Votre recherche

This Article provides the first legal examination of the immensely valuable but underappreciated phenomenon of social innovation. Innovations such as cognitive behavioral therapy, microfinance, and strategies to reduce hospital-based infections greatly enhance social welfare yet operate completely outside of the patent system, the primary legal mechanism for promoting innovation. This Article draws on empirical studies to elucidate this significant kind of innovation and explore its divergence from the classic model of technological innovation championed by the patent system. In so doing, it illustrates how patent law exhibits a rather crabbed, particularistic conception of innovation. Among other characteristics, innovation in the patent context is individualistic, arises from a discrete origin and history, and prioritizes novelty. Much social innovation, however, arises from communities rather than individual inventors, evolves from multiple histories, and entails expanding that which already exists from one context to another. These  Professor of Law and Chancellor’s Fellow, UC Davis School of Law. I would like to thank Camilla Hrdy, Chris Griffin, Richard Gruner, Courtney Joslin, Lydia Loren, Manesh Patel, and Darien Shanske for their comments on earlier versions of this paper. This Article benefitted substantially from presentations at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference at Cardozo Law School, the East Bay Faculty Workshop, the Works in Progress Intellectual Property colloquium at Santa Clara School of Law, IP in The Trees at Lewis & Clark Law School, PatCon 4 at the University of San Diego School of Law, the Value Pluralism and Intellectual Property Law conference organized by the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law and the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and BYU Law School. I would like to thank Dean Kevin Johnson and Associate Dean Vik Amar for providing generous institutional support for this project. I would also like to thank Erin Choi and the UC Davis School of Law library staff for exceptional research assistance. Finally, I would like to thank the excellent editors of the Washington University Law Review. 2 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [VOL. 92:1 attributes, moreover, apply in large part to technological innovation as well, thus revealing how patent law relies upon and reinforces a rather distorted view of the innovative processes it seeks to promote. Moving from the descriptive to the prescriptive, this Article cautions against extending exclusive rights to social innovations and suggests several nonpatent mechanisms for accelerating this valuable activity. Finally, it examines the theoretical implications of social innovation for patent law, thus helping to contribute to a more holistic framework for innovation law and policy.

Cross-boundary teaming, within and across organizations, is an increasingly popular strategy for innovation. Knowledge diversity is seen to expand the range of views and ideas that teams can draw upon to innovate. Yet, case studies reveal that teaming across knowledge boundaries can be difficult in practice, and innovation is not always realized. Two streams of research are particularly relevant for understanding the challenges inherent in cross-boundary teaming: research on team effectiveness and research on knowledge in organizations. They offer complementary insights: the former stream focuses on group dynamics and measures team inputs, processes, emergent states, and outcomes, while the latter closely investigates dialog and objects in recurrent social practices. Drawing from both streams, this paper seeks to shed light on the complexity of cross-boundary teaming, while highlighting factors that may enhance its effectiveness. We develop an integrative model to provide greater explanatory power than previous approaches to assess cross-boundary teaming efforts and their innovation performance.

This open access book summarizes research being pursued within the SISCODE (Society in Innovation and Science through CO-DEsign) project, funded by the EU under the H2020 programme, the goal of which is to set up an analytical, reflective and learning framework to explore the transformations in initiatives and policies emerging from the interaction between citizens and stakeholders. The book provides a critical analysis of the co-design processes activated in 10 co-creation labs addressing societal challenges across Europe. Each lab as a case study of real-life experimentation is described through its journey, starting from the purpose on the ground of the experimentation and the challenge addressed. Specific attention is then drawn on the role of policies and policy maker engagement. Finally, the experimentation is enquired in terms of its output, transformations triggered within the organization and the overall ecosystem, and its outcomes, opening the reasoning towards the lessons learnt and reflections that the entire co-creation journey brought.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) reshapes companies and how innovation management is organized. Consistent with rapid technological development and the replacement of human organization, AI may indeed compel management to rethink a company's entire innovation process. In response, we review and explore the implications for future innovation management. Using ideas from the Carnegie School and the behavioral theory of the firm, we review the implications for innovation management of AI technologies and machine learning-based AI systems. We outline a framework showing the extent to which AI can replace humans and explain what is important to consider in making the transformation to the digital organization of innovation. We conclude our study by exploring directions for future research.

