White Spaces Innovation in Sweden - Innovation policy for ... - Vinnova

WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENgreater the perturbation or disturbance of a move or action by any one entity on all theother related entities. Such a high degree of dependence rarely has beneficial effectsthroughout the whole ecosystem. Degree of connectivity is also associated with thequantity of information which flows between the connected entities and it may be arguedthat the higher the connectivity the greater the exchange of information. Yet, avery high rate in the flow of information is again found to be deleterious as it tends topush the system towards instability (Mitleton-Kelly).Thus we prefer a more „positive-sum‟ perspective. Accordingly, in full awareness ofthe above points the term „complexity‟ will be used within this report to refer to thetheories of complexity as applied to complex adaptive systems (CASA; Fig. 3.3). Theseare dynamic systems able to adapt and change within, or as part of, a changing environment.It is important however to note that there is no dichotomy between a systemand its environment in the sense that a system always adapts to a changing environment.The notion to be explored is rather that of a system closely linked with all otherrelated systems making up an ecosystem. Within such a context change needs to be seenin terms of co-evolution with all other related systems, rather than as adaptation to aseparate and distinct environment.It is the notion of co-evolution with, which will be examined in relation to the „innovationprocess‟ within the context of a co-evolving „social ecosystem‟. If the innovationprocess of any one organisation is seen as distinct and separate from all related businesses,which include suppliers, buyers and competitors, then strategy will always beseen as a „response to‟ the actions and decisions of those other entities. But if strategy(interpreted in this context as actions and decisions affecting the organisation and directionof the firm) is seen as a co-evolving process, then the perspective changes, and eachfirm is seen as a fully participating agent that both influences and is influenced by thesocial ecosystem made up of all related businesses, consumers and legislative bodies.2.2 Coping with complexityBoisot and Child (1999) argue that complex adaptive systems generally choose one oftwo responses to the complexity that confronts them. A complexity reduction responseinvolves developing a single representation of the variety in the environment and developinga singular adaptive response. Organizations that attempt to reduce complexityemphasize codification (specifying categories to which data are assigned) and abstraction(limiting the number of categories that need to be considered in the first place).Thus, managerial responses to complexity based on codification and abstraction wouldinclude minimizing the number of goals and strategic activities to be considered, formalizingand centralizing structural/decision making patterns, and minimizing the numberof interactions/connections necessary for decision making. This is in short to follow areductionist path. This approach is transaction oriented and builds on sharing codes.23