Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding and Managing Responsible Innovation

  • Published:
Philosophy of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As a relational concept, responsible innovation can be made more tangible by asking innovation of what and responsibility of whom for what? Arranging the scattered field of responsible innovation comprehensively, starting from an anthropological point of view, into five fields of tension and five categories of spearheads, may be theoretically and practically helpful while offering suggestions for both research and management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. With ‘Faustian’ is meant the unwanted and undesirable spinoff of innovations of ambitious innovators who surrender moral integrity in order to achieve power and success for a delimited term.

  2. The term ‘ethics’ is used to indicate the science of morals and morality, whereas ‘moral’ refers to the practice of values, norms, principles, and virtues that are held in a certain social system (personal, family, organization, type of industry, professional organization, and society).

  3. Not all responsible innovation themes can be addressed here fully. Instead, at points considered relevant, exemplary explanations, not with the power of argument, but as illustrative excursion, with suggestions for further reading.

  4. Much earlier, Hugo of St. Victor (1096–1141) advocated the use of scientific knowledge in human practice by positing that man, born naked and unprotected, cannot be satisfied with his natural state, stepping outside that natural order. Through the ingenuity of his intellect he can still provide for the vital in a natural way, not only for survival, but also to make life more enjoyable (Sternagel 1966, 85, 87).

  5. This Third Agricultural Revolution involves a set of research technology transfer initiatives, occurring between 1950 and the late 1960s, that increased agricultural production worldwide, particularly in the developing countries.

  6. In the words of Reinert and Reinert (2006, 76), “Schumpeter was not very explicit about his sources, holding the cards that would have revealed the origins of his ideas very close to his chest. Sombart used the term creative destruction for the first time on the very last page of his book Krieg und Kapitalismus (1913).

  7. Contributions addressing moral elements of innovation are those of Anokhin and Schulze (2009), Baucus et al. (2008), Berdichevsky and Neuenschwander (1999); Berne (2008); Bohn et al. (2004); Bostrom (2014); Fassin (2000), Giaretta (2005); Lee (2005), Martin, (2008), Meel and Saat (2002), Mittelstadt et al. (2016); Mittelstadt and Floridi (2016), Selinger and White (2011); Silver (2012); Tate et al. (2017).

  8. For instance, Achterhuis (1992), Anders (1980), Ellul (1954), Feenberg (2012), Heidegger (1962), Ihde (1990), Jonas (1973, 1976, 1979a, 1979b, 1984), Mumford (1934, 1967, 1971).

  9. Ethics literature shows discussions about the nature and even the possibility of moral/expertise. Unfortunately, these discussions are troubled by unclear definitions about the differences between moral expertise and ethical expertise(Archard 2011; Crosthwaite 1995; Nussbaum 2002; Powers 2005; Singer 1972; Steinkamp et al. 2008; Van Willigenburg 1991; Varelius 2008; Weinstein 1994).

References

  • Ach, J.S., and J. Siep, eds. 2006. Nano-bio-ethics: Ethical dimensions of Nanobiotechnology. Berlin: LIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Achterhuis, H. 1992. Inleiding. In De maat van de techniek, ed. H. Achterhuis, 9–42. Baarn: Ambo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Achterhuis, H. 1995. De moralisering van de apparaten. Socialisme en Democratie 52 (1): 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anders, G. 1980. Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen. München: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anokhin, S., and W.S. Schulze. 2009. Entrepreneurship, innovation, and corruption. Journal of Business Venturing 24 (5): 465–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archard, D. 2011. Why moral philosophers are not and should not be moral experts. Bioethics 25 (3): 119–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asongu, J.J. 2007. Innovation as an argument for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business and Public Policy 1 (3): 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., and H.C. Song. 2017. Similar but not the same: Differentiating corporate sustainability from corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Annals 11 (1): 105–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B.R. 2007. Consumed. How markets corrupt children, infantalize adults, and swallow citizens whole. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

  • Bateson, M.C. 1989. Composing a life. New York: Grove Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baucus, M.S., W.I. Norton, D.A. Baucus, and S.E. Human. 2008. Fostering creativity and innovation without encouraging unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 81 (1): 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. 2007. Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. 1992. Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennink, H. 2012. Foundations of organizational moral climate theory. Nijmegen: Radboud University.

