00980nas a2200373   4500008004100000022001400041245003900055210003600094260004200130300000600172490000700178653002300185653002200208653001400230653001400244653000900258653001600267653001500283653002600298653002300324653002500347653002100372653001400393653001600407653001200423653001900435653001900454653001900473653001600492653002700508100001800535700002300553856003000576       2021                        eng d  a1927-032100aEditorial: Insights (January 2021)0 aEditorial Insights January 2021  aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2021  a30 v1110aDigital disruption10adigital ecosystem10aeCommerce10aecosystem10aFAIR10aGlobal eCom10ainnovation10aInnovation management10ainnovation process10ainternationalization10ainteroperability10aknowledge10aopportunity10aroadmap10ascientometrics10asmall business10asustainability10atext mining10auniversity cooperation1 aTanev, Stoyan1 aSandstrom, Gregory  utimreview.ca/article/141601628nas a2200205   4500008004100000022001400041245009200055210006900147260004200216300001000258490000700268520099000275653001501265653002601280653002301306653001901329100002401348700002001372856003001392       2021                        eng d  a1927-032100aSMEs and the Innovation Management Process:  A multi-level process conceptual framework0 aSMEs and the Innovation Management Process A multilevel process   aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2021  a22-330 v113 aThe aim of this paper is to propose a conceptual framework to manage the innovation process in small businesses. It is based on research from 11 case studies in the Montreal software industry using contingency and resource dependency theories. This conceptual framework provides a view of the innovation process that differs from the linear approach often used in many studies to investigate innovation in small and medium sized businesses (SMEs). The linear approach considers the process as a set of activities that includes developing from one stage to another, while depending on the previous one. We conceptualize the innovation process in small businesses as an interactive process that involves a set of six subprocesses and several keys points of resources mobilization, which requires interacting with both internal and external business actors. Successful mobilization of innovation resources at all key points determines the success or failure of SMEs' innovation processes.10ainnovation10aInnovation management10ainnovation process10asmall business1 aDossou-Yovo, Angelo1 aKeen, Christian  utimreview.ca/article/141401816nas a2200217   4500008004100000022001400041245007800055210006900133260004200202300001000244490000600254520113800260653002901398653002401427653002301451653002301474653002301497100001701520700002301537856003801560       2019                        eng d  a1927-032100aUnderstanding Digital Innovation from a Layered Architectural Perspective0 aUnderstanding Digital Innovation from a Layered Architectural Pe  aOttawabTalent First Networkc02/2019  a51-630 v93 aManaging successful digital innovation processes is a challenging task, especially when it involves heterogeneous actors with different sets of knowledge. By gaining a better understanding of how different architectural layers of digital technology interplay with digital innovation, we can be better prepared for managing the complex and messy processes that often arise when working with digital innovation. In this article, we therefore ask: How does the layered architecture of digital technology interplay with digital innovation processes? A case study approach was selected to studied events involving multiple actors in an innovation and development project called the Smart Lock project. The theoretical basis for our study is digital innovation from the perspective of knowledge exchange and relationships. A temporal bracketing strategy was used to support a process analysis of the case data. The article primarily contributes to the body of research concerning digital innovation and provides an example to practitioners of how digital innovation processes can be coordinated and managed based on the innovation at hand.10acollaborative innovation10aconcept development10adigital innovation10adigital technology10ainnovation process1 aLund, Jesper1 aEbbesson, Esbjörn  uhttps://timreview.ca/article/121801816nas a2200229   4500008004100000022001400041245008000055210006900135260004200204300001000246490000600256520113400262653001401396653001301410653002301423653002001446653002301466100002101489700002001510700001901530856003701549       2018                        eng d  a1927-032100aData Science as an Innovation Challenge: From Big Data to Value Proposition0 aData Science as an Innovation Challenge From Big Data to Value P  aOttawabTalent First Networkc03/2018  a16-250 v83 aAnalyzing “big data” holds huge potential for generating business value. The ongoing advancement of tools and technology over recent years has created a new ecosystem full of opportunities for data-driven innovation. However, as the amount of available data rises to new heights, so too does complexity. Organizations are challenged to create the right contexts, by shaping interfaces and processes, and by asking the right questions to guide the data analysis. Lifting the innovation potential requires teaming and focus to efficiently assign available resources to the most promising initiatives. With reference to the innovation process, this article will concentrate on establishing a process for analytics projects from first ideas to realization (in most cases: a running application). The question we tackle is: what can the practical discourse on big data and analytics learn from innovation management? The insights presented in this article are built on our practical experiences in working with various clients. We will classify analytics projects as well as discuss common innovation barriers along this process. 10aanalytics10abig data10adigital innovation10aidea generation10ainnovation process1 aKayser, Victoria1 aNehrke, Bastian1 aZubovic, Damir  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/114301599nas a2200253   4500008004100000022001400041245007800055210006900133260004200202300001000244490000600254520086300260653001601123653002601139653002301165653001501188653000801203653001201211653002101223100002101244700002101265700002201286856003701308       2018                        eng d  a1927-032100aInnovation Instruments to Co-Create Needs-Based Solutions in a Living Lab0 aInnovation Instruments to CoCreate NeedsBased Solutions in a Liv  aOttawabTalent First Networkc05/2018  a22-350 v83 aThis multiple case study focuses on co-creation facilitated with innovation instruments in three different environments – a school, a hospital, and an airport – in which 12 SMEs and startups developed solutions based on predefined needs of customer organizations, and where stakeholders actively participated through user involvement methods facilitated by a living lab. The article provides new knowledge regarding the benefits of the co-creation, user involvement, and use of the living lab approach within different contexts. Our findings show concrete benefits of co-creation for stakeholders