Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Organizations shaping a thriving future – On future-oriented innovations and personal transformation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
CSR und neue Arbeitswelten

Part of the book series: Management-Reihe Corporate Social Responsibility ((MRCOSORE))

  • 23k Accesses

Abstract

We are facing huge changes and challenges in today´s hypercomplex and high-speed world (e. g., in terms of economy, climate change, new technologies, migration, etc.). How can we understand these changes and how should we deal with them in a sustainable and thriving manner? It will be shown that it is not sufficient to just react to these changes in the sense of “solving problems”: rather, we have to actively shape and innovate our environment(s) according to their own potentials in a future-oriented manner and in such a way that a flourishing future might emerge. Such an approach to profound and proactive change and innovation calls for completely new skills, functionalities, and attitudes. In most cases it will not be an individual who can achieve such changes, but organizations in the sense of sustainable social systems, working environments, and Enabling Spaces pursuing the purpose of bringing about thriving futures. We will show that the concept of organization has changed dramatically over time, how today´s (and tomorrow´s) organizations are characterized, and what their needs as future-oriented organizations are. On the basis of these insights, we will develop guiding principles (and their practical implications) for how to implement such organizations and new working environments that are based on the concept of being an Enabling Space for bringing forth future-oriented, sustainable, thriving, and responsible innovations. These principles comprise radical epistemic openness, deep understanding, designing and co-creating meaningful and desired futures, emergence, enabling, identifying and cultivating potentials, and learning from the future as it emerges. Finally, we will develop an important implication of such a perspective of future-oriented organizations: It turns out that creating innovations can no longer be seen as an “abstract” activity, but that the persons involved in such a process must also go through a transformation (of their thinking, perception, and attitudes).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 19.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aristotle. (2007). Metaphysics. Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.html (date of download: 02.04.2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, T., Ehn, P., Michelis, G. de, Linde, P., & others. (2011). Design things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind. Myths and mechanisms (second). London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, R. (2015). Worlds in the making. Design, management, and the reform of organizational culture. She Ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1(1), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind. Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 1–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corning, P. A. (2002). The re-emergence of “emergence”: A venerable concept in search of a theory. Complexity, 7(6), 18–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Depraz, N., Varela, F. J., & Vermersch, P. (2003). On becoming aware. A pragmatics of experiencing. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2006). Design problems and design paradoxes. Design Issues, 22(3), 4–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008). Decision No 1350/2008/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 16 December 2008 concerning the European Year of Creativity and Innovation (2009). Official Journal of the European Union, L 348, 115–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2010). Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF (date of download: 03.02.2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J., & Verspagen, B. (2009). Innovation studies. The emerging structure of a new scientific field. Research Policy, 38(2), 218–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felin, T., Kauffman, S. A., Koppl, R., & Longo, G. (2014). Economic opportunity and evolution: beyond landscapes and bounded rationality. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 8(4), 269–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanville, R. (1998). Re-searching design and designing research. Design Issues, 15(2), 88–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanville, R. (2007). Try again. Fail again. Fail better: the cybernetics in design and the design in cybernetics. Kybernetes. The International Journal of Systems and Cybernetics, 36(9/10), 1173–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldspink, C., & Kay, R. (2003). Organizations as self-organizing and sustaining systems. A complex and autopoietic systems perspective. International Journal of General Systems, 32(5), 459–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G. (2009). Moon shots for management. Harvard Business Review, 87(2), 91–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekkert, P. (2006). Design aesthetics. Principles of pleasure in design. Psychology Science, 48(2), 157–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., & Wieringen, P. C. W. van. (2003). Most advanced, yet acceptable. Typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. British Journal of Psychological, 94(1), 111–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hohwy, J. (2013). The Predictive Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ingold, T. (2013). Making. Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, A., & Fordinal, B. (2010). Creating a ba for generating self-transcending knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(6), 928–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. A. (2014). Prolegomenon to patterns in evolution. BioSystems, 123(2014), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, R. (2001). Are organizations autopoietic? A call for new debate. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 18, 461–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koppl, R., Kauffman, S. A., Felin, T., & Longo, G. (2014). Economics for a creative world. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2014, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the essential contexts of artifacts or on the proposition that “Design is making sense (of things).” Design Issues, 5(2), 9–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn. A new foundation for design. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, P. (2015). Postcapitalism. A guide to our future. UK: Penguin Books, Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H. R. (1970). Biology of cognition. In H. R. Maturana & F. J. Varela (Eds.), Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living (pp. 2–60). Dordrecht, Boston: Reidel Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1975). Autopoiesis: the organization of the living. In H. R. Maturana & F. J. Varela (Eds.), Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living (pp. 63–134). Dordrecht, Boston: Reidel Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menary, R. (Ed.). (2010). The extended mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitleton-Kelly, E. (Ed.). (2003a). Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives on organisations: the application of complexity theory to organisations. Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003b). Ten principles of complexity and enabling infrastructures. In E. Mitleton-Kelly (Ed.), Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives on organisations: the application of complexity theory to organisations (pp. 23–50). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, D. (1992). On the computational architecture of the neocortex. II The role of cortico-cortical loops. Biological Cybernetics, 66, 241–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, T., & Wong, H. Y. (2009). Emergent Properties. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2009 Edition). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2009/entries/properties-emergent (date of download: 21.02.2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, B. P., Dzindolet, M., & Kohn, N. W. (2012). Collaborative creativity. Group creativity and team innovation. In M. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 327–357). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2008). Emergent Innovation and Sustainable Knowledge Co-creation. A Socio-Epistemological Approach to „Innovation from within“. In M. D. Lytras, J. M. Carroll, E. Damiani, Tennyson, D, Avison, D, & Vossen, G. (Eds.), The Open Knowledge Society: A Computer Science and Information Systems Manifesto (Vol. CCIS (Communications in Computer and Information Science) 19, pp. 101–108). New York, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer (CCIS 19).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2012). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2013). Theory-U and Emergent Innovation. Presencing as a method of bringing forth profoundly new knowledge and realities. In O. Gunnlaugson, C. Baron, & M. Cayer (Eds.), Perspectives on Theory U: Insights from the field (pp. 207–233). Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference/IGI Global. Retrieved from doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4793-0 (date of download: 24.10.2013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Peschl, M. F., & Fundneider, T. (2014). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poli, R. (2006). The ontology of what is not there. In J. Malinowski & A. Pietruszczak (Eds.), Essays in Logic and Ontology (Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, vol. 91) (Vol. 91, pp. 73–80). Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poli, R. (2010a). An introduction to the ontology of anticipation. Futures, 42(7), 769–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poli, R. (2010b). The many aspects of anticipation. Foresight, 12(3), 7–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poli, R. (2011). Ontological categories, latents and the irrational. In J. Cumpa & E. Tegtmeier (Eds.), Ontological categories (pp. 153–163). Heusenstamm: Ontos Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter-Palmon, R., Wigert, B., & Vreede, T. de. (2012). Team creativity and innovation. The effect of group composition, social processes, and cognition. In M. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 295–326). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rifkin, J. (2014). The zero marginal cost society. The internet of things, the collaborative commons, and the eclipse of capitalism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., Socha, D., & Tenenberg, J. (2016). Becoming-design in corresponding: re/theorising the co- in codesigning. CoDesign, 12(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1127387