  • Berdichevsky, D., and E. Neuenschwander. 1999. Toward an ethics of persuasive technology. Communications of the ACM 42 (5): 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berne, R.W. 2008. Science fiction, nano-ethics, and the moral imagination. In The yearbook of nanotechnology in society, volume I: Presenting futures, ed. E. Fisher, C. Selin, and J.M. Wetmore, 291–302. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Birsch, D., and J. Fielder, eds. 1994. The Ford Pinto case: A study in applied ethics, business, and technology. New York: State University of New York Press.

  • Blok, V. 2014. Look who's talking: Responsible innovation, the paradox of dialogue and the voice of the other in communication and negotiation processes. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (2): 171–190.

  • Blok, V. 2018. Philosophy of innovation: A research agenda. Philosophy of Management 17 (1): 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blok, V., and P.P. Lemmens. 2015. The emerging concept of responsible innovation. Three reasons why it is questionable and calls for a radical transformation of the concept of innovation. In Responsible innovation 2 concepts, approaches, and applications, ed. B.J. Koops, 19–35. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohn, J., V. Coroamă, M. Langheinrich, F. Mattern, and M. Rohs. 2004. Living in a world of smart everyday objects - social, economic, and ethical implications. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 10 (5): 763–785.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borning, A. & M. Muller 2012. Next steps for value sensitive design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (1125–1134). Austin TX: ACM.

  • Bos, J., V. Blok, and R. van Tulder. 2013. From Confrontation to Partnership. The Role of a Dutch Non-Governmental Organisation in Co-Creating a Market to Address the Issue of Animal Welfare. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 16 (Special Issue A): 69–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, N. 2014. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourban, M. & J. Rochel 2018. Synergies in innovation: Mapping and structuring the emerging fields of innovation ethics. Paper presented at the Thirteenth Philosophy of Management Conference, Greenwich UK, June 2018.

  • Bowen, H.R., and F.E. Johnson. 1953. Social responsibility of the businessman. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Box, J. 1983. Extending product lifetime: Prospects and opportunities. European Journal of Marketing 17 (4): 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridle, J. 2018. New dark age: Technology and the end of the future. London: Verso Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M.E., and L.K. Treviño. 2006. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly 17 (6): 595–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brundage, M. 2014. Limitations and risks of machine ethics. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 26 (3): 355–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J.M., B.C. Crosby, and M. Middleton Stone. 2006. The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Management Review 66 (special issue): 44–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulow, J. 1985. An economic theory of planned obsolescence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 101: 729–750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnside, R.M. 1990. Improving corporate climates for creativity. In Innovation and Creativity at Work. Psychological and Organizational Strategies, ed. M.A. West and J.L. Farr, 265–284. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, V. 1945/1995. Science: The endless frontier. North Stratford: Ayer Co..

    Google Scholar 

  • Calis, M., and H. Kisjes. 2013. Socialbesitas. Sociale media: Van vertier tot verslaving. Middelbeers: Innodoks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvano, E. 2007. Destructive Creation. SSE/EFI working paper series in economics and finance, no 653.

  • Carr, Nicholas. 2010. The shallows. What the internet is doing to our brains. New York/London: W.W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H.W. 2003. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., D. Faulkner, and S. Tallmann. 2005. Cooperative strategy: Managing alliances, networks, and joints ventures. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coeckelbergh, M. 2007. Imagination and principles: An essay on the role of imagination in moral reasoning. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coeckelbergh, M. 2011. Human development or human enhancement? A methodological reflection on capabilities and the evaluation of information technologies. Ethics and Information Technology 13 (2): 81–92.

