation projects over three years at a multinational technology company. Our processual analysis that combined participant observation, interviews, diaries, and project-related documents reveals that innovation projects progress through tactically re-created 'spaces for play'—temporary leeway that innovators create for themselves within existing organizational structures. We show how these spaces develop through recurring patterns of opening, maintaining, and reconstituting and how project teams employ situated tactics to creatively leverage specific organizational structures to open and sustain them. Projects advance by realigning with company strategy to re-open space for play, while those failing to connect either stop or pivot. Our findings suggest that innovation-enabling structures alone are insufficient. Innovators must continuously use tactical combinations to create and sustain temporary space for play as leeway for innovation, generating emerging impacts that influence organizational contexts and shape subsequent project developments. We also contribute both conceptual refinements and empirical grounding to the mainly theoretical body of knowledge on organizational entrepreneurship and space for play.

Suggested Citation

  • Whitelaw, Lisa & Garcia-Lorenzo, Lucia, 2026. "Creating and sustaining space for play as leeway for innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:150:y:2026:i:c:s0166497225002172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2025.103385
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497225002172
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2025.103385?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Hjorth, 2004. "Creating space for play/invention -- concepts of space and organizational entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 413-432, September.
    2. Bertrand Quélin & Valérie Claude-Gaudillat, 2006. "Innovation, New Market and Governance Choices of Entry: The Internet Brokerage Market," Post-Print hal-00459804, HAL.
    3. Bengt Johannisson, 2011. "Towards a practice theory of entrepreneuring," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 135-150, February.
    4. Deborah Dougherty & Trudy Heller, 1994. "The Illegitimacy of Successful Product Innovation in Established Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 200-218, May.
    5. Erwin Danneels, 2003. "Tight–loose coupling with customers: the enactment of customer orientation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 559-576, June.
    6. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    7. Jennifer A. Howard-Grenville, 2007. "Developing Issue-Selling Effectiveness over Time: Issue Selling as Resourcing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 560-577, August.
    8. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    9. Rangapriya (Priya) Kannan‐Narasimhan & Barbara S. Lawrence, 2018. "How innovators reframe resources in the strategy‐making process to gain innovation adoption," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 720-758, March.
    10. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    11. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Matthew J. Mazzei & David J. Ketchen & Christopher L. Shook, 2017. "Understanding strategic entrepreneurship: a “theoretical toolbox” approach," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 631-663, June.
    2. Ter Wal, Anne L.J. & Criscuolo, Paola & Salter, Ammon, 2017. "Making a marriage of materials: The role of gatekeepers and shepherds in the absorption of external knowledge and innovation performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 1039-1054.
    3. Caroline A. Bartel & Raghu Garud, 2009. "The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Organizational Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 107-117, February.
    4. Guo, Jingjing & Guo, Bin & Zhou, Jianghua & Wu, Xiaobo, 2020. "How does the ambidexterity of technological learning routine affect firm innovation performance within industrial clusters? The moderating effects of knowledge attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Ridge, Jason W. & Johnson, Scott & Hill, Aaron D. & Bolton, Joel, 2017. "The role of top management team attention in new product introductions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 17-24.
    6. Natalya Vinokurova & Rahul Kapoor, 2020. "Converting inventions into innovations in large firms: How inventors at Xerox navigated the innovation process to commercialize their ideas," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2372-2399, December.
    7. Mark Dodgson & David M. Gann & Nelson Phillips, 2013. "Organizational Learning and the Technology of Foolishness: The Case of Virtual Worlds at IBM," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1358-1376, October.
    8. Matthew J. Mazzei & David J. Ketchen & Christopher L. Shook, 0. "Understanding strategic entrepreneurship: a “theoretical toolbox” approach," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-33.
    9. Samina Karim & Aseem Kaul, 2015. "Structural Recombination and Innovation: Unlocking Intraorganizational Knowledge Synergy Through Structural Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 439-455, April.
    10. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    11. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    12. Alvesson, Mats & Sveningsson, Stefan, 2011. "Management is the solution: Now what was the problem? On the fragile basis for managerialism," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 349-361.
    13. Lauren Waardenburg & Marleen Huysman & Anastasia V. Sergeeva, 2022. "In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man Is King: Knowledge Brokerage in the Age of Learning Algorithms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 59-82, January.
    14. Felipe A. Csaszar & Harsh Ketkar & Hyunjin Kim, 2024. "Artificial Intelligence and Strategic Decision-Making: Evidence from Entrepreneurs and Investors," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 322-345, December.
    15. Birkinshaw, Julian & Ridderstråle, Jonas, 1999. "Fighting the corporate immune system: a process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 149-180, April.
    16. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    17. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    18. Markus Reihlen & Jan‐Florian Schlapfner & Monika Seeger & Hannah Trittin‐Ulbrich, 2022. "Strategic Venturing as Legitimacy Creation: The Case of Sustainability," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 417-459, March.
    19. Melissa Haller & David L. Rigby, 2020. "The geographic evolution of optics technologies in the United States, 1976–2010," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    20. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:techno:v:150:y:2026:i:c:s0166497225002172. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.