Innovation in the forest sector is a growing research interest and within this field, there is a growing attention for institutional, policy and societal dimensions and particular when it comes to the question of how to support innovativeness in the sector. This Special Issue therefore focuses on governance aspects, relating to and bridging business and political-institutional-societal levels. This includes social/societal factors, goals and implications that have recently been studied under the label of social innovation. Furthermore, the emergence of bioeconomy as a paradigm and policy goal has become a driver for a variety of innovation processes on company and institutional levels. Our article provides a tentative definition of "innovation governance" and attempts a state-of-art review of innovation governance research in the forest sector. For structuring the research field, we propose to distinguish between organizational/managerial, policy or innovation studies. For the forestry sector, specifically, we suggest to distinguish between studies focusing on (i) innovative governance of forest management and forest goods and services; on (ii) the governance of innovation processes as such, or (iii) on specific (transformational) approaches that may be derived from combined goals such as innovation governance for sustainability, regional development, or a bioeconomy. Studies in the forest sector are picking up new trends from innovation research that increasingly include the role of societal changes and various stakeholders such as civil society organizations and users. They also include public-private partnership models or participatory governance. We finally should not only look in how far research approaches from outside are applied in the sector but we believe that the sector could contribute much more to our general scientific knowledge on ways for a societal transformation to sustainability. • We sketch the state-of-knowledge in innovation governance in the forest sector. • We provide a definition and possible categorizations of innovation governance. • We discuss recent research avenues, including social innovation and bioeconomy. • We assess how this Special Issue contributes to our scientific knowledge. • We discuss state of art, research gaps and possible future research directions.

L’objectif de cet article est d’analyser une nouvelle forme organisationnelle, le living lab (LL) et sa capacité à favoriser l’innovation territoriale en milieu rural ou péri-urbain. A travers une revue de littérature et la mobilisation de la sociologie de l’acteur-réseau (Callon, 1986 ; Latour, 1987), nous positionnons les living labs comme intermédiaires d’innovation ouverte dont les caractéristiques permettent d’intégrer de nombreux acteurs hétérogènes, établissements publics, entreprises privées, associations et citoyens, sur des projets d’innovation. L’étude d’un LL rural met en évidence la capacité d’une telle structure à reconfigurer des réseaux d’acteurs pour proposer une série de tiers-lieux adaptés aux spécificités des territoires sur lesquels ils s’implantent. Cette recherche permet d’enrichir la réflexion la pérennisation des tiers-lieux ruraux et leurs spécificités par rapport aux espaces urbains.

Creative collaboration happens when a creative process is undertaken by two or more individuals, teams, entities, or organizations for a project or challenge of common concern. Typically, the project is too challenging to be undertaken alone; and if done satisfactorily, the outcome is would be both novel and useful. Members can collaborate either physically or remotely through electronic (online creative collaboration) or other means at all or different phases of the project.

Technology is the answer, but what was the question? Introduction Many firms, charities and governments are in favour of more innovation, and like to side with the new against the old. But should they? A moment's reflection shows that it's not altogether coherent (whether intellectually, ethically or in terms of policy) to simply be in favour of innovation, whether that innovation is a product, a service or a social idea. Some innovations are unambiguously good (like penicillin or the telephone). Others are unambiguously bad (like concentration camps or nerve gas). Many are ambiguous. Pesticides kill parasites but also pollute the water supply. New surveillance technologies may increase workplace productivity but leave workers more stressed and unhappy. Smart missiles may be good for the nations deploying them and terrible for the ones on the receiving end.In finance, Paul Volcker, former head of the US Federal Reserve, said that the only good financial innovation he could think of was the automated teller machine. That was an exaggeration. But there is no doubt that many financial innovations destroyed more value than they created, even as they enriched their providers, and that regulators and policy makers failed to distinguish the good from the bad, with very costly results. In technology, too, a similar scepticism had emerged by the late 2010s, with digital social media described as the ‘new tobacco’, associated with harm rather than good, with addiction rather than help. Or, to take another example: when the US Central Intelligence Agency's venture capital arm, In-QTel, invested heavily in firms like Palantir, which then became contractors for the intelligence and military (a prime example of the ‘entrepreneurial state’), it was far from obvious how much this was good or bad for the world.The traditional justification for a capitalist market economy is that the net effects of market-led innovation leave behind far more winners than losers, and that markets are better able to pick technologies than bureaucracies or committees. But even if, overall, the patterns of change generate more winners than losers, there are likely to be some, perhaps many, cases where the opposite happens. It would be useful to know.

Mosaic est le pôle multidisciplinaire de formation et de recherche d’HEC Montréal spécialisé en management de l’innovation et de la créativité. Mosaic est un accélérateur d’innovation et de créativité. La mission de Mosaic est d’aider les dirigeants et les organisations à relever le défi de l’innovation en s’inspirant de méthodologies issues de l’industrie créative, et en faisant évoluer leur pratique.

Ce document est une traduction de l’outil Organizational Learning Self-Assessment Tool – 18 questions to self-assess your organization’s learning culture and identify steps for action publié en 2019 par Taylor Newberry Consulting. Il a été traduit par Territoires innovants en économie sociale et solidaire (TIESS) avec La permission des auteurs. L’apprentissage organisationnel mène à l’innovation, à une meilleure planification et à une performance organisationnelle améliorée. Il prépare également le terrain pour une meilleure évaluation. Cependant, définir une culture d’apprentissage n’est pas toujours facile. Cet outil d’autoévaluation vise à aider les organisations à identifier et à évaluer l’état de l’apprentissage dans leur organisation.

Over the past few decades, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been perceived as an antecedent of competitive advantage. It was, moreover, placed at the top of the business agenda and recognized as a key driver of performance. Under this context, the present study sets to investigate how strategic CSR (SCSR) affects organizational performance and whether firms operating in “controversial” sectors should adopt SCSR activities. To this aim, this study reviews the body of knowledge on the topic, through a systematic review of the literature. After searching for academic publications in the Scopus database and selecting publications based on their relevance, 32 studies have been included in the review. Their analysis sheds light on common findings and contradicting arguments. Results show the main attributes of strategic, as opposed to non-strategic CSR activities. The importance of effective communication of SCSR activities is highlighted. SCSR is linked to “shared value”, as well as to competitive advantage, social innovation and good reputation. Voices of criticism focus on using SCSR as an empty promise that is used to counteract unethical behavior. Finally, more research is needed on the implementation of SCSR activities during recessionary periods.

Dans le but d’atteindre une des orientations stratégiques de l’établissement « d’être un établissement de première ligne à vocation universitaire, chef de file en matière de développement et de soutien aux pratiques de qualité et aux pratiques novatrices » 1 , l’établissement s’est doté d’une politique institutionnelle de la recherche, de l’évaluation et du transfert de connaissances 2pour assurer la réalisation d’activités de développement et d’utilisation des connaissances de haut niveau (recherche, évaluation et transfert de connaissances) et ainsi, contribuer à l’amélioration continue de la qualité des soins et des services et à l’innovation en première ligne. Le transfert de connaissances constitue une dimension importante de la mission universitaire de l’établissement. Le CSSS de la Vieille-Capitale a fait du transfert de connaissances un domaine d’expertise à investir. Ce volet de la mission universitaire est en développement au Québec. Afin de poursuivre le développement des connaissances dans ce domaine, l’équipe responsable du transfert s’est étroitement associée aux chercheurs et aux partenaires de l’axe transversal sur le transfert de connaissances au sein du centre de recherche sur les soins et les services de première ligne de l’Université Laval (CERSSPL-UL) ainsi qu’à d’autres chercheurs reconnus dans le domaine au Québec. Les activités de transfert de connaissances sont conçues et structurées de façon à assurer un arrimage étroit entre les milieux de pratique et de gestion de l’établissement et l’équipe de recherche et sa programmation, et ce, en cohérence avec les orientations stratégiques de l’établissement. Le transfert de connaissances concerne un ensemble d’acteurs impliqués dans le développement et l’utilisation des meilleures connaissances pour qu’elles soient mises au service de la population et procurent les retombées attendues au plan de l’amélioration continue de la qualité et de l’innovation. Les chercheurs, le personnel, les gestionnaires, les médecins, les sages-femmes, les stagiaires, les usagers et leurs proches, les bénévoles, les partenaires détiennent des savoirs riches et diversifiés qui font quotidiennement l’objet de transfert de connaissances.

La Société du Quartier de l’innovation de Montréal est un Organisme à but non lucratif (OBNL) qui a été créé en 2013 à l’initiative de l’Université McGill et de l’École de technologie supérieure (ÉTS). NOTRE MISSION Cultiver un écosystème d’innovation unique au cœur de Montréal et favoriser la collaboration et l’expérimentation entre les milieux académique, entrepreneurial et citoyen dans le but de créer des retombées positives pour la société. Notre connaissance du milieu de l’innovation québécois est exhaustive

The establishment of empathy is the premise and foundation for diverse innovative proposals and problem solutions. Virtual reality has provided a full range of depth and breadth for the establishment of empathy in many different types of fields due to its immersive, interactive, and imaginative characteristics. In this study, bibliometric analysis and VOSviewer software are used to cluster and visualize relevant 190 articles from the Web of Science core collection. The essay proposes a positioning of how to apply virtual reality on empathy based on two dimensions, from internal world to external world, and from business innovation to social innovation, by integrating each two of them, four application methods are summarized, which are meaning shaping, value creation, individual satisfaction, and self-realization. What's more, using the bibliometric analysis result as a basis, the application landscape of virtual reality technology for establishing empathy has been constructed, including individual level, society level, and nature level, which reveals the existing and coming possibilities of using VR technology on building empathy in different fields. Last but not least, the paper has discussed the impact of virtual reality for empathy-building from five aspects, economy, politics, culture, society, and ecology. The efforts of this study reveal the VR tendency and have important reference significance for promoting the application of virtual reality technology in creating empathy and innovation in different fields.

La necessité d'innover dans le secteur public. Peut‐on faire plus avec moins? C’est une question qui ne date p as d’hier pour les gouvernements. Malgré l’embellie budgétaire récente, le gouvernement du Québec devra faire plus avec moins dans les décennies à venir. La trop lente croissance économique ainsi que le vieil lissement de la population vont le forcer à changer ses façons de faire. Pour pouvoir faire plus avec moins , il va devoir innover. Certaines de ses organisations ont démontré que c’était possible. Il faut passer de ces réussites ponctuelles à un modèle plus général. C’est ce qui est proposé en conclusion de ce rapp ort de recherche. Un tel changement nécessite de repenser un certain nombre d’habitudes, de règles, de structures. Il n’est pas question ici d’une révolution administrative mais de changer graduellement et itérativement, que des innovations entraînent les suivantes. C’est ce que font de nombreux gouvern ements en ce moment pris dans la même problématique d’ensemble. De plu s, les technologies de l’inform ation vont aider à innover. Elles rendent possible une meilleure coordination d’ensemble que par le passé et peuvent libérer d’un certain nombre de tâches les employés du secteur public. Outre faire plus avec moins en changeant les façons de faire, il pourrait être aussi possible de mieux faire en innovant. Ce que ce rapport propose en conclusion est un modèle d’innovation dans le secteur public basé sur une recensi on importante des écrits et un travail empirique sur les prix de la gestion innovatrice qui poursuit n os publications antérieures (Bernier, Hafsi et Deschamps, 2013 et 2015). Nous proposons ici une analyse par ticulière des données sur le Québec que nous avons mises à jour pour lan cer la proposition qui suit. Il est présumé que l’innovation dans le secteur public peut con tribuer à améliorer la qualité des services et la capacité de faire face aux enjeux des organisations qui s e heurtent aux turbulences de l’évolution de la société et de l’économie. « L’innovation est l’ensemble du processus se déroulant depuis la naissance d’une idée jusqu’à sa matérialisation. Un État innovant est un État favorisant la naissance de nouvelles idées et les mettant en œuvre pour améliorer son organisation e t ses façons de faire. Un État performant au service de l’intérêt commun et du bien‐être de la population doit être un État innovant. » (Gouvernement du Québec, 2015, p. 80). Le plan économique du Québec présenté en mars 2016 énumérait si x objectifs. Le premier est le maintien de l’équilibre budgétaire et le deuxième est l’établissement de la croissance des dépenses en fonction de la capacité de payer des contribuables, en priorisant les deux grandes missions de l’État québécois, l’éducation et la santé. Le budget 2017 poursuit dans la même v eine. Le gouvernement consacre aux missions « Santé et services sociaux » ainsi que « Éducation et culture » 60 des 100 milliards de dollars qu’il dépense en 2016‐17 1 et ils doivent faire partie de la solution. On prévoit mainten ir l’équilibre budgétaire au cours des prochaines années en contrôlant le rythme d’augmentation des dépenses. Pour ce faire, on peut augmenter les contrôles, comme ce fut souvent le cas dans le passé, mais cette méthode a démontré ses limites. On pourrait aussi faire les choses autrement. En d’autres mots, on pourrait innover. Mulgan et Albury (2003) , dans un texte qui a été beauc oup cité, suggèrent qu’une innovation réussie est « the creation and implementation of new processes, products, services and methods of delivery which result in significant improvements in outcomes efficiency, effectiveness or quality ».

