WORKSHOP 1: Creative Knowledge Capital
Thursday 7 June at
14.30-16.30
Chair:
Markku Wilenius
How a Firm’s Renewal Capability Can Be Measured,
Described and Valued
Pirjo Ståhle (Finland Futures
Research Centre, Turku School of Economics, Finland) & Jaana
Junell (Nokia Siemens Networks)
It is widely agreed that organizational ability for constant renewal and innovation is one of the main success factors in the knowledge economy. However, even though there are several relatively consolidated theories about the composition of intellectual capital, there is relatively little knowledge about the dynamic processes by which intellectual capital is maintained and created in organizations, as well as to what extent a company’s intellectual capital has effect on the its economical success. In this paper, we present both a theoretical model for organizational renewal capability (Dynamic Intellectual Capital), and a tool for its measurement (KM-factor®).
As effective management requires measurement, it is highly important to be able to quantify organizational capability for constant renewal. At the moment, most of the research on renewal capability is based on case studies, and there is a lack of quantitative measures that would enable inter-firm comparison and external communication of this capability.
In this paper we a) define renewal capability as an organization’s systemic ability to create and maintain different knowledge environments in line with the firm’s strategic intent, b) demonstrate how renewal capability can be operationalized and measured, and c) how renewal capability prospects company’s future success. The approach is based on systems thinking, knowledge-based theory of the firm and dynamic capability approach, and it also relates to intellectual capital literature. Over 200 organizations have been measured by KM-factor®, and the mathematic analysis of the method has been tested by financial knowledge base of 12000 companies.
Societies’ Features and the Nature of
Entrepreneurship
Tero Vuorinen (Department of
Management & Organizations,
University of Vaasa, Finland)
This paper is focusing on entrepreneurial challenges in homogenous and heterogeneous societies. In this paper the examples of such homogenous countries are the Nordic countries, especially Finland, which could be compared with relatively different society; in this case USA. This paper is theoretical and it is mainly based on the Austrian view of entrepreneurship (e.g. Kirzner 1973; 1979; 1986; 1992; 1997) and the ideas of reflexive sociology (e.g. Bourdieu & Wacquant 1995). The main issue in this paper is: How do the principles of entrepreneurship change, when the society is fairly homogenous when considering e.g. income, wealth, education, religion, race, experiences and values. Furthermore, how should this been taken into account when considering the societal and economical development? The incentives and paths to entrepreneurship and the effects of the entrepreneurship as well might be varying strongly in accordance with societies’ features. Too homogenous society could be compared with closed economy where the internal processes might be very well functioning, but the direction of the efforts might be wrong. That issue becomes more important when considering the accelerating pace of technological and economical changes and the nature of the business opportunities they provide. The challenges of the more dynamic environment are hard to approach with the principles of neoclassical economics, instead, more potential aid to analyze the dynamics of the economy and the entrepreneurial society is the Austrian entrepreneurship concept. It emphasizes the role of perception and dynamic of the entrepreneurial process.
Linking a Foresight Perspective to Innovation
Processes in KIBS
Mari Holopainen (Innovation
Management Institute IMI, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland)
This paper introduces an ongoing study which explores innovations and foresight in knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS). The concept of KIBS refers to expert companies that provide information and knowledge services to other organizations (Miles, 2003). The first aim of the study is to discuss characteristics of innovation processes in the context of KIBS. Even the identification of the existence of innovations is often challenging in services, and the ways in which the innovation processes are organized in service companies is a fairly new research topic (Sundbo, 1997). The second objective is to integrate a foresight perspective in the study of innovation. The focus is on the scanning of environment including the detection of weak signals as a source for innovation. Weak signals can be defined as first symptoms of possible change in the future (Ansoff, 1984). Even though foresight is interlinked with innovation, (Martin & Johnston, 1999) this relation has not been broadly examined.
The empirical part of the study is an ethnographic case study focusing on the level of an individual innovation process in a Finnish architects’ office. Typical for KIBS, the case company does not have a separate R&D department or other specific team specialized for innovation process (cf. Preissl, 2000). On the contrary, the successful innovation process is dependant on the efforts and the potential of the whole organization (Sundbo, 1997). Especially in the case of service innovations, informational and cognitive inputs and learning processes are essential (Toivonen, 2004). Personal abilities and the organization’s support to observe changes occurring in the business environment can even become crucial for success. This study was started in November 2006 and it will continue until September 2007. It is a part of a larger project examining knowledge-intensive business service innovations and innovation networks.
The conference organisers reserve all rights to
any programme or schedule
changes.