Search results

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a multi-layered theoretical framework to enable engaged scholarship to develop as a practice in entrepreneurship and small business research. To do so, it illuminates the salient features of engaged scholarship, collaborative learning and actor-network theory (ANT).

The paper follows a narrative or traditional literature review design. Specifically, it adopts a thematic approach for summarising and synthesising a body of literature on engaged scholarship, collaborative learning and ANT with the view to develop a new multi-layered theoretical framework.

Applying the theory of engaged scholarship to pivot entrepreneurship/SME research provides scholars with an opportunity to unlock the theory vs practice paradox. Moreover, engaged scholarship offers valuable instructions for encouraging interactionism between entrepreneurship researchers and practitioners as well as reconcile their polarised views. Co-production and co-creation of knowledge addresses the concerns often raised by the practitioner community regarding the relevance and applicability of academic research to practice.

The proposed multi-layered framework provides entrepreneurship researchers, and the practitioner community with a taxonomy to use to encourage a joint approach to research. Developing deep partnerships between academics and practitioners can produce outcomes that satisfy the twin imperatives of scholarship that can be of high quality as well as a value to society.

The paper advances the theory and practice of engaged scholarship in new ways that are not common in entrepreneurship/SME research. This enables engaged scholarship to develop as a practice in entrepreneurship and small firms’ research. Through applying the proposed multi-layered framework in research, academics can deliver fully developed solutions for practical problems. The framework is useful in the theory vs practice and entrepreneurship researchers vs practitioner debates.

The chapter aims to reflectively discuss a participatory research project concerning the future of higher education in Hungary. This project can be understood as an ongoing methodological experiment which attempts to engage teachers and students, in order to reveal how key stakeholders think about the future of higher education. In line with this, this methodologically oriented chapter shows how different participatory methodologies can be combined in a so-called backcasting framework. This approach starts by describing the present situation, then moves beyond the present conditions so as to identify the cornerstones of an ideal future state. On the one hand, the chapter gives a detailed introduction to how our participatory research process was set up and what particular methodologies we used during this process. On the other hand, it critically reflects on the methodological and ethical challenges involved.

Health care ecosystems instantiate different innovation trajectories, driven either by science-/techno-push or user-centric rationales. This article focuses on organization intermediaries (OIs), respectively, active in health care ecosystems driven by science- and techno-push versus user-centric innovation processes; it aims at characterizing their operation and intervention modes. The analysis elaborates on network and content brokerage. Innovation also needs to consider various challenges associated with physical vicinity. The authors check whether territorial anchoring plays a role in brokerage, depending on the innovation model.

The article offers an investigation of eight French organizations matching the definition of OIs and active in different areas of health care-related innovation. It follows a qualitative and abductive research protocol adhering to the precepts of grounded theory.

First, the authors show that content and network brokerage specialize in specific activities in each innovation model. On network brokerage, the authors show that OIs foster the development of communities of practice in the science-/techno-push model, while they nurture communities of innovation in the user-centric model. Services materializing content brokerage are typical consequences of activities performed in each model. The second contribution deals with physical vicinity. In the science-/techno-push model, OIs install a physical space (the “internal” dimension) to support the development of communities of practice, while the “external” dimension copes with agglomeration effects. In the user-centric model, OIs deliver services thanks to the “internal” space; communities of innovation create a leverage effect on the physical space to operate their activities that are supported by “external” network effects.

The originality of the article lies in the description of the alternative roles plaid by organization intermediaries in the science-/techno-push versus user-centric approaches of innovation. In these two approaches, (contents and network) brokerage and physical vicinity play different roles.

How can we explain the development – or equally the non-development – of professional ethics norms in a particular case? And how can we enhance compliance with existing professional ethical norms? In this chapter, I develop a supply/demand theory of professional ethics. That is, I consider the demand-forces and pull-factors that call for the construction, reform or continuance of a professional ethos. These demands may come from various stakeholders, including individual service-providers, the professional community, actual and prospective clients and the general public collectively as interested third parties. The supply-side, on the other hand, constitutes the ethical materiel out of which norms emerge: these are the felt-motivations of individual professionals at the coalface of action that drive them to recognize, acknowledge and act upon a professional norm. This material includes traditions and stories, the conscious application of common-sense ethics, explicit endorsement of public moral codes, internal excellences within the activity, a discrete community capable of cultivating attractive role-identities and so on. As well as considering such ethical-materiel, I canvas the institutional and cultural supports that facilitate the production of these motives.

The purpose of this paper is to reveal and justify influential factors of dynamic capabilities on research organizations’ R&D and innovation performance.

Adoption of seminal D. Teece’s (1997) concept of dynamic capabilities and operationalized matrix of key performance indicators in the area of R&D and innovation allowed the construction of the strategic management model for research organizations, consequently tested by methods of statistical analysis.

The empirical findings reveal that there exists positive influence of the dynamic capabilities on research organizations’ R&D and innovation performance. Explicitly, sensing, seizing and re-configuring dimensions of dynamic capabilities have positive impact on R&D and innovation results; consequently, the peculiarities of their inter-dependencies are identified.

Delivered research is based on the investigation of Lithuanian research organizations’ dynamic capabilities and their impact on their R&D and innovation performance. Therefore, further research could be extended to foreign countries.

The model on management of research organization’s dynamic capabilities with the aim for better R&D and innovation performance is conceptualized and specified hereinafter. In the course of the research, constructed toolkit to eventually measure research organization’s R&D and innovation performance or use it as the set of key performance indicators in the benchmarking exercise is suggested.

The paper is one of the first to suggest novel application of dynamic capabilities’ view within the domain of research organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a new framework for developing social innovation competencies in social sciences within the agenda of the Relational University. It explores the educational strategy promoted by the Social Innovation Excubator (SIE), an experimental social sciences lab that provides students with a work-based learning scenario focusing on the solution of social problems.

This conceptual paper explores a new learning strategy to promote the Relational University. This exploration designs an experimental infrastructure named SIE. This infrastructure promotes the link between work-based learning and social innovation to develop four key competencies: heuristic, epistemic, relational and experimental skills.

There is little attention in the literature about work-based learning and social innovation. The conceptual framework provides a program on Social Innovation Capitalization (SIC) in the framework of the SIE. This framework provides a process of four phases to prototype social innovations: exploration, experimentation, exploitation and evaluation as a process to boost social innovation skills.

The conceptual framework of Relational University is an innovative and integrative model (companies, social organizations, public sector and civil society) that develops a work-based learning strategy through SIE infrastructure. The SIE has a strong implication for social sciences developing an experimental space to explore, exploit and evaluate local social problems.

The SIE infrastructure and the SIC program promotes a new strategy in social sciences to boost employability (new competencies), entrepreneurship (pilot social organizations) and intra-entrepreneurship (social innovation in organizations).

This paper proposes a conceptual and empirical framework to develop the Relational University through a new learning strategy linking work-based learning and social innovation. This practical framework covers a lack in the work-based learning perspective opening a new line of research linked to social innovation.

Recent debates within the literature and amongst practitioners of coaching have been focussed on defining the scope and practice of coaching as a form of organizational intervention that can facilitate organizational and individual change. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate about what coaching is by reviewing an emerging comparative conceptual framework of coaching as a form of practice for management and organizational development.

The framework was developed through an exploratory study involving a focus group of practitioners in coaching and management. The overall approach to this study blends a conceptual consideration of the practice of coaching with the results gained from a focus group. The study uses cognitive mapping, thematic grouping and content analysis to seek to define the key characteristics of coaching in comparison to other forms of management practice.

A framework of “meta‐categories” of management practice are identified and the role and processes of coaching is compared in relation to these. Results from the study suggest that coaching adopts a holistic approach to management and organizational development and that certain key characteristics can be identified that differentiate it from other forms of management and organizational development. Results also open the way for research into forms of coaching required to facilitate and support whole systems change.