  • Sarasvathy, S. D., Dew, N., Velamuri, S. R., & Venkataraman, S. (2003). Three Views of Entrepreneurial Opportunity. In Z. D. Acs & D. B. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research (pp. 141–160). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharmer, C. O. (2001). Self-transcending knowledge. Sensing and organizing around emerging opportunities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(2), 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharmer, C. O. (2007). Theory U. Leading from the future as it emerges. The social technology of presencing. Cambridge, MA: Society for Organizational Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1992). Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Research in Engineering Design, 3(3), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, D., & Becker, K. H. (2006). Organizations as distinction generating and processing systems. Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Organization, 13(1), 9–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (third). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, A. (1999). Varieties of emergentism. Evolution and Cognition, 5(1), 49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F. (2000). Three gestures of becoming aware. Retrieved from http://www.dialogonleadership.org/Varela-2000.pdf (date of download: 27.04.2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fakultät für Philosophie und Bildungswissenschaft, Institut für Philosophie, Universität Wien, Wien, Austria

    Prof. Dr. M. F. Peschl

  2. Managing Director, TheLivingCore GmbH, Wien, Austria

    Thomas Fundneider

Authors
  1. Prof. Dr. M. F. Peschl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Fundneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. F. Peschl .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. EBC Hochschule Marketing & Event Management, Berlin, Germany

    Brigitte Spieß

  2. EBC Hochschule Marketing & Internationales Management, Hamburg, Germany

    Nicole Fabisch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Peschl, M.F., Fundneider, T. (2017). Organizations shaping a thriving future – On future-oriented innovations and personal transformation. In: Spieß, B., Fabisch, N. (eds) CSR und neue Arbeitswelten. Management-Reihe Corporate Social Responsibility. Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-50531-1_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-50531-1_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-50530-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-50531-1

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation