IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/jecman/v41y2020i3p105-127n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of design thinking in the creation of academic incubators

Author

Listed:
  • Staniec Iwona

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Production Engineering, Lodz University of Technology, Lodz, Poland)

  • Pilawa Joanna

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Production Engineering, Lodz University of Technology, Lodz, Poland)

Abstract

Aim/purpose – More and more universities invest in business incubators. However, different aspects of their creation are not extensively described in the literature. The main purpose of this paper is to identify the possibility of using design thinking (DT) in the creation of academic incubators. Design/methodology/approach – A case study is used in this research. The approach of Lodz Technical University to the creation of a business incubator by using the design thinking method is presented. Findings – It is significant that all the participants thought design thinking was a useful methodology for the creation of academic incubators. Furthermore, the participants had a sense of social contribution to the local people, the university, and communities. It was very important to use their knowledge, experience, skills, and needs in the field of collaboration with incubators. The common works provided an opportunity to share their ideas with other teammates from different perspectives. The advantages of using DT are very meaningful for participants, allowing them to keep in mind why they are doing this and for whom. The DT process can be very difficult to describe, but its use by the creation of a business incubator will yield many benefits and new initiatives. DT is a great solution to this problem because it relates programme activities to their effect, it helps keep stakeholders focused on achieving outcomes, while it remains flexible and open to finding the best means to enact a unique story of change. Research implications/limitations – The limitations of the described study are observer bias and difficulty of replication. The effect of this process was not implemented because there was insufficient funding and the decisions regarding the implementation of this idea have changed. Originality/value/contribution – This paper is a one-of-a-kind description of the implementation of design thinking methodology in the creation of an academic incubator.

Suggested Citation

  • Staniec Iwona & Pilawa Joanna, 2020. "The use of design thinking in the creation of academic incubators," Journal of Economics and Management, Sciendo, vol. 41(3), pages 105-127, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:jecman:v:41:y:2020:i:3:p:105-127:n:1
    DOI: 10.22367/jem.2020.41.06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.22367/jem.2020.41.06
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22367/jem.2020.41.06?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald F. Kuratko & Michael H. Morris, 2018. "Examining the Future Trajectory of Entrepreneurship," Journal of Small Business Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1), pages 11-23, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rita Mura & Francesca Vicentini & Ludovico Maria Botti & Maria Vincenza Chiriacò, 2024. "Achieving the circular economy through environmental policies: Packaging strategies for more sustainable business models in the wine industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 1497-1514, February.
    2. Audretsch, David B. & Belitski, Maksim & Theodoraki, Christina, 2024. "Micro and macro factors of firm scaling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    3. Subhalaxmi Mohapatra & Subhadip Roy & Arvind Upadhyay & Anil Kumar, 2024. "Circular value creation through environmental entrepreneurship initiatives: A case‐based exploration," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 3811-3831, July.
    4. Charles Stephen Tundui & Christopher Shiganza, 2021. "Determinants of entrepreneurial behaviour in the public sector in Tanzania: a case of water services provision," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 11(1), pages 189-199, December.
    5. Luning Shao & Yuxin Miao & Shengce Ren & Sanfa Cai & Fei Fan, 2024. "Designing a framework for entrepreneurship education in Chinese higher education: a theoretical exploration and empirical case study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Morris, Michael H. & Kuratko, Donald F. & Santos, Susana C. & Soleimanof, Sohab, 2024. "Fear and the poverty entrepreneur: The paradox of failure and success," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 41-54.
    7. Martin Hemmert & Adam R. Cross & Ying Cheng & Jae-Jin Kim & Masahiro Kotosaka & Franz Waldenberger & Leven J. Zheng, 2022. "New venture entrepreneurship and context in East Asia: a systematic literature review," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(5), pages 831-865, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    design thinking; academic incubators; creation of incubators;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:jecman:v:41:y:2020:i:3:p:105-127:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.