Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reflexive Innovation

On Innovation in Radicalized Modernity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Innovation Society Today

Abstract

Today, innovation as ‘creative destruction’ (Schumpeter 2003: 83) is becoming a social imperative that increasingly characterizes innovation societies far beyond their economies (Hutter et al., this volume). This development is accelerated through reflexive innovations that actors constitute in interactions drawing on modern institutions, systems of regulation, and the actors’ capabilities. These specific conditions, both symbolic and material, influence which innovations are produced, advanced, and transformed and how this occurs, and these conditions themselves are again and again produced and reproduced in processes of innovation.

I would like to thank Dzifa Ametowobla, Robert Jungmann, Uli Meyer, and Cornelius Schubert for their valuable input.

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 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, Andrew. 1988. The Systems of Professions. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, Andrew. 2014. “The Problem of Excess.” Sociological Theory 32(1): 1-26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adner, Ron and Daniel Snow. 2010. “Old Technology Responses to New Technology Threats: Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Retreats.” Industrial and Corporate Change 19(5): 1655-1675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz), Raghu Garud, and Arun Kumaraswamy. 2015. “The Disruptor’s Dilemma: TIVO and the U.S. Television Ecosystem.” Strategic Management Journal 37(9): 1829-1853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antal, Ariane Berthoin, Michael Hutter, and David Stark, eds. 2015. Moments of Valuation. Exploring Sites of Dissonance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autio, Erkko, Martin Kenney, Philippe Mustard, Don Siegele, and Mike Wright. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Innovation: The Importance of Context.” Research Policy 43(7): 1097-1108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbosa, Natália, Ana Paula Faria, and Vasco Eirizy. 2013. “Industry- and Firm-Specific Factors of Innovation Novelty.” Industrial and Corporate Change 23(3): 865-902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barley, Stephen R. 2010. “Building an Institutional Field to Corral a Government: A Case to Set an Agenda for Organization Studies.” Organization Studies 31(6): 777-805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, Julie and Matthew Lee. 2014. “Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing. Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises.” The Academy of Management Annals 8(1): 397-441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, Markus C. and Thorbjørn Knudsen. 2002. “Schumpeter 1911: Farsighted Visions on Economic Development.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 61(2): 387-403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, Markus C., Thorbjørn Knudsen, and James G. March. 2006. “Schumpeter, Winter, and the Sources of Novelty.” Industrial and Corporate Change 15(2): 353-371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckert, Jens. 2013. “Imagined Futures: Fictional Expectations in the Economy.” Sociological Theory 42(3): 219-240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belt, Henk van den and Arie Rip. 1987. “The Nelson-Winter-Dosi Model and Synthetic Dye Chemistry.” Pp. 135-158 in The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, edited by W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, and T. J. Pinch. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhme, Hartmut. 2004. “Einführung: Netzwerke. Zur Theorie und Geschichte einer Konstruktion.” Pp. 17-36 in Netzwerke. Eine Kulturtechnik der Moderne, edited by J. Barkhoff, H. Böhme, and J. Riou. Cologne: Böhlau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhme, Hartmut and Gernot Böhme. 1985. Das Andere der Vernunft. Zur Entwicklung von Rationalitätsstrukturen am Beispiel Kants. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boli, John and George M. Thomas. 1997. “World Culture in the World Polity: A Century of International Non-Governmental Organizations.” American Sociological Review 62(2): 171-190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977 [1972]. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, Robert and Michel Freyssenet. 2003 [2000]. Produktionsmodelle. Eine Typologie am Beispiel der Automobilindustrie. Berlin: Edition Sigma.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun-Thürmann, Holger. 2005. Innovation. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromley, Patricia and John W. Meyer. 2017. “‘They Are All Organizations’: The Cultural Roots of Blurring Between the Nonprofit, Business, and Government Sectors.” Administration & Society 49(7): 939-966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural Holes. The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, Ronald S. 2005. Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, Bo, Staffan Jacobsson, Magnus Holmén, and Annika Rickne. 2002. “Innovation Systems: Analytical and Methodological Issues.” Research Policy 31(2): 233-245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clausen, Tommy, Mikko Pohjola, Koson Sapprasert, and Bart Verspagen. 2011. “Innovation Strategies as a Source of Persistent Innovation.” Industrial and Corporate Change 21(3): 553-585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Wesley M. and Daniel A. Levinthal. 1990. “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128-152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colapinto, John. 2014. “Material Question. Graphene May Be the Most Remarkable Substance Ever Discovered. But What’s It for?” The New Yorker, December 22. Retrieved April 18, 2017 (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/material-question).

