IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03079478.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What does proof-of-concept (POC) really do? A systematic comparison of generativity and robustness of POC practices
[Qu'est-ce que la preuve de concept (POC) fait vraiment ? Une comparaison systématique de la générativité et de la robustesse des pratiques de la preuve de concept]

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline Jobin

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Pascal Le Masson

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Sophie Hooge

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Although there has been an increasing use of 'proof-of-concept' in practice, the literature is highly poor on the subject. We investigate a basic research question: what does proof-of-concept really do? We perform an historical study and a case study of PoC practices of a French design studio 'The Sismo'. Generativity and robustness allow us to compare PoC practices related to TRLs, medicine, security, start-up, and design. The study clarifies the polysemous practices to help stakeholders to know why and how PoC is a design tool to establish and sustain collaborative exploratory communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline Jobin & Pascal Le Masson & Sophie Hooge, 2020. "What does proof-of-concept (POC) really do? A systematic comparison of generativity and robustness of POC practices [Qu'est-ce que la preuve de concept (POC) fait vraiment ? Une comparaison systéma," Post-Print hal-03079478, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03079478
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03079478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03079478/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marie Thursby & Richard Jensen, 2001. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 240-259, March.
    2. Armand Hatchuel & Pascal Le Masson & Yoram Reich & Eswaran Subrahmanian, 2018. "Design theory: a foundation of a new paradigm for design science and engineering," Post-Print hal-01633021, HAL.
    3. Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil & Armand Hatchuel, 2010. "Strategic Management of Design and Innovation," Post-Print hal-00696953, HAL.
    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. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    2. Dominique Laousse & Sophie Hooge, 2015. "Innovative urban temporalities: conceptive and generative temporal regimes," Post-Print hal-01174923, HAL.
    3. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    4. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    5. Hans K. Hvide & Benjamin F. Jones, 2018. "University Innovation and the Professor's Privilege," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(7), pages 1860-1898, July.
    6. Braguinsky, Serguey & Honjo, Yuji & 本庄, 裕司 & Nagaoka, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男 & Nakamura, Kenta & 中村, 健太, 2010. "Science-Based Business : Knowledge Capital or Entrepreneurial Ability? : Theory and Evidence from a Survey of Biotechnology Start-ups," IIR Working Paper 10-05, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    7. Richard Jensen, 2012. "University Startups and Entrepreneurship: New Data, New Results," Working Papers 009, University of Notre Dame, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2012.
    8. Wipo, 2011. "World Intellectual Property Report 2011- The Changing Face of Innovation," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2011:944, April.
    9. Teixeira, Aurora A.C. & Tavares-Lehmann, Ana Teresa, 2014. "Human capital intensity in technology-based firms located in Portugal: Does foreign ownership matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 737-748.
    10. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2016. "Knowledge Creates Markets: The influence of entrepreneurial support and patent rights on academic entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 131-146.
    11. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2013. "Endogeneous matching in university-industry collaboration: Theory and empirical evidence from the UK," Economics Working Papers 1379, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    12. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500130 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. David B. Audretsch & Taylor Aldridge & Alexander Oettl, 2006. "The Knowledge Filter and Economic Growth: The Role of Scientist Entrepreneurship," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2006-11, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    14. Amit Shovon Ray & Sabyasachi Saha, "undated". "Patenting Public-Funded Research for Technology Transfer: A Conceptual-Empirical Synthesis of US Evidence and Lessons for India," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 244, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    15. Toole, Andrew A. & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2007. "Life Scientist Mobility from Academe to Industry: Does Academic Entrepreneurship Induce a Costly ?Brain Drain? on the Not-for-Profit Research Sector?," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-072, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    17. Thomas Gillier & Gérald Piat, 2011. "Exploring over the Presumed Identity of Emerging Technology," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00641765, HAL.
    18. Robert Lowe, 2006. "Who Develops a University Invention? The Impact of Tacit Knowledge and Licensing Policies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 415-429, July.
    19. Ferretti, Marco & Guerini, Massimiliano & Panetti, Eva & Parmentola, Adele, 2022. "The partner next door? The effect of micro-geographical proximity on intra-cluster inter-organizational relationships," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    20. Crespi, Gustavo & D'Este, Pablo & Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo, 2011. "The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 55-68, February.
    21. Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2014. "Réinventer l'entreprise : la gestion collégiale des inconnus communs non appropriables," Post-Print hal-01083252, HAL.

    More about this item

    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:hal:journl:hal-03079478. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.