  • Cohen, S. 2014. The ethics of De-extinction. NanoEthics 8 (2): 165–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingridge, D. 1980. The social control of technology. London: Frances Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R.G. 1990. Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products, 44–54. May–June: Business Horizons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. 2005. Ethics and altruism: What constitutes socially responsible design? Design Management Review 16: 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosthwaite, J. 1995. Moral expertise: A problem in the professional ethics of professional ethicists. Bioethics 9 (4): 361–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Alisa, G., F. Demaria, and G. Kallis, eds. 2015. Degrowth: A vocabulary for a new era. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A.R. 2003. Looking for Spinoza. Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. London: William Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • De George, R.T. 1981. Ethical responsibilities of engineers in large organizations: The Pinto case. Business & Professional Ethics Journal 1 (1): 1–14.

  • Dorrestijn, S. 2012. The design of our lives: technical mediation and subjectivation after Foucault. Enschede: Universiteit Twente.

  • EESC (European Economic and Social Committee). 2011. Innovative workplaces as a source of productivity and quality jobs. Brussels: EESC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellul, J. 1954. La technique ou l’enjeu du siècle. Paris: Armand Collin.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. 2010. Social innovation as part of the Europe 2020 strategy. Brussels: Bureau of European Policy Advisers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabris, A. 2018. Ethics of information and communication technologies. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, Y. 2000. Innovation and ethics. Ethical considerations in the innovation business. Journal of Business Ethics 27 (1–2): 193–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg, A. 2012. Questioning technology. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogg, B.J. 1999. Persuasive technologies. Communications of the ACM 42 (5): 27–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogg, B.J. 2003. Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and do. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, R., and S. Kaplan. 2001. Creative destruction. In Why Companies That Are Built to Last Underperform the Market - and How to Successfully Transform Them. New York: Broadway Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B., and P.H. Kahn Jr. 2003. Human values, ethics, and design. In The Human-computer interaction handbook, ed. J.A. Jacko and A. Sears, 1223–1248. Mahwah: L. Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B., P. Kahn, and A. Borning. 2002. Value sensitive design: Theory and methods, 02–12. Washington: University of Washington Technical Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genus, A. 2006. Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective, discourse. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 73 (1): 13–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genus, A., and A.M. Coles. 2005. On constructive technology assessment and limitations on public participation in technology assessment. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 17 (4): 433–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genus, A., and A.M. Coles. 2006. Firm strategies for risk management in innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management 10 (2): 113–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genus, A., and A. Stirling. 2018. Collingridge and the dilemma of control: Towards responsible and accountable innovation. Research Policy 47 (1): 61–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesang, B. 2010. Are moral philosophers moral experts? Bioethics 24 (4): 153–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giaretta, E. 2005. Ethical product innovation: In praise of slowness. The TQM Magazine 17 (2): 161–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gini, A. 2004. Moral Leadership and Business Ethics. In Ethics, the Heart of Leadership, ed. J.B. Ciulla, 25–43. Westport CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giubilini, A., and S. Sanyal. 2015. The ethics of Human enhancement. Philosophy Compass 10 (4): 233–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glannon, W. 2007. Bioethics and the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godin, B. 2006. The linear model of innovation: The historical construction of an analytical framework. Science, Technology, & Human Values 31 (6): 639–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordijn, B., and A.M. Cutter, eds. 2014. In pursuit of Nanoethics. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grün, A. 2002. Das Buch der Lebenskunst. Herder Verlag: Freiburg im Breisgau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiltinan, J. 2009. Creative destruction and destructive creations: Environmental ethics and planned obsolescence. Journal of Business Ethics 89 (1): 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 1967. Technik und Wissenschaft als Ideologie. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 1981. Theorie des Kommunikativen Handelns. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. 2001. The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review 108 (4): 814–834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häußermann, J.J. 2019. Nudging and participation: A contractualist approach to behavioural policy. Philosophy of Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-019-00117-w.

  • Heidegger, M. 1962. Die Technik und die Kehre. Pfullingen: Neske.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbroner, R.L. 1953. The worldly philosophers: The lives, times and ideas of the great economic thinkers. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinberg, R. 2011. The end of growth. Adapting to our new economic reality. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizingh, E. 2019. Innovatiemanagement. Amsterdam: Pearson education Benelux (4th edition).

  • Ihde, D. 1990. Technology and the Lifeworld: From garden to earth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, D., and H. Snijders. 2008. Innovatieroutine. In Hoe managers herhaalde innovatie kunnen stimuleren. Assen: Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B.B. 1999. Ethical issues in risk communication: Continuing the discussion. Risk Analysis 19 (3): 335–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. 1973. Technology and responsibility: Reflections on the new tasks of ethics. Social Research 40 (1): 31–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. 1976. Responsibility today: The ethics of an endangered future. Social Research 43 (1): 77–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. 1979a. Toward a philosophy of technology. Hastings Center Report 9 (1): 34–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. 1979b. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt am Main: Insel.

  • Jonas, H. 1984. The imperative of responsibility: In search of an ethics for the technological age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M., and D. Eckles. 2010. Selecting effective means to any end: Futures and ethics of persuasion profiling. In International conference on persuasive technology, 82–93. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kekes, J. 2002. The art of life. New York: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T. 2005. The Ten Faces of Innovation. IDEO’s Strategies for Defeating the Devil’s Advocate and Driving Creativity throughout Your Organization (Broadway business). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M. 1987. The ethical dilemmas of university-industry collaborations. Journal of Business Ethics 6 (2): 127–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kierkegaard, S. 1944. The concept of dread. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koops, B.J. 2015. The concepts, approaches, and applications of responsible innovation. In Responsible innovation 2 concepts, approaches, and applications, ed. B.J. Koops, 1–15. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroes, P., and P.P. Verbeek. 2014. The moral status of technical artefacts. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology. Vol. 17. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Kuhn, T.S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laloux, F. 2014. Reinventing organizations. A guide to creating organizations inspired by the next stage of Human consciousness. Brussel: Nelson Parker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D.A., and R.R. Maxfield. 2005. Ontological uncertainty and innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 15 (1): 3–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. 2005. The ethics of innovation: p2p software developers and designing substantial noninfringing uses under the Sony doctrine. Journal of Business Ethics 62 (2): 147–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, P., and F. Allhoff. 2008. Untangling the debate: The ethics of human enhancement. NanoEthics 2 (3): 251–264.

  • Mann, C.C. 2018. The wizard and the prophet: Two remarkable scientists and their dueling visions to shape Tomorrow's world. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manson, N.A. 2002. Formulating the precautionary principle. Environmental Ethics 24 (3): 263–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, P. 2012. The consumer mind. Brand perception and the implication for marketers. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDannell, C., and B. Lang. 1988. Heaven – A history. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahan, J. 2013. Killing by remote control: The ethics of an unmanned military. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meel, M., and M. Saat. 2002. Ethical life cycle of an innovation. Journal of Business Ethics 39 (1–2): 21–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merna, T. & F. F. Al-Thani 2008. Corporate Risk Management. Chichester: Wiley (second edition).

  • Miegel, M. 2014. Hybris. Die überforderte Gesellschaft. Berlin: List.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne, M.J., and R. Gray. 2013. W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting. Journal of Business Ethics 118 (1): 13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstadt, B.D., and L. Floridi. 2016. The ethics of big data: Current and foreseeable issues in biomedical contexts. Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2): 303–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstadt, B.D., P. Allo, M. Taddeo, S. Wachte, L. Floridi, and L. 2016. The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society 3 (2): 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moberg, D., and M. Seabright. 2000. The development of moral imagination. Business Ethics Quarterly 10: 845–884.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montiel, I. 2008. Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts, common futures. Organization & Environment 21 (3): 245–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morozov, E. 2012. The net delusion: How not to liberate the world. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, L. 2006. Permanent Innovation. Walnut Creek: Innovation Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, L. 2011. The innovation master plan. Walnut Creek: Innovation Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, L. 1934. Techniques and civilisation. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.

  • Mumford, L. 1967. The myth of the machine, I. In Technics and human development. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

  • Mumford, L. 1971. The myth of the machine, II. In The pentagon of power. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

  • Myers, N. 1993. Biodiversity and the precautionary principle. Ambio 22 (2/3): 74–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nehamas, A. 1998. The art of living: Socratic reflections from Plato to Foucault. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niva, M., and P. Timonen. 2001. The role of consumers in product-oriented environmental policy: Can the consumer be the driving force for environmental improvements? International Journal of Consumer Studies 25 (4): 331–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M.C. 2002. Moral expertise? Constitutional narratives and philosophical argument. Metaphilosophy 33 (5): 502–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyström, H. 1990. Organizational innovation. In Innovation and creativity at work. Psychological and organizational strategies, ed. M.A. West and J.L. Farr, 143–161. Chichester: Wiley.

  • O’Neill, O. 2002. Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oeij, P., S. Dhondt, and T. Korver. 2011. Social innovation, workplace innovation and social quality. International Journal of Social Quality 1 (2): 31–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A. & Y. Pigneur, 2010. Business model canvas. Self published.

  • Overskeid, G. 2000. The slave of the passions: Experiencing problems and selecting solutions. Review of General Psychology 4 (3): 284–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, R., P. Macnaghten, and J. Stilgoe. 2012. Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy 39 (6): 751–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, R., J. Stilgoe, P. Macnaghten, M. Gorman, E. Fisher, and D. Guston. 2013. A framework for responsible innovation. In Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant, and M. Heintz, 27–50. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Packard, V. 1960. The waste makers. New York: David McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlman, M. 2003. Schumpeter and schools of economic thought. In Joseph Alois Schumpeter. Entrepreneurship, Style and Vision, ed. J. Backhaus, 163–178. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrick, J.A., and G.E. Manning. 1990. Developing an ethical climate for excellence. The Journal for Quality and Participation 14(2), 85–87.

  • Pleij, H. 2003. Dreaming of Cockaigne: Medieval fantasies of the perfect life. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pot, F.D. 2011. Workplace innovation for better jobs and performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 60 (4): 404–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers, M. 2005. Bioethics as politics: The limits of moral expertise. Kennedy Institute Ethics Journal 15 (3): 305–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, C.J. 2011. Re-thinking the unthinkable: Environmental ethics and the presumptive argument against Geoengineering. Environmental Values 20 (4): 457–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raworth, K. 2017. Doughnut economics. Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichers, A.E., and B. Schneider. 1990. Climate and culture: An evolution of constructs. In Organizational Climate and Culture, ed. B. Schneider, 5–39. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco/Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinert, H., and E.S. Reinert. 2006. Creative Destruction in Economics: Nietzsche, Sombart, Schumpeter. In Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) Economy and Society, ed. J.G. Backhaus and W. Drechsler, 55–85. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A., and H. te Kulve. 2008. Constructive technology assessment and socio-technical scenarios. In The yearbook of nanotechnology in society, volume I: Presenting futures, ed. E. Fisher, C. Selin, and J.M. Wetmore, 49–70. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A., T. Misa, and J. Schot. 2005. Managing technology in society: The approach of constructive technology assessment. London: Pinter.

  • Rollin, B.E. 1995. The Frankenstein syndrome. Ethical and social issues in the genetic engineering of animals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruppel, C.P., and S.J. Harrington. 2000. The relationship of communication, ethical work climate, and trust to commitment and innovation. Journal of Business Ethics 25 (4): 313–328.

  • Ruttan, V.W. 1959. Usher and Schumpeter on invention, innovation, and technological change. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 73 (4): 596–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sand, M. 2018. The virtues and vices of innovators. Philosophy of Management 17 (1): 79–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M.J. 2005. The ethical implications of human cloning. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 48 (2): 241–247.

