IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/66539.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Learning how to innovate as a socio-epistemological process of co-creation. Towards a constructivist teaching strategy for innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Peschl, Markus F.
  • Bottaro, Gloria
  • Hartner-Tiefenthaler, Martina
  • Rötzer, Katharina

Abstract

Context: Radical constructivism (RC) is seen as a fruitful way to teach innovation, as Ernst von Glasersfeld’s concepts of knowing, learning, and teaching provide an epistemological framework fostering processes of generating an autonomous conceptual understanding. Problem: Classical educational approaches do not meet the requirements for teaching and learning innovation because they mostly aim at students’ competent performance, not at students’ understanding and developing their creative capabilities. Method: Analysis of theoretical principles from the constructivist framework and how they can be used as a foundation for designing a course in the field of innovation. The empirical results are based on qualitative journal entries that were coded and categorized according to Charmaz’s grounded theory approach. Results: It is shown that there is a close relationship between learning and innovation processes. The proposed investigated course design based on RC incorporates the following concepts: the course setting is understood as a framework to guide understanding; students work in teams and are subjective constructors of their own knowledge; instructors take on the role of coaches, guiding students through an innovation process as co-creators. Such a framework facilitates dynamic processes of assimilation and accommodation, as well as perturbation through the “other,” which potentially lead to novel, and viable, conceptual structures crucial for sustainable innovation. Constructivist Content: The paper argues in favor of RC principles in the context of teaching and learning. The proposed course setting is oriented at von Glasersfeld’s understanding of knowing, learning, and teaching (vs. training. It outlines theoretical and practical aspects of these principles in the context of a course design for innovation. Furthermore, it shows the importance of von Glasersfeld’s concept of intersubjectivity for processes of accommodation and the generation of (novel) autonomous conceptual structures. The interplay between creating coherence, perturbation, and irritation through interacting with the “other” (in the form of co-students and instructors) is assumed to be vital for such processes, as it leads to the creation of not only novel but also viable conceptual structures, therefore re-establishing a relative equilibrium critical for sustainable innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Peschl, Markus F. & Bottaro, Gloria & Hartner-Tiefenthaler, Martina & Rötzer, Katharina, 2014. "Learning how to innovate as a socio-epistemological process of co-creation. Towards a constructivist teaching strategy for innovation," MPRA Paper 66539, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:66539
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/66539/1/MPRA_paper_66539.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fagerberg, Jan & Verspagen, Bart, 2009. "Innovation studies--The emerging structure of a new scientific field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 218-233, March.
    2. Peschl, Markus F., 2006. "Triple-loop learning as foundation for profound change, individual cultivation, and radical innovation: Construction processes beyond scientific and rational knowledge," MPRA Paper 9940, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Peschl, Markus F. & Fundneider, Thomas, 2013. "Theory-U and Emergent Innovation. Presencing as a method of bringing forth profoundly new knowledge and realities," MPRA Paper 66538, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Fagerberg, Jan & Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. (ed.), 2006. "The Oxford Handbook of Innovation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286805.
    5. John E. Ettlie & William P. Bridges & Robert D. O'Keefe, 1984. "Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 682-695, June.
    6. Peschl, Markus F. & Fundneider, Thomas, 2008. "Emergent Innovation and Sustainable Knowledge Co-creation. A Socio-Epistemological Approach to “Innovation from within”," MPRA Paper 10215, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    8. Peschl, Markus F. & Fundneider, Thomas, 2012. "Spaces enabling game-changing and sustaining innovations: Why space matters for knowledge creation and innovation," MPRA Paper 66536, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Grisold & Markus F. Peschl, 2017. "Why a Systems Thinking Perspective on Cognition Matters for Innovation and Knowledge Creation. A Framework towards Leaving behind Our Projections from the Past for Creating New Futures," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 335-353, May.

    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. Peschl, Markus F. & Fundneider, Thomas, 2013. "Theory-U and Emergent Innovation. Presencing as a method of bringing forth profoundly new knowledge and realities," MPRA Paper 66538, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Peschl, Markus F. & Fundneider, Thomas, 2014. "Designing and enabling interfaces for collaborative knowledge creation and innovation. From managing to enabling innovation as socio-epistemological technology," MPRA Paper 66542, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Markus F. Peschl & Thomas Fundneider, 2014. "Why space matters for collaborative innovation networks: on designing enabling spaces for collaborative knowledge creation," International Journal of Organisational Design and Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3/4), pages 358-391.
    4. Peschl, Markus F. & Fundneider, Thomas, 2014. "Evolving the future by learning from the future (as it emerges)? Toward an epistemology of change," MPRA Paper 66540, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Da Mota de Pina E Cunha, A.M. & Verhallen, T.M.M., 1998. "Organizational innovation : An overview of topics, models and research directions," Other publications TiSEM 03119425-3fea-4334-ad00-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    7. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    8. Leenders, M.A.A.M. & Wierenga, B., 2001. "The Effectiveness of Different Mechanisms for Integrating Marketing and R&D," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-20-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    9. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    11. Tony Huzzard, 2015. "Opening Up And Closing Down: The Interpretative Repertoires Of Leading Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(01), pages 1-24.
    12. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    13. Fabio Magnacca & Riccardo Giannetti, 2024. "Management accounting and new product development: a systematic literature review and future research directions," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(2), pages 651-685, June.
    14. James Boyer & Jean-Marc Touzard, 2021. "To what extent do an innovation system and cleaner technological regime affect the decision-making process of climate change adaptation? Evidence from wine producers in three wine clusters in France," Post-Print hal-03290224, HAL.
    15. Bookhagen, Andrea & Sperber, Sonja, 2017. "Kundenintegration in den Entwicklungsprozess von Produktinnovationen durch Crowdsourcing," PraxisWISSEN Marketing: German Journal of Marketing, AfM – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Marketing, vol. 2(01/2017), pages 21-37.
    16. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    17. Spanos, Yiannis E. & Voudouris, Irini, 2009. "Antecedents and trajectories of AMT adoption: The case of Greek manufacturing SMEs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 144-155, February.
    18. Sophie Hooge & Milena Klasing Chen & Dominique Laousse, 2019. "Managing the emergence of concepts in fuzzy front end: a framework of strategic performance and emerging process of innovation briefs," Post-Print hal-02167857, HAL.
    19. Ijaz Ur Rehman & Muhammad Shahbaz & Phouphet Kyophilavong, 2016. "Do Technological Development and Financial Development Promote Economic Growth: Fresh Evidence from Romania," International Journal of Economics and Empirical Research (IJEER), The Economics and Social Development Organization (TESDO), vol. 4(2), pages 60-76, February.
    20. Andreas Kallmuenzer & Andreas Strobl & Mike Peters, 2018. "Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 855-883, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; teaching; learning; course design; co-creation; Enabling Space; radical constructivism.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A23 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Graduate

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:66539. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.