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

WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENsencing‟ in order to „learn from the future.‟ Diverse individuals engaging in collectivediscourse are, however, involved in a slightly different way.Here, Martin introduces the „knowledge funnel‟, a linear three-step process thattakes „personal knowledge‟ from, first, addressing the „mystery‟ to, second, developinga „heuristic‟ in order to identify any underlying pattern to inform actions and, thirdly,refining the heuristic to an „algorithm‟ that facilitates implementation of the innovation.Dialogue is present from the outset, although in ex post accounts such interactions normallyget obscured by mainstream quests to identify the legal intellectual property owningindividual. Thereafter, organisations proceeding with this approach – examplesinclude Research in Motion (BlackBerry); Procter & Gamble (open innovation; Chesbrough,2003); and Herman Miller (the Aeron office chair) – hire a „sounding board‟of design theory experts (including Martin) to advise on the heuristic-to-algorithm partsof the design process and projects. Three vulnerabilities lie in Martin‟s approach in lightof the perspective adopted here. First, despite the „sounding board‟ it is individualisticin its stress on „personal knowledge‟ as the key driver of the design process. Second it isunclear how design teams interact with sounding board members, whether individuallyor collectively, virtually or proximately. Third, as he admits, there will inevitably be a„revolt of the analyticals‟ intending to wrest control back from the „wilful negligence‟ ofthe „flaky‟ creatives to protect shareholder interests. To which threat, Martin offers notheoretical protection. Accordingly, it could be concluded that the knowledge funnel isjust a species of idealism unless large numbers of firms had already decided to adoptsuch an approach at the highest level, something Martin‟s own estimates suggest isoverwhelmingly far from the case.Nevertheless, the knowledge funnel is implicitly practised in the Region Skåne exemplarin Sweden (Fig. 4.4). In their regional innovation process this region practicessome of the key elements of design theory, notably the concept of „white spaces‟ astheir terminology for the „mystery‟ of wherein regional innovation lies (Johnson, 2010).This is cognate to Burt‟s (1992) idea of „structural holes‟ between strong ties clusterswith evolved social capital „bridging‟ that asset across to a „related variety‟ strong-tiescluster to explore adjacent possibilities for innovation in-between Kauffman, 1995).This is also referred to as seeking the „blue ocean‟ of novelty where competition is lowor non-existent rather than the red water of bloody competition in regard to corporate(or regional) strategy (Kim & Mauborgne, 2005).The second way in which Region Skåne‟s regional innovation strategy echoes theknowledge funnel is its deployment of a „sounding board‟ heuristic of regional expertsto facilitate interactions between clusters and the variety of regional support agencies orintermediaries responsible for risk capital, skills formation, innovation bridging, researchand regional innovation governance. Thus in Fig. 4.4 ALMI is the regionalbranch of Sweden‟s national training agency while, similarly decentralised „InnovationBridge‟ funds innovation links between firms and research institutes.88