You are looking at 1 - 10 of 12 items

  • Author or Editor: Patrick Cohendet x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Patrick Cohendet and Patrick Llerena

You do not have access to this content

Patrick Cohendet and Ash Amin

You do not have access to this content

Patrick Cohendet and Laurent Simon

In this chapter, the authors analyse Ubisoft’s Montreal ecosystem. They show how the Ubisoft studio is the central actor that orchestrated a unique ecosystem in videogames through the building of a rich ‘middleground’, conceived as a set of intermediary platforms and devices that connect and integrate formal organisations and informal collectives. They argue that the success of the development of the Ubisoft studio and of the dynamism of the city in the domain of videogames is due to the progressive building by the main parties in this field of such a middleground that provides the essential qualities of an ecosystem: generative dynamism, resilience and power of attraction.

You do not have access to this content

Patrick Cohendet and Laurent Simon

As a general paradigm for society, a dominant model of innovation drives and shapes the behaviours and decisions of policy-makers, economists, entrepreneurs, business managers and all sorts of economic agents. In the present contribution, to focus on the relationships between dominant models and constitutive disciplines, we have purposefully reduced the sequence of generations of dominant models to three main generations: 1) the linear and closed model of innovation (from World War I to the mid-1980s); 2) the interactive and closed model of innovation (from the mid-1980s to the first decade of the 21st century); and 3) the interactive and open model of innovation (starting from the first decade of the 21st century, which in our view has not yet reached its mature stage). For each generation of dominant model, we will summarise the main characteristics of the dominant model, to assess the contribution of each of the constitutive disciplines to the model, and to understand the replacement of a model by a new one.

You do not have access to this content

Patrick Cohendet, Guy Parmentier and Laurent Simon

The place and role of managing creativity in organizations appears as a growing concern amongst scholars as well as practitioners. The aim of this chapter is to situate and analyze how managing creativity should fit into the organizational framework orchestrated by the interactions between the management of knowledge and the management of innovation. In this contribution, we question the traditional view that places creativity at the preliminary stage of the innovation process. Following pioneering works on the management of creativity, we suggest in the following that managing creativity is equivalent to managing ideas, and argue that the main theoretical obstacle is that at the present stage ideas are mostly “black boxes” in innovation theories. In an effort to “open this black box”, we come to the suggestion that a major change of perspective is needed in management: instead of viewing the management of ideas as an initial stage of the innovation process, we propose an integrated framework where the processes of ideation and innovation are not sequential but coupled, and where these strategic interactions are mediated by knowledge-management processes. Such a change of perspective suggests drastic impacts on the ways to manage organizations, which are discussed in the conclusion of this chapter.

You do not have access to this content

Patrick Cohendet, Jean-Alain Héraud and Patrick Llerena

This content is available to you

Edited by Harald Bathelt, Patrick Cohendet, Sebastian Henn and Laurent Simon