Advertisement

Büro als Treiber von Wissens- und Innovationsprozessen

  • Markus F. Peschl
  • Thomas Fundneider
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Um die Zukunftsfähigkeit eines Unternehmens zu sichern, muss der Arbeitsplatz der Zukunft ein Workspace für Wissens- und Innovationsarbeiter sein. In diesem Beitrag wird gezeigt, wie Innovation, Wissen, Organisation und Raum beziehungsweise Büro zusammenhängen. Ausgehend von einer Darstellung des Konzeptes der Innovation wird deutlich, dass kognitive Prozesse für alle Formen von Wissens- und Innovationsprozessen verantwortlich sind und dass diese niemals ohne die sie umgebenden Rahmenbedingungen (Raum, Organisation, soziale Strukturen) verstanden werden können. Innovation kann demnach nur ermöglicht und nicht „gemacht“ werden. Notwendig ist es, eben diese „Ermöglicher“ zu verstehen und zu einem ganzheitlichen Organisations- und Raumkonzept für den Arbeitsplatz der Zukunft zu integrieren. Aus der Darstellung der „Ermöglicher“ werden die Konsequenzen für die Gestaltung von Workspaces abgeleitet und praktische Implikationen, Handlungsempfehlungen sowie konkrete Beispiele vorgestellt.

