Search results

This paper identifies exigent factors that enable and constrain trust building in a science-based innovation ecosystem.

Set in the Northeast England, this study adopts a processual sensemaking approach to thematically analyse interviews with a diverse range of participants in six science-based SMEs.

The findings provide a unique exposition of trust building in an innovation ecosystem across geographic and platform relationships. In doing so, the findings highlight factors outside of contractual agreements that enable or constrain trust building in an innovation ecosystem.

Limitations centred on subjectivity in the use of thematic analysis, sample bias and size. Sampling limitations were mitigated through the research design and analysis.

The findings provide unique insights into understanding the exigent factors that enable or constrain trust building in a science-based innovation ecosystem.

The study identifies five exigent factors that constrain or enable trust building in science-based SMEs' innovation ecosystem at a micro-level – building network relationships, degree of novelty, protection of innovations, propensity for adding value, propensity for risk.

This study aims to provide insights into ecosystem builder futurists’ work and their orientations toward creating more connected communities of the future.

Anticipation of and relationship with the future are not straightforward. How we approach the future and our relationship with it has underlying ontological and epistemological assumptions (Poli, 2010, 2017). Forecasting (Makridakis et al., 2008), foresight (Bishop and Hines, 2012; Hines and Bishop, 2013; Popper, 2008), futures studies (Bell, 2009; Gidley, 2017) and anticipatory logics (Miller and Poli, 2010; Miller et al., 2017; Nadin, 2010; Poli, 2017) inform this research study of a select group of futurists’ relationships with the future. This research explores ecosystem builder futurists’ work and their orientations toward creating more connected communities of the future. A primary driver of this research aims to understand how futurists with emergentist understandings think about and work with their clients to better understand how to facilitate individual and community transformations through anticipatory future perspectives.

This qualitative study was designed to explore the why, where and how of the ecosystem builder futurists. The “why” question of their work focused on capacity building, disruption and community for evolving systems revealing an emergentist orientation to the future. The “where” question, focusing on where their passions and ideas for futures work came from, revealed a commitment to forge new territories and support communities through the change process. Finally, the “how” questions revealed using both/and methods of traditional and innovative approaches with a special focus on changing the hearts and minds of those who participated in their community change initiatives.

A total of 15 ecosystem futurists participated in this study. Their perspectives were strongly affiliated and aligned with ecosystem building and communities of the future ideas. The narrow focus, however, is important to represent this particular population of the futurists.

There is a great need for ecosystem futurists who can work with communities for social and community transformations. This paper introduces ecosystem builder futurists as a unique population of futurists with specific drivers for and perspectives of change.

Especially in post-normal, mid-pandemic times, there will be more opportunities and need for ecosystem builder futurists to engage groups of individuals in transformative and community building processes. This study focuses on ecosystem futurists and how they work toward fundamental, community change.

Futurists work across many areas and emerging fields. A search of futurist activities reveals some of these areas including Marketing, Team Building, Coaching, Strategic Planning, Partner Management, Marketing Strategy, Ecosystem Building and Sustainable Community Development, to name a few. The purpose of this study is to describe the perspectives and underlying drivers of a particular group of futurists who have been working in large and small communities, organizations, governments and with clients with an underlying focus on creating communities of the future.

Bringing more impact seems to be a real issue for social initiatives and organizations requiring the adoption of new approaches. The paper aims to define an integrated approach for building, maintaining and upgrading Islamic social finance and sustainable ecosystems.

The paper presents a conceptual framework based on case studies and literature review describing the methodology and the necessary steps to build sustainable ecosystems.

The paper shows the impact of building social finance ecosystems on tackling social issues. It emphasizes the idea that solving social issues is everybody’s business – from governments to businesses – and that those initiatives require sufficient Sharīʿah-compliant funding to achieve sustainability goals.

The paper does not focus on the Islamic world experiences in building ecosystems serving social causes.

The paper gives an overview on how collaboration between the different social oriented organisations can enhance the social impact of the different initiatives. The aim is to ensure adequate financing to all the ecosystem components during the whole lifecycle.

The suggested approach of building sustainable ecosystems can serve as a way to assess the existing social initiatives and practices to find relevant combinations targeting more impact.

In the social sphere, the idea of building ecosystems has been explored in different ways but never in a way that gathers all the components including finance providers, coordinators and the different types of initiatives. The paper adapts the ecosystem concept to the Islamic finance specificities.

Despite the undeniable need for innovation in hospital building design, the literature highlights the disconnect between research and practice as the primary knowledge gap hindering such innovation. This study shows this focus to be an oversimplification, for the complex processes that trigger design innovations and impact their ecosystems need to be examined from a systemic perspective. This paper aims to conceptualise the evolution of hospital building design and identify and explain the main factors triggering design and construction innovations over the past 100 years.

A novel hybrid research design to mixed grounded theory (MGT) methodology, with Charmaz constructivist paradigm, is developed as a new systematic way of constructing and interpreting the concepts and interconnections among them that triggered design innovation.

This study represents a taxonomy of concepts and an explanatory innovation framework, containing 617 interconnections between 146 factors classified across 14 categories. The complex innovation ecosystem comprises multi-faceted processes between heterogenous factors with both individual and collective impacts on design innovations.

This research highlights the main components of the innovation ecosystem and its overall behaviour in this field, and the most influential and interrelated contextual factors, as well as representing and mapping generative interactions that support innovation processes. This knowledge can help hospital researchers, designers, policymakers and stakeholders adopt a multidimensional outlook to analyse the strength of all influential factors, introduce potential novel ways of collaborating, conceptualise an organisational approach, re-formulate research questions through transdisciplinary methods and introduce interdisciplinary courses and programs in architecture schools, thereby contributing to timely design innovation.

This study provides insight into using ecological design principles in designing high-rise buildings for increasing the ecological capacity of a region. It is a descriptive-analytical survey, which starts with the literacy of the subject, and continues by analyzing successful ecologically designed case studies around the world and notes that by using ecological design principles in designing high-rise buildings, can increase the ecological capacity of a region in order to meet its occupant needs. It indicates that by the industrialization of cities, due to population growth, the value of the land and lack of it for growing population to be settled in, designing high-rise buildings may be the best solution to solve the problem. Moreover, the importance of designing high-rise buildings based on ecological principles has been highlighted by environmental pollution, natural hazards and endangered ecosystems. The ecological design for high-rise buildings is becoming more and more important considering environmental issues. This approach is routed in remaking the natural relationships in ecosystems. The most important feature of nature which can be used in ecological design is its power of reconstruction and rehabilitation. So we can reach an ecosystem in scale of a high-rise building which imitates nature in all its aspects.

Startup ecosystems and traditional economic development models have historically excluded non-traditional, alternative, and diverse entrepreneurs. These ecosystems often ignore the authentic groups of entrepreneurs and businesses that make a community unique and instead try to encourage only high-impact, high-growth tech startups. By only focusing on this narrower scope of a defined startup ecosystem versus an entrepreneurial ecosystem, smaller cities (and alternative marketplaces) face extreme challenges and miss opportunities for enhanced economic development. This chapter includes a case study of Tucson’s entrepreneurial ecosystem and the evolution of the entrepreneurial support organization Startup Tucson from one focused only on startups to a now industry-agnostic driver of inclusive ecosystem building. An account of this transition is provided for review, including the community-based feedback process used by the organization to redefine its goals. By adopting a broader definition of entrepreneurship and supporting entrepreneurs truly rooted in Tucson’s strengths, Startup Tucson has seen more diverse businesses (and ventures of all types) and founders opting-in to the ecosystem, thereby increasing the Tucson’s economic development. This case study will provide those interested in ecosystem development with ideas on how to implement ecosystems within alternative markets.

The aim of this paper is to discuss a selection of policy strategies, regional initiatives and market approaches to uncover the realities of twenty-first-century building energy performance. A position that market-based approaches, human influence and policy interventions are part of an ecosystem of building energy performance is presented.

An exploratory search of secondary sources spanning the last three decades was conducted. Both peer-reviewed and grey literature were included to capture a broader understanding of the discourse in literature. Research questions guided the literature search, and a data extraction tool was designed to categorise the literature. The primary limitation of this study is that only a few applications could be discussed in a condensed format.

Several challenges about the current status quo of building energy performance were identified and summarised as follows. (1) Inconsistencies in measurement and verification protocols, (2) Impacts of market approaches, (3) National policy priorities that are at variance with regional targets and (4) Ambiguous reporting on environmental impacts of energy efficiency (EE) technologies.

The practical implications of the findings in this paper for practice and research are that as part of the building energy performance ecosystem, national responses through government interventions must become adaptive to keep up with the fast-paced energy sector and social trends. Simultaneously, before market-based approaches overcome the messiness of socio-economic dynamics, institutional conditions and cultural nuances, they ought to transparently address environmental impacts and the infringement of several SDGs before they can become viable solutions to building energy performance.

This paper presents building energy performance as an ecosystem comprising human influence, market-based approaches and policy interventions which form interdependent parts of the whole. However, evidence in the literature shows that these aspects are usually investigated separately. By presenting them as an ecosystem, this paper contributes to the discourse by advocating the need to re-align building energy performance to socio-economic-political dynamics and contextually viable solutions.

The purpose of this paper is to identify actions and guidelines for enabling and fostering the Industry 4.0 adoption, as well as to understand the role of three ecosystem actors in these actions (i.e. companies, educational organizations and regional policy makers).

52 semi-structured expert interviews in the Tyrol-Veneto cross-border macro-region were carried out and interpreted using the innovation ecosystem concept. In particular, drawing from this latter, six ecosystem building blocks were identified and used to analyze the interviews' content.

The findings allow not only to build a comprehensive framework for action to support Industry 4.0 adoption, but also to confirm the importance of exploring Industry 4.0 through the lens of the ecosystem concept. Indeed, the authors show that R&D activities should be complemented with interorganizational actions, such as training and networking, and that all ecosystem actors should be involved in the Industry 4.0 adoption.

This is among the few studies that adopt the innovation ecosystem perspective to explore best practices for Industry 4.0 adoption, thus overcoming the weakness of existing papers based on a firm-level perspective. It also complements previous ecosystem-based research on Industry 4.0 by exploring the technology adoption side, rather than the technology provision one, and by considering the adoption of a wide set of technologies.

To stimulate further research aimed at understanding how value can be cocreated by participants in digital ecosystems, this paper draws attention to new ventures as focal actors in innovation ecosystems orchestrated by hub firms.

This is a conceptual article that imports the notion of network oscillation (a pattern of brokerage-closure-brokerage) from social network studies to the conversation on digital ecosystems.

One potential pattern that a new venture may pursue to increase its prospects of cocreating value in an innovation ecosystem includes: (1) brokerage to gain managerial attention from a business unit of the hub firm, (2) switching to closure to attract attention from the wider hub firm (e.g. headquarters) and (3) reverting to brokerage to pursue synergistic network expansion opportunities from the wider interfirm ecosystem.

The exploratory ideas in this paper can help advance both entrepreneurship and information systems research.

This paper offers preliminary ideas on egocentric network dynamics associated with a new venture partnering with a large ecosystem hub firm. Such a perspective is appropriate since achieving value creation through active partnering requires building and strengthening ties over time across the hub firm's ecosystem.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how Chinese enterprises overcome their lack of resource and capabilities and eventually fulfill global resource accumulation, fast innovative commercialization and significant technological breakthrough by establishing and coordinating innovation ecosystem at firm level.

This paper first reviewed the literature on the structure and coordinating mechanism of enterprise innovation ecosystem and identified two important gaps on the characteristics of ecosystem actors and the logic of innovative coordination. Then, the paper adopted grounded analysis about the construction and evolution of Haier’s innovation ecosystem based on longitudinal case data. On the basis of the case study, the construct of firm-level innovation ecosystem and new logic of coordination are formed.

This paper found the emerging phenomenon of sub-organizational ecosystem actors and depicted that the establishing process of firm-level innovation ecosystem went through three majors stages, and the corresponding coordinating logic changed from proactive intervention to reactive self-evolution.

This paper tried to make contributions to the studies of structure and coordinating mechanism of enterprise innovation ecosystem, and proposed the enterprise itself could build firm-level ecosystem within its organizational boundary and interact with external ecosystem. The findings enlightened the nested structure of ecosystem, opened the black box of organizational boundary and broke the limitation that existing researches only analyse innovation ecosystem at system level and regard firms as basic analytical unit. Besides, this paper proposed that the coordination of innovation ecosystem can be passively fulfilled by network effect and ecological evolution, where previous studies mainly focused on proactive institutional intervention and resource investment. This point could provide Chinese enterprises with good references.