such as companies, customer organizations, and end users. Based on our results, we propose a new, generic model for using innovation instruments to facilitate co-creation for the development of needs-based products and services in different service domains.10aco-creation10ainnovation instrument10ainnovation process10aLiving lab10aSME10astartup10auser involvement1 aHaukipuro, Lotta1 aVäinämö, Satu1 aHyrkäs, Pauliina  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/115601690nas a2200277   4500008004100000022001400041245009900055210006900154260004200223300000900265490000600274520083600280653001601116653002501132653002301157653002101180653001501201653002401216653002501240653002301265653001801288653002201306100002601328700002101354856003701375       2017                        eng d  a1927-032100aRealistic Creativity Training for Innovation Practitioners: The Know–Recognize–React Model0 aRealistic Creativity Training for Innovation Practitioners The K  aOttawabTalent First Networkc06/2017  a5-150 v73 aCreativity is increasingly being recognized as important raw material for innovation, which highlights the importance of identifying ways to increase the creativity of practitioners. In this article, we describe our efforts to design a creativity training program specifically for innovation practitioners. Our aim was to develop a program that would be both theoretically sound (i.e., based on a rigorous scientific foundation) and relevant for practitioners (i.e., applicable to real-world contexts). Our transdisciplinary study employed co-creation as a method to ensure that three layers of focus would be taken into consideration: metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive monitoring, and metacognitive control. The result is a program called Creative Awareness Training, which is based on the new Know–Recognize–React model.10aco-creation10acognitive creativity10acreative awareness10acreative process10acreativity10acreativity training10afront-end innovation10ainnovation process10ametacognition10atransdisciplinary1 aValgeirsdottir, Dagny1 aOnarheim, Balder  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/108001898nas a2200253   4500008004100000022001400041245004900055210004900104260004200153300001000195490000600205520121400211653002001425653001201445653001201457653002401469653001401493653002301507653001501530653002101545100002301566700001801589856003701607       2017                        eng d  a1927-032100aReflecting on Actions in Living Lab Research0 aReflecting on Actions in Living Lab Research  aOttawabTalent First Networkc02/2017  a27-340 v73 aLiving labs deploy contemporary open and user-centred engagement processes in real-world contexts where all relevant stakeholders are involved and engaged with the endeavour to create and experiment with different innovations. The approach is evidently successful and builds on the perspective that people have a democratic right to have influence over changes that might affect them, such as those brought about by an innovation. In this article, we will reflect on and discuss a case in which end users took part in the development of a method that stimulates learning and adoption of digital innovations in their own homes while testing and interacting with it. The results show that, when end users were stimulated to use the implemented innovation through different explicit assignments, they both increased their understanding of the situation as well as changed their behaviour. Living lab processes are complex and dynamic, and we find that it is essential that a living lab have the capability to adjust its roles and actions. We argue that being reflective is beneficial for innovation process managers in living labs because it allows them to adjust processes in response to dynamic circumstances. 10aaction research10aApollon10acontext10adigital innovations10aend users10ainnovation process10aLiving lab10aresearch process1 aStåhlbröst, Anna1 aHolst, Marita  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/105501697nas a2200205   4500008004100000022001400041245010700055210006900162260004200231300001000273490000600283520106600289653001201355653002301367653001501390653001401405100002001419700001501439856003701454       2017                        eng d  a1927-032100aTaking Real-Life Seriously: An Approach to Decomposing Context Beyond “Environment” in Living Labs0 aTaking RealLife Seriously An Approach to Decomposing Context Bey  aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2017  a26-360 v73 aThe maturity of living labs has grown over the years and researchers have developed a uniform definition by emphasizing the multi-method and real-life, contextual approach. The latter predominantly focuses on the in situ use of a product during field trials where users are observed in their everyday life. Researchers thus recognize the importance of context in living labs, but do not provide adequate insights into how context can be taken into consideration. Therefore, the contribution of this article is twofold. By means of a case study, we show how field trials can be evaluated in a more structural way to cover all dimensions of context and how this same framework can be used to evaluate context in the front end of design. This framework implies that living lab researchers are no longer dependent on the technological readiness level of a product to evaluate all dimensions of context. By using the proposed framework, living lab researchers can improve the overall effectiveness of methods used to gather and analyze data in a living lab project. 10acontext10ainnovation process10aLiving lab10areal-life1 aCoorevits, Lynn1 aJacobs, An  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/104701490nas a2200229   4500008004100000022001400041245006900055210006900124260004200193300001000235490000600245520084000251653001201091653001801103653000801121653002301129653001501152653000901167100002301176700002501199856003601224       2015                        eng d  a1927-032100aLeveraging Living Lab Innovation Processes through Crowdsourcing0 aLeveraging Living Lab Innovation Processes through Crowdsourcing  aOttawabTalent First Networkc12/2015  a28-360 v53 aAround the globe, crowdsourcing initiatives are emerging and contributing in a diversity of areas, such as in crisis management and product development and to carry out micro-tasks such as translations and transcriptions. The essence of crowdsourcing is to acknowledge that not all the talented people work for you; hence, crowdsourcing brings more perspectives, insights, and visions to, for instance, an innovation process. In this article, we analyze how crowdsourcing can contribute to the different stages of innovation processes carried out in living labs and thus contribute to living labs by strengthening their core role as innovation process facilitators. We have also identified benefits and challenges that need to be grappled with for managers of living labs to make it possible for the crowd to fully support their cause.10acitizen10acrowdsourcing10aICT10ainnovation process10aLiving lab10auser1 aStåhlbröst, Anna1 aLassinantti, Josefin  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/950