  • Colatat, Phech. 2015. “An Organizational Perspective to Funding Science: Collaborator Novelty at DARPA.” Research Policy 44(4): 874-887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dedrick, Jason, Kenneth L. Kraemer, and Greg Linden. 2009. “Who Profits from Innovation in Global Value Chains? A Study of the iPod and Notebook PCs.” Industrial and Corporate Change 19(1): 81-116.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, Paul and Walter Powell. 1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited. Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review 48(2): 147-160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson, Mark. 2011. “Exploring New Combinations in Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Social Networks, Schumpeter, and the Case of Josiah Wedgwood (1730–1795).” Industrial and Corporate Change 20(4): 1119-1151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolata, Ulrich. 2015. “Volatile Monopole, Konzentration und Innovationsstrategien.” Berliner Journal für Soziologie 24(4): 505-529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, Lynn. 2004. Whole World on Fire: Organizations, Knowledge, and Nuclear Weapons Devastation. Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, Mustafa. 1997. “Manifesto for a Relational Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 103(2): 281-317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erumban, Abdul Azeez and Marcel P. Timmer. 2012. “The Dark Side of Creative Destruction: Innovation and Retirement of Capital.” Industrial and Corporate Change 21(5): 1149-1174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, Jan. 2005. “Innovation. A Guide to the Literature.” Pp. 1-26 in The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, edited by J. Fagerberg, D. G. Mowery, and R. R. Nelson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrary, Michel and Mark Granovetter. 2009. “The Role of Venture Capital Firms in Silicon Valley’s Complex Innovation Network.” Economy and Society 38(2): 326-359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, Neil and Doug McAdam. 2012. A Theory of Fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, John W. 1981 [1963]. Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Innovative Society. New York, London: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garud, Raghu and Peter Karnøe, eds. 2001. Path Dependence and Creation. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi, Gary and Karina Fernandez-Stark. 2011. Global Value Chain Analysis. A Primer. Durham: Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness (CGGC), Duke University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1990a. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1990b. “Structuration Theory and Sociological Analysis.” Pp. 297-315 in Anthony Giddens. Consensus and Controversy, edited by J. Clark, C. Modgil, and S. Modgil. London, New York, Philadelphia: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1993 [1976]. New Rules of Sociological Method. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert-Walsh, James. 2010. “Revisiting the Concept of Time: Archaic Perplexity in Bergson and Heidegger.” Human Studies 33(2/3): 173-190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godin, Benoît. 2012. “‘Innovation Studies’: The Invention of a Specialty.” Minerva 50(4): 397-421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godin, Benoît. 2015. Innovation Contested. The Idea of Innovation over the Centuries. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, Stephen Jay and Elisabeth S. Vrba. 1982. “Exaptation—A Missing Term in the Science of Form.” Paleobiology 8(1): 4-15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, Mark. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360-1380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, Mark. 1974. Getting a Job. A Study of Contacts and Careers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, Kieran. 2015. “The Performativity of Networks.” European Journal of Sociology 56(2): 175-205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilpinen, Risto. 2011. “Artifact.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta. Retrieved April 18, 2 017 (https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/artifact/).

  • Hoffman, Andrew J. 1999. “Institutional Evolution and Change: Environmentalism and the U.S. Chemical Industry.” Academy of Management Journal 42(4): 351-371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutter, Michael, Hubert Knoblauch, Werner Rammert, and Arnold Windeler. This volume. “Innovation Society Today. The Reflexive Creation of Novelty.”

    Google Scholar 

  • Jandhyala, Srividya and Anupama Phene. 2015. “The Role of Intergovernmental Organizations in Cross-Border Knowledge Transfer and Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 60(4): 712-743.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Pagan. 2016. “How to Cultivate the Art of Serendipity.” The New York Times, January 2. Retrieved April 18, 2017 (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/03/opinion/how-to-cultivate-the-art-of-serendipity.html).

  • Kenney, Martin. 2011. “How Venture Capital Became a Component of the US National System of Innovation.” Industrial and Corporate Change 20(6): 1677-1723.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoblauch, Hubert. This volume. “Communicative Action, the New, and the Innovation Society.”