L'inventeur isolé n'existe pas vraiment. Les inventions sont souvent simultanées et collectives. Mieux, avancent les plus récents travaux d'Eric von Hippel, les utilisateurs sont les premiers innovateurs. Certes, leurs conceptions ne forment pas nécessairement des produits : il faut pour cela que l'industrie s'y intéresse. Mais avec les nouvelles formes de contributions permises par l'internet, c'est la forme même de l'innovation qui est transformée. Désormais son paradigme repose sur l'ouverture et la participation. Des formes proches de l'auto-organisation, qui nécessitent une forte adaptation des entreprises pour apprendre à "perdre le contrôle". L'innovation via l'internet montre qu'il n'y a pas d'innovation sans lien social et que l'accélération de l'innovation actuelle est certainement plus à mettre au bénéfice des nouvelles sociabilités que des nouvelles technologies.

Twelve papers examine knowledge, learning, and innovation in order to enhance competitiveness. Papers also explore perspectives of cross-sector collaboration, intrafirm and interfirm connections, gender, and relational marketing. Papers discuss knowledge, learning, and innovation--research into cross-sector collaboration; entrepreneurial competencies and firm performance in emerging economies--a study of women entrepreneurs in Malaysia; whether online cocreation influences lead users' and opinion leaders' behaviors; knowledge and innovation in Portuguese enterprises; social ties and human capital in family small- and medium-sized entrepreneurial internationalization; perceived social support and social entrepreneurship--gender perspectives from Turkey; entrepreneurship challenges and gender issues in the African informal rural economy; the construction of a professional identity of a female entrepreneur; knowledge creation and relationship marketing in family businesses--a case-study approach; the gender question and family entrepreneurship research; a composite-index approach to detecting reporting quality--the case of female executives in family firms; and influencing factors in customers' intention to revisit resort hotels--the roles of customer experience management and customer value. Ratten is Associate Professor at La Trobe University. Braga is Associate Professor of the Technology and Management at the Polytechnic Institute of Porto. Marques is Assistant Professor and Coordinator of the Innovation, Markets and Organization Research Group in the Centre for Transdisciplinary Development Studies at the University of Tras-os-Montes and Alto Douro. No index.

Ce document est une traduction de l’outil Organizational Learning Self-Assessment Tool – 18 questions to self-assess your organization’s learning culture and identify steps for action publié en 2019 par Taylor Newberry Consulting. Il a été traduit par Territoires innovants en économie sociale et solidaire (TIESS) avec La permission des auteurs. L’apprentissage organisationnel mène à l’innovation, à une meilleure planification et à une performance organisationnelle améliorée. Il prépare également le terrain pour une meilleure évaluation. Cependant, définir une culture d’apprentissage n’est pas toujours facile. Cet outil d’autoévaluation vise à aider les organisations à identifier et à évaluer l’état de l’apprentissage dans leur organisation.