Dr Tim Minshall has been appointed as the inaugural Dr John C Taylor Professor of Innovation at the University of Cambridge, a new post that will build on the University’s strengths in science, engineering and entrepreneurship. Dr Minshall, who is currently Head of CTM. Reader in Technology & Innovation Management in the Department of Engineering and Fellow of Churchill College, will take up his new post on 1 October.
Over the last two days I attended the DRUID conference in New York. It has been an excellent experience. While this might be partially explained by the unbeatable location, I found the intellectual conversations and particularly the DRUID debates extremely inspiring and on a fantastic high level.
The conference features two debates, with the first one on engaging with practice (and the problem to create impact) and the second on focused on theoretical and empirical contributions in academic papers.
Particularly when I was listening to the second DRUID debate it struck me that the debate circled around a particularly view of what must be considered one particular way to understand what theory is. It seems to me that most colleagues (possibly mostly the younger ones) understand theory predominantly as an instrument to provide explanations of existing phenomenon, particularly of those which warrant explanation (i.e. are relevant). Accordingly, the type of theory to be developed and tested usually seeks to explain ‘why’, in other words to explain the causalities within and around certain phenomenon (i.e. interrelations of constructs). From my understanding, such an understanding essentially forces researchers to become concerned with existing (ex post) conceptual or empirical phenomenon and will inevitable aim at developing explanatory theories. Let me try to explain why I think this approach is linked the problem that the community faces about creating impact through research (i.e. discussed during the first debate) and how this could possibly be changed.
There is an alternative way of thinking about what theory is, which was briefly touched upon by Martin Kilduff during the second debate. One may want to consider whether to disregard the phenomenon focused approach and substitute it with a focus on economic or managerial problems (e.g. the strategic alignment problem). Focusing on a problem (instead of phenomenon) offers a different cognitive space and thus a way for the field to create the impact it deserves with all the intellectually power of extremely capable colleagues behind it. Let me try to explain how I see it.
Focusing on problems will drive researchers to theorize solutions, some of which might be sub-optimal, but through empirical testing, validation and refinement one may (eventually) arrive at a fairly optimal solution to a certain problem. Hence, when focusing on problems the type of theory to be developed will be of inherently different nature than the theorizing that takes place when aiming to explain phenomenon. Instead of taking an ex-post observatory approach researchers will be forced to develop theories, i.e. an understanding of causalities that need to be set in action for solving a problem. These kind of theories can likewise be tested empirically, even though we may need slightly different methods (e.g. simulations). The next step would then be to develop policy frameworks (which can turn out to be highly relevant policy implications) as well as tools and techniques (to be put forward as managerial implications), which in turn can be tested empirically (i.e. their performance). We may also need to develop particularly skills, if not guidelines to frame and define problems.
Taking such an approach to empirically supported theory development may contribute to changing the research conducted in the community towards a way that creates impact, while being rigorous. Research will then become a creative (problem solving) endeavour with relevance and impact.
Pleased to announce a fully funded EPSRC scholarship to support one PhD student with research focusing on „OpenIP strategies for emerging technologies“ starting in October 2017.
Applicants from the UK are eligible for a full award covering university and college fees and a maintenance allowance. Applicants from the EU are only eligible for a fees-only award unless they can be deemed a home student, i.e. have been permanent residency in the UK for the 3 years preceding October 2017. Unfortunately, overseas applicants are not eligible for this particular scholarship.
The application deadline is 31 January 2017. Further details available here.
No. 10 in 2016 just got published on Open IP strategies for sustainability transitions. Read it here.
ZTE wants the public’s ideas for its next smartphone – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36976468
R&D Management invites submissions of papers for a special issue on „Leveraging open innovation to improve society: past achievements and future trajectories.“ Submission Deadline: December 31, 2016. For more information on this call for papers, click here.
Interesting ranking of TIE journals from Google. Research Policy top1 and Technovation on top4. JPIM on top6 and R&D Management on top11. A bit different to other rankings.
The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones VentureSource are tracking venture-backed private companies valued at $1 billion or more. See here how the unicorn club has expanded and select companies to learn more about each.
The Centre for Technology Management (CTM) at the University of Cambridge invites applications for a PhD position within our innovation and intellectual property (IP) management research group (IIPM).
The IIPM group is characterized by a young dynamic staff with strong research collaborations between industry and academia. We take a broad definition of IP and employ a relational perspective focusing on IP as enabler for collaborative and distributed innovation processes (i.e. Open Innovation). We have a primary interest in IP challenges for accelerating the development of emerging (manufacturing) technologies for supporting UK manufacturing. The group applies engineering principles to solve real life managerial problems, for example, through the development of new tools, techniques, approaches and methods.
We are seeking candidates with IP expertise as well as domain specific knowledge. Research interests may include, but are not restricted to:
- How to design IP based business models for multi-partner collaborations, such as joint R&D projects and industry-university partnerships?
- How to accelerate the development towards Industrie 4.0 (internet of things) through strategic IP management?
- How can open IP strategies help social enterprises, for instance cleantech ventures tackling the plastic challenge or medical not-for profit companies focusing on rare diseases (e.g. non-commercial patent pools)?
- How to integrate open source with proprietary software in innovation processes, e.g. IP modularity?
- How to increase UK productivity through better IP education, e.g. through design of new IP tools for learning?
Candidates must hold a Master degree or equivalent. Industrial IP related experience is beneficial. The preferred starting date is October 2016, with an option to start in January 2017. Our PhD students commonly have own funding, but we can support efforts to acquire funding. If you have a keen interest in any of the above topics (or like to suggest another topic) please contact Dr Frank Tietze (email@example.com).
„How innovation changed my life“ and particularly the life of this family. Read the full story on the UKIPO blog at: https://goo.gl/dZ0sL2
Quite some interesting statistics. Read here about the most innovative companies from 2005-2015.