The framework could be of use to managers in assessing whether a coaching‐based approach to promoting and managing change is appropriate and what processes it involves.

This paper aims to investigate the role of design as a knowledge translation mechanism in R&D-oriented open innovation. In particular, the paper intends to look at how design can be used as a means of knowledge transfer among various stakeholders who speak different languages and have divergent needs and interests in a process where knowledge openly flew across the boundaries of a high number of organizations.

The paper combines the insights from theory with the empirical evidences gathered by adopting an extreme case study approach: the detailed analysis of a case study related to an R&D project funded by the European Commission and aimed to investigate and produce innovative serious games in the area of healthcare. The project gathered a large number of stakeholders and deliberately adopted design to support an open innovation approach.

The paper provides insights into the use of design outputs such as artifacts, sketches, visual representations or prototypes to translate ideas, theoretical and technical requirements, documents and outputs into formats that can be more easily understood and appreciated by various stakeholders. This supports and favors coordination in open innovation projects where many different stakeholders are engaged in.

Although the adoption of an extreme case study approach offers important implications to understand the role of design in R&D-oriented open innovation, the use of a single case study represents the basis both to explore hypothesis and to provide first evidences that need to be further tested with other qualitative and quantitative analysis.

The paper offers practical implications about how design can help individuals and organizations involved in R&D activities to better communicate and share knowledge among various stakeholders by aligning their different needs, interests and languages along the various phases of their project development.

The originality of the paper lays at the intersection of three different fields: open innovation, knowledge management and design for innovation, thus integrating mature, but so far isolated, research streams. It provides insights for theory building by explaining the use of design as knowledge translational mechanism as well as it informs the practice by highlighting the power of design as a mean to support knowledge flows into open innovation-based R&D projects.

This study aims to understand in what way international cooperation between universities and/or firms can be seen as a vehicle in the transfer of knowledge and innovation for implementation of environmentally sustainable practices.

To do so, a qualitative approach was adopted, resorting to the case study method: the EdgeWise project. Data were obtained from interviews, documentation provided by partners and observation, and the content analysis technique was also used.

The results lead to the conclusion that this type of international cooperation is supported by solid dimensions, such as knowledge transfer and appropriate choice of partners. In addition, the dimension related to organisational culture is not considered a barrier in the cooperation process studied here, but rather as a form of learning among partners.

The empirical evidence suggests that it will add value to the understanding of the various issues surrounding resources (water and energy) that differ from country to country. However, the administrative-bureaucratic dimension is identified as a barrier to this type of cooperation/project, with its analysis being suggested for future studies.

This innovative study shows that the literature and the case study made identified various dimensions; motivations, barriers and drivers, of knowledge transfer, choice of partners and organisational culture. In addition, this study contributes for international universities-firms cooperation in sustainability area.

To assess whether interdisciplinary research evaluation scores vary between fields.

The authors investigate whether published refereed journal articles were scored differently by expert assessors (two per output, agreeing a score and norm referencing) from multiple subject-based Units of Assessment (UoAs) in the REF2021 UK national research assessment exercise. The primary raw data was 8,015 journal articles published 2014–2020 and evaluated by multiple UoAs, and the agreement rates were compared to the estimated agreement rates for articles multiply-evaluated within a single UoA.

The authors estimated a 53% agreement rate on a four-point quality scale between UoAs for the same article and a within-UoA agreement rate of 70%. This suggests that quality scores vary more between fields than within fields for interdisciplinary research. There were also some hierarchies between fields, in the sense of UoAs that tended to give higher scores for the same article than others.

The results apply to one country and type of research evaluation. The agreement rate percentage estimates are both based on untested assumptions about the extent of cross-checking scores for the same articles in the REF, so the inferences about the agreement rates are tenuous.

The results underline the importance of choosing relevant fields for any type of research evaluation.

This is the first evaluation of the extent to which a careful peer-review exercise generates different scores for the same articles between disciplines.