Literatur

  1. Adolf, M., & Stehr, N. (2014). Knowledge. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, T. J., & Henn, G. W. (2007). The organization of architecture and innovation. Managing the flow of technology. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann Elsevier.Google Scholar
  4. Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  5. Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision, 47(8), 1323–1339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–93.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design. How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  8. Catmull, E. (2008). How Pixar fosters collective creativity. https://hbr.org/2008/09/how-pixar-fosters-collective-creativity. Zugegriffen: 12. Sept. 2015.
  9. Chesbrough, H. W., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (2006). Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Churchland, P. M. (1979). Scientific realism and the plasticity of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind. Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cooper, R. G. (1990). Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Business Horizons, 33(3), 44–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coughlan, P., Suri, J. F., & Canales, K. (2007). Prototypes as (design) tools for behavioral and organizational change. A design-based approach to help organizations change work behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Damanpour, F. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation. Developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Science, 42(5), 693–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dodgson, M., & Gann, D. (2010). Innovation. A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dorst, K. (2003). The problem of design problems. In N. Cross & E. Edmonds (Hrsg.), Expertise in design (S. 135–147). Sydney: Creativity and Cognition Studio Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dorst, K. (2006). Design problems and design paradoxes. Design Issues (National Council of State Boards of Nursing (U. S.)), 22(3), 4–17.Google Scholar
  18. Drucker, P. F. (1988). The coming of the new organization. Harvard Business Review, 66, 45–53.Google Scholar
  19. Drucker, P. F. (1993). Post-capitalist society. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  20. d.school. (2010). Design thinking bootcamp bootleg. Methodbook. Stanford: d.school, Hasso Platter, Institute of Design.Google Scholar
  21. Easley, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Networks, crowds, and markets. Reasoning about a highly connected world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ettlie, J. E., Bridges, W. P., & O’Keefe, R. D. (1984). Organisational strategic and structural differences for radical vs. incremental innovation. Management Science, 30(6), 682–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. European Commission. (1995). Green paper on innovation. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  24. European Commission. (2004). Innovation management and the knowledge-driven economy. Brussels: European Commission. (Directorate-general for Enterprise)Google Scholar
  25. Fagerberg, J., & Verspagen, B. (2009). Innovation studies. The emerging structure of a new scientific field. Research Policy, 38(2), 218–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nelson, R. R. (Hrsg.). (2006). The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fayard, A. L., & Weeks, J. (2007). Photocopiers and water-coolers: The affordances of informal interaction. Organization Studies, 28(5), 605–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Felin, T., Kauffman, S. A., Koppl, R., et al. (2014). Economic opportunity and evolution: Beyond landscapes and bounded rationality. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 8(4), 269–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Friedenberg, J., & Silverman, G. (2006). Cognitive science. An introduction to the study of the mind. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Friedman, T. L. (2006). The world is flat. A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Ferrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  31. Gedenryd, H. (1998). How designers work. Lund: Lund University Cognitive Studies.Google Scholar
  32. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Houde, S., & Hill, C. (1997). What do prototypes prototype?. In M. Helander, T. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Hrsg.), Handbook of human-computer interaction. Second (S. 367–381). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  35. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  36. Kauffman, S. A. (2014). Prolegomenon to patterns in evolution. BioSystems, 123(2014), 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (Hrsg.). (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kelley, T. (2004). The art of innovation. Lessons in creativity from IDEO, America’s leading design firm. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  39. Koppl, R., Kauffman, S. A., Felin, T., et al. (2014). Economics for a creative world. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2014, 1–31.Google Scholar
  40. Krogh, G. v., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation. How to unlock the mystery of tacit knowledge and release the power of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Laurel, B.. (Hrsg.). (2003). Design research. Methods and perspectives. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  42. Leifer, R. (2000). Radical innovation. How mature companies can outsmart upstarts. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  43. Menary, R. (Hrsg.). (2010). The extended mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moggridge, B., Suri, J. F., & Bray, D. (2007). People and prototypes. In B. Moggridge (Hrsg.), Designing interactions (S. 641–735). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  45. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of „ba“: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. How Japanese companies manage the dynamics of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. O’Connor, G. C., & McDermott, C. M. (2004). The human side of radical innovation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21(1–2), 11–30. doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2003.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Onarheim, B. (2012). Creativity from constraints in engineering design: Lessons learned at Coloplast. Journal of Engineering Design, 23(4), 323–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2008a). Emergent innovation and sustainable knowledge co-creation. A socio-epistemological approach to „Innovation from within“. In M. D. Lytras, J. M. Carroll, E. Damiani, et al. (Hrsg.), The open knowledge society: A computer science and information systems manifesto (S. 101–108). New York: Springer (CCIS 19).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2012a). Spaces enabling game-changing and sustaining innovations: Why space matters for knowledge creation and innovation. Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change (OTSC), 9(1), 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2012b). Vom „digital turn“ zum „socio-epistemological creative turn“. Räume der Ermöglichung von Innovation und Wissensgenerierung. In B. Kossek & M. F. Peschl (Hrsg.), Digital Turn? Zum Einfluss digitaler Medien auf Wissensgenerierungsprozesse von Studierenden und Hochschullehrenden (S. 47–62). Göttingen: V & R unipress.Google Scholar
  52. Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2014a). Designing and enabling interfaces for collaborative knowledge creation and innovation. From managing to enabling innovation as socio-epistemological technology. Computers and Human Behavior, 37, 346–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2014b). Why space matters for collaborative innovation networks. On designing enabling spaces for collaborative knowledge creation. International Journal of Organisational Design and Engineering (IJODE), 3(3/4), 358–391.Google Scholar
  54. Peschl, M. F., Raffl, C., Fundneider, T., et al. (2010).Creating sustainable futures by innovation from within. Radical change is in demand of radical innovation. In R. Trappl (Hrsg.), Cybernetics and Systems 2010 (S. 354–359). Wien.Google Scholar
  55. Poli, R. (2006). The ontology of what is not there. In J. Malinowski & A. Pietruszczak (Hrsg.), Essays in logic and ontology (Poznan studies in the philosophy of the sciences and the humanities, vol. 91) (S. 73–80). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  56. SAP. (2015). https://experience.sap.com/designservices/apphaus. Zugegriffen: 9. Sept. 2015.
  57. Scharmer, C. O. (2001). Self-transcending knowledge. Sensing and organizing around emerging opportunities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(2), 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scharmer, C. O. (2007). Theory U. Leading from the future as it emerges. The social technology of presencing. Cambridge: Society for Organizational Learning.Google Scholar
  59. Steup, M. (2012). Epistemology. In E. N. Zalta (Hrsg.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/.
  60. Stokes, P. D. (2005). Creativity from constraints. The psychology of breakthrough. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  61. Stokes, P. D. (2007). Using constraints to generate and sustain novelty. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(2), 107–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tedlock, B. (2005). Ethnography and ethnographic representation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Hrsg.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Third (S. 455–486). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  63. UNESCO. (2005). Towards knowledge societies. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO World Report).Google Scholar
  64. Varela, F. J. (1990). Kognitionswissenschaft – Kognitionstechnik. Eine Skizze aktueller Perspektiven. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  65. Weisberg, R. W. (1993). Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cognitive Science Research PlatformUniversität WienWienÖsterreich
  2. 2.TheLivingCore GmbHWienÖsterreich

Personalised recommendations