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr Cetina, Karin. 1988. “Das naturwissenschaftliche Labor als ‘Verdichtung’ von Gesellschaft.” Zeitschrift für Soziologie 17(2): 85-101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koselleck, Reinhart. 2000. Zeitschichten. Studien zur Historik. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamont, Michèle. 2012. “Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation.” In: Annual Review of Sociology 38(1): 201-221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, Knut, Gordon Müller-Seitz, Jörg Sydow, and Arnold Windeler. 2013. “Financing Innovations in Uncertain Networks. Filling in Roadmap Gaps in the Semiconductor Industry.” Research Policy 42(3): 647-661.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James G. 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science 2(1): 71-87.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James G. and Herbert A. Simon. 1993 [1958]. Organizations. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, Robert K. and Elinor Barber. 2004. The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity. A Study in Sociological Semantics and the Sociology of Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W. 2009. World Society: The Writings of John W. Meyer, edited by G. S. Drori and G. Krücken. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W. 2008. “Reflections on Institutional Theories of Organization.” Pp. 790-811 in Organizational Institutionalism, edited by R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, and R. Suddaby. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W., John Boli, and George M. Thomas. 1987. “Ontology and Rationalization in the Western Cultural Account.” Pp. 12-37 in Institutional Structure. Constituting State, Society, and the Individual, edited by G. M. Thomas, J. W. Meyer, F. O. Ramirez, and J. Boli. Newbury Park: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W. and Ronald L. Jepperson. 2000. “The ‘Actors’ of Modern Society: The Cultural Construction of Social Agency.” Sociological Theory 18(1): 100-120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W. and Brian Rowan. 1977. “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology 83(2): 340-363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, Uli. 2016. Innovationspfade. Evolution und Institutionalisierung komplexer Technologie in organisationalen Feldern. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muniesa, Fabian. 2014. The Provoked Economy. Economic Reality and the Performative Turn. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Andrew, Andrew Earle, Jennifer Howard-Grenville, Julie Haack, and Doug Young. 2014. “Do Innovation Measures Actually Measure Innovation? Obliteration, Symbolic Adoption, and Other Finicky Challenges in Tracking Innovation Diffusion.” Research Policy 43(6): 927-940.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, Douglass C., John J. Wallis, and Barry R. Weingast. 2009. Violence and Social Order. A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, Martha. C. 2013. Political Emotions: Why Love Matters for Justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, Wanda J. and Susan V. Scott. 2008. “Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization.” The Academy of Management Annals 2(1): 433-474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortmann, Günther. 2016. “Innovation: In Ketten tanzen.” Pp. 237-248 in Innovationsgesellschaft heute. Perspektiven, Felder und Fälle, edited by W. Rammert, A. Windeler, H. Knoblauch, and M. Hutter. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortmann, Günther, Arnold Windeler, Albrecht Becker, and Hans-Joachim Schulz. 1990. Computer und Macht in Organisationen. Mikropolitische Analysen. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudheusden, Michiel van, Nathan Charliera, Benedikt Rosskampa, and Pierre Delvenne. 2015. “Broadening, Deepening, and Governing Innovation: Flemish Technology Assessment in Historical and Socio-Political Perspective.” Research Policy 44(10): 1877-1886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahnke, Emily C., Riitta Katila, and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. 2015. “Who Takes You to the Dance? How Partners’ Institutional Logics Influence Innovation in Young Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 60(4): 596-633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahnke, Emily C., Rory McDonald, Dan Wang, and Benjamin Hallen. 2015. “Exposed: Venture Capital, Competitor Ties, and Entrepreneurial Innovation.” Academy of Management Journal 58(5): 1334-1360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott. 1956. “Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations I.” Administrative Science Quarterly 1(1): 63-85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott. 1957. “Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations II.” Administrative Science Quarterly 1(2): 225-239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passoth Jan-Hendrik and Werner Rammert. This volume. “Fragmental Differentiation and the Practice of Innovation. Why Is There an Ever-Increasing Number of Fields of Innovation?”

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, Jeffrey and Gerald R. Salancik. 1978. The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popitz, Heinrich. 2000 [1997]. Wege der Kreativität. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rammert, Werner. 2014. “Vielfalt der Innovation und gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt. Von der ökonomischen zur gesellschaftstheoretischen Perspektive.” Pp. 619-639 in Vielfalt und Zusammenhalt. Verhandlungen des 36. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Bochum und Dortmund 2012, Part 2, edited by M. Löw. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Everett M. 2003 [1962]. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, Cornelius, Jörg Sydow, Arnold Windeler. 2013. “The Means of Managing Momentum: Bridging Technological Paths and Organisational Fields.” Research Policy 42(8): 1389-1405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1934 [1912]. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A. 2000 [1911]. “Entrepreneurship as Innovation.” Pp. 51-75 in Entrepreneurship. The Social Science View, edited by R. Swedberg. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A. 2003 [1942]. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A. 2005 [1932]. “Development.” Journal of Economic Literature 43(1): 108-120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, Daniel. 2011. “The Moodiness of Action.” Sociological Theory 29(3): 199-222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sydow, Jörg and Arnold Windeler. 2003. “Knowledge, Trust and Control. Managing Tensions and Contradictions in a Regional Network of Service Firms.” International Studies of Management & Organization 33(2): 69-99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sydow, Jörg, Arnold Windeler, Cornelius Schubert, and Guido Möllering. 2012. “Organizing R&D Consortia for Path Creation and Extension: The Case of Semiconductor Manufacturing Technologies.” Organization Studies 33(7): 907-936.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavassoli, Sam and Charlie Karlsson. 2015. “Persistence of Various Types of Innovation Analyzed and Explained.” Research Policy 44(10): 1887-1901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, James D. 2004 [1967]. Organizations in Action. Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. New Brunswick, London: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villani, Marco, Stefano Bonacini, Davide Ferrari, Roberto Serra, and David Lane. 2007. “An Agent-Based Model of Exaptive Processes.” European Managemen t Review 4(3): 141-151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1978 [1922]. Economy and Society. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold. 2001. Unternehmungsnetzwerke. Konstitution und Strukturation. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold. 2003. “Kreation technologischer Pfade: Ein strukturationstheoretischer Ansatz.” Managementforschung 13: 295-328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold. 2012. “Kooperation und Konkurrenz in Netzwerken. Theoretische Überlegungen zum Strukturwandel der Arbeitsorganisation.” Pp. 23-50 in Vertrauen und Kooperation in der Arbeitswelt, edited by C. Schilcher, M. Will-Zocholl, and M. Ziegler. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold. 2014. “Können und Kompetenzen von Individuen, Organisationen und Netzwerken. Eine praxistheoretische Perspektive.” Pp. 225-301 in Kompetenz. Sozialtheoretische Perspektiven, edited by A. Windeler and J. Sydow. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold. 2015. “Organisationen in der radikalisierten Moderne: Herausforderungen.” Pp. 173-188 in Zur Zukunft der Organisationssoziologie, edited by M. Apelt and U. Wilkesmann. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold and Jörg Sydow. 2001. “Project Networks and Changing Industry Practices. Collaborative Content Production in the German Television Industry.” Organization Studies 22(6): 1035-1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, Arnold and Carsten Wirth. 2005. “Strukturation von Arbeitsregulation: eine relationale Mehrebenenperspektive.” Pp. 163-191 in Organisation von Arbeit, edited by M. Faust, M. Funder, and M. Moldaschl. Munich, Mehring: Hampp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoffie, David B. and Michael A. Cusumano. 2015. Strategy Rules: Five Timeless Lessons from Bill Gates, Andy Grove, and Steve Jobs. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, Shaker A., Mike Wright, and Sondos G. Abdelgawad. 2014. “Contextualization and the Advancement of Entrepreneurship Research.” International Small Business Journal 32(5): 479-500.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TU Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland

    Arnold Windeler

Authors
  1. Arnold Windeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnold Windeler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Soziologie, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Werner Rammert

  2. Institut für Soziologie, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Arnold Windeler

  3. Institut für Soziologie, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Hubert Knoblauch

  4. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung gGmbH, Berlin, Germany

    Michael Hutter

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Windeler, A. (2018). Reflexive Innovation. In: Rammert, W., Windeler, A., Knoblauch, H., Hutter, M. (eds) Innovation Society Today. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19269-3_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19269-3_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-19268-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-19269-3

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation