For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
279
views
65
references
 Top references
cited by
6
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      55
      similar
       All similar

      If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

      Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journals. Furthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

      Prometheus

      Volume 32, Issue 4
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Co-creation: moving towards a framework for creating innovation in the Triple Helix

      research-article
      Author(s):
      Publication date (Print):
      Journal: Prometheus
      Publisher: Pluto Journals
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            The objective of the paper is to demonstrate how the theoretical ideas of service-dominant logic (S-D logic) can usefully be applied to innovation through collaboration among university, industry and government. The debate around S-D logic has stimulated much discussion of three areas that are particularly pertinent in considering the co-creation of knowledge within the Triple Helix. The first area relates to understanding the nature of the resources provided by all the parties involved and the process through which they are integrated. The second area relates to interaction among the parties involved. The third and most complex area relates to how value is perceived by the different parties. This discussion leads to a proposed model of the co-creation process and four suggested research agendas: Research Agenda One, looking at the resources supplied by the parties and their integration; Research Agenda Two, concerning the interaction practices that enhance co-creation; Research Agenda Three, exploring what value propositions will motivate the different parties to co-create; and Research Agenda Four, considering how co-creation modifies the resources of the parties involved. A model of the co-creation process that encompasses these four research agendas and provides a conceptual framework to analyse Triple Helix initiatives is proposed. Some practical implications are then discussed relating to the challenges posed for researchers.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Contributors
            T. Hughes
            Journal
            Journal ID (doi): 10.2307/j50022063
            Journal ID (jcode): prometheus
            Title: Prometheus
            Publisher: Pluto Journals
            ISSN: 0810-9028
            ISSN: 1470-1030
            Publication date (Print): 1 December 2014
            Volume: 32
            Issue: 4 ( doiID: 10.1080/prometheus.32.issue-4 )
            Pages: 337-350
            Affiliations
            Faculty of Business and Law, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
            Article
            Publisher ID: 08109028.2014.971613
            DOI: 10.1080/08109028.2014.971613
            SO-VID: e7619628-366a-43d9-b10e-823dc227021c
            Copyright statement: © 2014 Pluto Journals
            License:

            All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

            Custom metadata
            lang eng

            ScienceOpen disciplines: Computer science,Arts,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,History,Economics

            References

            1. Afuah, A. (2002) ‘Mapping technological capabilities into product markets and competitive advantage: the case of cholesterol drugs’, Strategic Management Journal, 23, 2, pp.171–79.

            2. Amabile, T., Patterson, C., Mueller, J., Wojcik, T., Odomirok, P., Marsh, M. and Kramor, S. (2001) ‘Academic practitioner collaboration in management research: a case of cross-profession collaboration’, Academy of Management Journal, 44, 2, pp.418–31.

            3. Antonacopoulou, E., Dehlin, E. and Zundel, M. (2011) ‘The challenge of delivering impact: making waves through the ODC debate’, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47, 1, pp.33–52.

            4. Arnould, E., Price, L. and Malshe, A. (2006) ‘Toward a cultural resource-based theory of the customer’ in Lusch, R. and Vargo, S. (eds) The Service-Dominant Logic of Marketing: Dialog, Debate and Directions, ME Sharpe, Armonk NY, pp.320–33.

            5. Ballantyne, D. and Varey, R. (2006) ‘Creating value-in-use through marketing interaction: the exchange logic of relating communicating and knowing’, Marketing Theory, 6, p.335–18.

            6. Ballantyne, D. and Varey, R. (2008) ‘The service-dominant logic and the future of marketing’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, pp.11–1.

            7. Ballantyne, D., Williams, J. and Aitken, R. (2011) ‘Introduction to service-dominant logic: from propositions to practice’, Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 2, pp.179–80.

            8. Barney, J. (1991) ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of Management, 17, pp.99–120.

            9. Benner, M. and Sandstrom, U. (2000) ‘Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system’, Research Policy, 29, pp.291–301.

            10. Bilgram, V., Bartl, M. and Biel, S. (2011) ‘Getting closer to the consumer – how Nivea co-creates new products’, Marketing Review St Gallen, 1, pp.34–40.

            11. Bitner, M., Faranda, W., Hubbert, A. and Zeithaml, V. (1997) ‘Customer contributions and roles in service delivery’, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8, 3, pp.193–205.

            12. Bourne, P. and Chalupa, L. (2008) ‘A new approach to scientific dissemination’, Materials Today, 11, 6, p.48.

            13. Braun, S. and Hadwiger, K. (2011) ‘Knowledge transfer from research to industry (SMEs) – an example from the food sector’, Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22, 1, pp.S90–6.

            14. Carayannis, E., Barth, T. and Campbell, D. (2012) ‘The Quintuple Helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation’, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1, 1, pp.1–12.

            15. Carayannis, E. and Campbell, D. (2012) Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems: 21st-Century Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Development, Springer Briefs in Business, 7, Springer, NY.

            16. Castonguay, L. (2011) ‘Psychotherapy, psychopathology, research and practice: pathways of connection and integration’, Psychotherapy Research, 21, 1, pp.125–40.

            17. Chesborough, H. (2003) ‘The era of open innovation’, MIT Sloan Management Review, 44, 3, pp.35–41.

            18. Chesborough, H. (2006) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business Press, Boston MA.

            19. Chiu, H., Hsieh, Y., Li, Y. and Lee, M. (2005) ‘Relationship marketing and consumer switching behavior’, Journal of Business Research, 58, 12, pp.1681–89.

            20. Corcoran, M. (2006) ‘Dissemination or knowledge translation?‘, American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60, 5, pp.487–88.

            21. Cummings, J. and Teng, B. (2003) ‘Transferring R&D knowledge: the key factors affecting knowledge transfer success’, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 20, 1, pp.39–68.

            22. de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., Lemmink, J. and Mattsson, J. (1997) ‘The dynamics of the service delivery process: a value-based approach’, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14, 3, pp.231–43.

            23. Dietrich, A., Oxman, T. and Williams, J. (2003) ‘Dissemination to community-based practices’, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 55, 2, pp.111–22.

            24. Earles-Vollrath, T. (2012) ‘Research to practice: closing the gap’, Intervention in School and Clinic, 47, 3, pp.135–38.

            25. Echeverri, P. and Skalen, P. (2011) ‘Co-creation and co-destruction: a practice-theory based study of interactive value formation’, Marketing Theory, 11, 3, pp.351–73.

            26. Ellson, T. (2009) ‘Assessing contribution of research in business to practice’, Journal of Business Research, 62, pp.1160–64.

            27. Etzkowitz, H. (2003) ‘Innovation in innovation: the Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations’, Social Science Information, 42, 3, pp.293–337.

            28. Etzkowitz, H. (2008) The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action, Routledge, Abingdon.

            29. Etzkowitz, H. (2011) ‘Normative change in science and the birth of the Triple Helix’, Social Science Information, 50, 3–4, pp.549–68.

            30. Fisher, D. and Smith, S. (2011) ‘Co-creation is chaotic: what it means for marketing when no one has control’, Marketing Theory, 11, 3, pp.325–50.

            31. Ford, D. (2011) ‘IMP and service-dominant logic: divergence, convergence and development’, Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 2, pp.231–39.

            32. Frow, P. and Payne, A. (2011) ‘A stakeholder perspective of the value proposition concept’, European Journal of Marketing, 45, 1–2, pp.223–40.

            33. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London.

            34. Greer, C. and Lei, D. (2012) ‘Collaborative innovation with customers: a review of the literature and suggestions for future research’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 14, 1, pp.63–84.

            35. Grimshaw, J., Eccles, M., Lavis, J., Hill, S. and Squires, J. (2012) ‘Knowledge translation of research findings’, Implementation Science, 7, May, pp.1–17.

            36. Gronroos, C. (2011) ‘A service perspective on business relationships’, Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 2, pp.240–42.

            37. Gronroos, C. and Voima, P. (2013) ‘Critical service logic: making sense of value creation and co-creation’, Academy of Marketing Science, 41, 2, pp.133–50.

            38. Gummesson, E. (2011) ‘2B or not 2B: that is the question’, Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 2, pp.190–92.

            39. Harkins, A. and Kubik, G. (2006) ‘Leapfrogging toward the “singularity”: innovative knowledge production on market-driven campuses’, On the Horizon, 14, 3, pp.99–107.

            40. Hilton, T., Hughes, T. and Chalcraft, D. (2012) ‘Service co-creation and value realisation’, Journal of Marketing Management, 28, 13–14, pp.1504–19.

            41. Holbrook, M. (1986) ‘Emotion in the consumption experience: toward a new model of the human consumer’ in Peterson, R. (ed.) The Role of Affect in Consumer Behavior: Emerging Theories and Applications, Lexington Books, Lexington MA, pp.17–52.

            42. Holbrook, M. (1996) ‘Customer value– a framework for analysis and research’, Advances in Consumer Research, 23, 1, pp.138–42.

            43. Holbrook, M. (2005) ‘Customer value and autoethnography: subjective personal introspection and the meanings of a photograph collection’, Journal of Business Research, 58, pp.45–61.

            44. Holsapple, C. (2009) ‘A new map for knowledge dissemination channels’, Communications of the ACM – Being Human in the Digital Age, 52, 3, pp.117–25.

            45. Hughes, T., Bence, D., Grisoni, L., O'Regan, N. and Wornham, D. (2011) ‘Scholarship that matters: academic/practitioner engagement in business and management’, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10, 1, pp.40–57.

            46. Hussle, C., Picard, F. and Tang, M. (2010) ‘Taking the ivory from the tower to coat the economic world: regional strategies to make science useful’, Technovation, 30, 9–10, pp.508–18.

            47. Kanouse, D., Kallich, J. and Kahan, J. (1995) ‘Dissemination of effectiveness and outcomes research’, Health Policy, 34, 3, pp.167–92.

            48. Katakis, I., Tsoumakas, G., Banos, E., Bassiliades, N. and Vlahavas, I. (2009) ‘An adaptive personalized news dissemination system’, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 32, 2, pp.191–212.

            49. Kerner, J. and Hall, K. (2009) ‘Research dissemination and diffusion: translation within science and society’, Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 5, pp.519–30.

            50. Khalifa, A. (2004) ‘Customer value: a review of recent literature and an integrative configuration’, Management Decision, 42, 5–6, pp.645–66.

            51. King, C. and Grace, D. (2008) ‘Internal branding: exploring the employees’ perspective', Brand Management, 15, 5, pp.358–72.

            52. Kingston, J. (2012) ‘Choosing a knowledge dissemination approach’, Knowledge and Process Management, 19, 3, pp.160–70.

            53. Lafrenière, D. and Cox, S. (2012) ‘Means of knowledge dissemination: are the Café Scientifique and the artistic performance equally effective?‘, Sociology Mind, 2, 2, pp.191–99.

            54. Landfried, S. (1989) ‘Strategies for effective information dissemination in a “high-tech” age’, Environmental Conservation, 16, 2, pp.123–28.

            55. Lang, J. (2001) ‘Managerial concerns in knowledge management’, Journal of Knowledge Management, 5, 1, pp.43–57.

            56. Layton, R. (2008) ‘The search for a dominant logic: a macromarketing perspective’, Journal of Macromarketing, 28, 3, pp.215–27.

            57. Lundberg, H. (2013) ‘Triple Helix in practice: the key role of boundary spanners’, European Journal of Innovation Management, 16, 2, pp.211–26.

            58. Lusch, R., Vargo, S. and Wessels, G. (2008) ‘Toward a conceptual foundation for service science: contributions from service-dominant logic’, IBM Systems Journal, 47, 1, pp.5–14.

            59. Marcovich, A. and Shinn, T. (2011) ‘From the Triple Helix to a Quadruple Helix? The case of dip-pen nanolithography’, Minerva, 49, 2, pp.175–90.

            60. Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N. and Rigdon, E. (2001) ‘Experiential value: conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and internet shopping environment’, Journal of Retailing, 77, 1, pp.39–56.

            61. Mesny, A. and Mailhot, C. (2012) ‘Control and traceability of research impact on practice: reframing the “relevance gap” debate in management’, Management, 15, 2, pp.180–207.

            62. Nonaka, I. (1994) ‘A dynamic theory of knowledge creation’, Organization Science, 5, 1, pp.14–37.

            63. Nowotny, H., Scott, P. and Gibbons, M. (2001) Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty, Blackwell, Oxford.

            64. Oswald, A. (2005) ‘Striga control– technologies and their dissemination’, Crop Protection, 24, 4, pp.333–42.

            65. Ousley, A., Swarz, J., Milliken, E. and Ellis, S. (2010) ‘Cancer education and effective dissemination: information access is not enough’, Journal of Cancer Education, 25, 2, pp.196–205.

            66. Peteraff, M. (1993) ‘The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view’, Strategic Management Journal, 14, pp.179–91.

            67. Pettigrew, A. (1997) ‘The double hurdles for management research’ in Clarke, T. (ed.) Advancement in Organizational Behaviour: Essays in Honour of J.S. Pugh, Dartmouth Press, London, pp.277–96.

            68. Pine, J. and Gilmore, J. (1999) The Experience Economy: Work is Theatre and Every Business a Stage, Harvard University Press, Boston MA.

            69. Pink, D. (2005) A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age, Allen & Unwin, Crow's Nest NSW.

            70. Porter, M. and Ketels, H. (2003) UK Competitiveness: Moving to the Next Stage, DTI Economics Paper 3, DTI, London, May.

            71. Prahalad, C. and Hamel, G. (1990) ‘The core competence of the corporation’, Harvard Business Review, May–June, pp.79–91.

            72. Prahalad, C. and Ramaswamy, V. (2000) ‘Co-opting customer competence’, Harvard Business Review, January, pp.79–90.

            73. Prahalad, C. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004) ‘Co-creation experiences: the next practice in value creation’, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18, 3, pp.5–14.

            74. Ramaswamy, V. (2011) ‘It's about human experiences ... and beyond, to co-creation’, Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 2, pp.195–96.

            75. Rossi, C. (2011) ‘Online consumer communities, collaborative learning and innovation’, Measuring Business Excellence, 15, 3, pp.46–62.

            76. Russell, E. (2007) ‘eHealth evaluation and dissemination research’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32, 5, pp.S119–29.

            77. Shafran, R., Clark, D., Fairburn, C., Arntz, A., Barlow, D., Ehlers, A., Freeston, M., Garety, P., Hollon, S., Ost, L., Salkovskis, P., Williams, M. and Wilson, G. (2009) ‘Mind the gap: improving the dissemination of CBT’, Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47, 11, pp.902–9.

            78. Shanthy, T. (2011) ‘Strategies for effective dissemination of appropriate technologies to sugarcane growers in India’, Society for Sugar Research & Promotion, 13, 4, pp.354–59.

            79. Shapiro, D., Kirkman, B. and Courtney, H. (2007) ‘Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research’, Academy of Management Journal, 50, 2, pp.249–66.

            80. Shiovitz, S., Ashley, G., Morris, A., Graff, J., Katz, S. and Hawley, S. (2011) ‘Dissemination of quality-of-care research findings to breast oncology surgeons’, American Society of Clinical Oncology, 7, 4, pp.257–62.

            81. Song, M., Berends, H., Van Der Bij, H. and Weggeman, M. (2007) ‘The effect of IT and co-location on knowledge dissemination’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 1, pp.52–68.

            82. Steiber, A. and Alänge, S. (2013) ‘The formation and growth of Google: a firm-level triple helix perspective’, Social Science Information, 52, 4, pp.515–38.

            83. Sweeney, J. and Soutar, G. (2001) ‘Consumer perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale’, Journal of Retailing, 77, 2, pp.203–20.

            84. Thelwall, M. and Harries, G. (2004) ‘Can personal web pages that link to universities yield information about the wider dissemination of research?‘, Journal of Information Science, 30, 3, pp.240–53.

            85. Tuunainen, J. and Knuuttila, T. (2009) ‘Intermingling academic and business activities– a new direction for science and universities?‘, Science, Technology & Human Values, 34, 6, pp.684–704.

            86. Van de Ven, A. (2007) Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

            87. Van De Ven, A. and Johnson, P. (2006) ‘Knowledge for theory and practice’, Academy of Management Review, 31, 4, pp.802–21.

            88. Vanhaverbeke, W. (2013) ‘Rethinking open innovation beyond the innovation funnel’, Technology Innovation Management Review, April, pp.6–10.

            89. Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2004) ‘Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing’, Journal of Marketing, 68, 1, pp.1–17.

            90. Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2008) ‘Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, pp.1–10.

            91. Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2011) ‘It's all B2B ... and beyond: toward a systems perspective of the market’, Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 2, pp.181–87.

            92. Viale, R. and Etzkowitz, H. (eds) (2010) The Capitalization of Knowledge: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

            93. Von Hippel, E. and Euchner, J. (2013) ‘User innovation’, Research Technology Management, 56, 3, pp.15–20.

            94. Wernerfelt, B. (1984) ‘A resource-based view of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 5, pp.171–80.

            95. Williams, G. (2012) ‘The disciplining effects of evaluation practices: negotiating the pressures of impact within an ESRC-DFID project’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37, pp.489–95.

            96. Wilson, T. (2012) A Review of Business-University Collaboration, available from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32383/12-610-wilson-review-business-university-collaboration.pdf.

            97. Zeithaml, V. (1988) ‘Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means–end model and synthesis of evidence’, Journal of Marketing, 52, 3, pp.2–22.

            Comments

            Comment on this article