  • Sandel, M.J. 2009. The case against perfection. In Ethics in an age of genetic engineering. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

  • Sawhney, M., R.C. Wolcott, and I. Arroniz. 2006. The 12 different ways for companies to innovate. Sloan Management Review 47 (3): 75–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaar, P. 2009. Das Ende der Privatsphäre. Der Weg in die Überwachungsgesellschaft. München: Goldmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaveling, J., and B. Bryan. 2018. Making better decisions using systems thinking. How to stop firefighting, Deal with root causes and deliver permanent solutions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, W. 1998. Philosophie der Lebenskunst. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schot, J., and A. Rip. 1997. The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change Vol. 54 (2–3): 251–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J.A. 1934. The theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selinger, E., and K. Whyte. 2011. Is there a right way to nudge? The practice and ethics of choice architecture. Sociology Compass 5 (10): 923–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selsky, J.W., and B. Parker. 2005. Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management 31 (6): 849–873.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sennett, R. 1998. The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siep, L. 2008. Ethical problems of Nanobiotechnology. In Nanobiotechnology, nanomedicine and human enhancement, ed. J.S. Ach and B. Lüttenberg, 17–27. Münster: LIT.

  • Silver, Ch. 2011. Ethics and innovation. The George Washington Law Review 79 (2): 754–772.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. 1972. Moral Experts. Analysis 31 (4): 115–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skidelsky, R., and E. Skidelsky. 2012. How much is enough? The love of money, and the case for the good life. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snell, R.S. 2001. Moral foundations of the learning organization. Human Relations 54 (3): 919–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sombart, W. 1913. Krieg und Kapitalismus. München & Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

  • Steinkamp, N.L., B. Gordijn, and H.A. ten Have. 2008. Debating ethical expertise. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (2): 173–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternagel, P. 1966. Die Artes mechanicae im Mitteralter. Begriffs-und Bedeutingsgeschichte bis zum Ende des 13. Jahrhunderts. Kallmünz: Michael Lassleben. Münchener historische Studien, Abteilung mittelalterliche Geschichte, Band 2.

  • Stevens, R. 1941. A report on industrial research as a National Resource: Introduction, research: A National Resource (II): Industrial research, NRC. Washington, DC: USGPO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stilgoe, J., R. Owen, and P. Macnaghten. 2013. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy 41 (9): 1568–1580.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M.C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review 20 (3): 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R. 2010. Editor’s comments: Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review 35 (3): 346–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R. 2005a. Laws of fear: Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R. 2005b. The precautionary principle as a basis for decision making. The Economists' Voice 2 (2): 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R. 2014. Nudging: A very short guide. Journal of Consumer Policy Vol., 37. No. 4: 583–588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R. 2015. Nudges do not undermine human agency. Journal of Consumer Policy 38 (3): 207–210.

  • Sušanj, Z. 2000. Innovative climate and culture in manufacturing organizations: Differences between some European countries. Social Science Information 39 (2): 349–361.

  • Sutherland, M., and A.K. Sylvester. 2000. Advertising and the mind of the consumer: What works, what Doesn't and why. Bel Air: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swierstra, T. 2003. De wisselwerking tussen ethiek en technologie. Naar een moderne technologie-ethiek. In De verleiding van de ethiek. Over de plaats van morele argumenten in de huidige maatschappij, ed. I. Devisch and G. Verschraegen, 154–171. Amsterdam: Boom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swierstra, T., B. Walhout, and R. van Elst. 2009a. Ethische uitdagingen van een nieuwe technologische golf. In Leven als bouwpakket. Ethisch verkennen van een nieuwe technologische golf, ed. T. Swierstra, M. Boenink, B. Walhout, and R. van Est, 10–21. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swierstra, T., M. Boenink, and R. van Elst. 2009b. Convergerende technologie en opkomende grensconflicten. In Leven als bouwpakket. Ethisch verkennen van een nieuwe technologische golf, ed. T. Swierstra, M. Boenink, B. Walhout, and R. van Est, 128–145. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tate, M., D. Johnstone & E. Fielt 2017. Ethical issues around crowdwork: How can blockchain technology help? Proceedings of the 28th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. Hobart: ACIS.

  • Thaler, R.H., and C.R. Sunstein. 2008. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R.H., C.R. Sunstein, and J.P. Balz. 2014. Choice architecture. In The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy (428–439), ed. E. Shafir. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tidd, J., J. Bessant, and K. Pavitt. 2001. Managing Innovation. Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change. Chichester: John Wiley (2nd edition).

    Google Scholar 

  • Trott, P. 2005. Innovation management and new product development. Harlow: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzafestas, S.G. 2016. Roboethics: A navigating overview. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Poel, I., and P.P. Verbeek. 2004. Ethische vragen bij het ontwerpen van techniek. In Ethiek & Techniek. Morele overwegingen in de ingenieurspraktijk, ed. L. Royakkers, I. van de Poel, and A. Pieters, 118–142. Baarn: HBuitgevers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Belt, H. 2009. Het leven op de tekentafel. In Leven als bouwpakket. Ethisch verkennen van een nieuwe technologische golf, ed. T. Swierstra, M. Boenink, B. Walhout, and R. van Est, 104–127. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bergh, J.C.G.M. 2011. Environment versus growth - a criticism of “degrowth” and a Plea for “A-growth”. Ecological Economics 70 (5): 881–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bergh, J.C.G.M., and G. Kallis. 2012. Growth, A-growth or degrowth to stay within planetary boundaries? Journal of Economic Issues XLVI (4): 909–919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijck, J. 2016. Big data, grand challenges: On digitization and humanities research. KWALON 21 (1): 8–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gorp, A., and I. Van de Poel. 2008. Deciding on ethical issues in engineering design. In Philosophy and Design. From Engineering to Architecture, ed. P.E. Vermaas, P. Kroes, A. Light, and S.A. Moore, 77–89. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Willigenburg, Th. 1991. Inside the ethical expert. Problem solving in applied ethics. Kampen: Kok Pharos.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Wulfen, G. 2014. The innovation expedition. A visual toolkit to start innovation. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varelius, J. 2008. Is ethical expertise possible? Medicine. Health Care and Philosophy 11 (2): 127–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.P. 2001. Don Ihde: The technological lifeworld. In American Philosophy of Technology. The Empirical Turn, ed. H.J. Achterhuis, 119–146. Bloomington: Indiana University press.

  • Verbeek, P.P. 2008. Morality in design: Design ethics and the morality of technological artifacts. In Philosophy and Design. From Engineering to Architecture, ed. P.E. Vermaas, P. Kroes, A. Light, and S.A. Moore, 91–103. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.P. 2009. Ambient intelligence en persuasive technology. In Leven als bouwpakket. Ethisch verkennen van een nieuwe technologische golf, ed. T. Swierstra, M. Boenink, B. Walhout, and R. van Est, 48–73. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.P. 2011. Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.P. 2014. Op de vleugels van Icarus. Hoe techniek en moraal met elkaar meebewegen. Rotterdam: Lemniscaat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincenti, W.G. 1990. What engineers know and how they know it. Baltimore: Baltimore John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Schomberg, R. 2013. A vision of responsible innovation. In Responsible Innovation. Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society, ed. R. Owen, J.R. Bessant, and M. Heintz, 241–266. London: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldman, M. 1993. A new perspective on planned obsolescence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 108: 273–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, L. 2018. Wizards and prophets. Industrial Biotechnology 14 (4): 165–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, M. 1983/2008. Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, B.D. 1994. The possibility of ethical expertise. Theoretical Medicine 15 (1): 61–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werhane, P.H. 2002. Moral imagination and systems thinking. Journal of Business Ethics 38 (1–2): 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future (Brundtland report). Vol. 383. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Laan van Scheut 10, 6525, EM, Nijmegen, Netherlands

    Hans Bennink

Authors
  1. Hans Bennink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hans Bennink.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bennink, H. Understanding and Managing Responsible Innovation. Philosophy of Management 19, 317–348 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-020-00130-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-020-00130-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation