Can processes make relationships work? The Triple Helix between structure and action

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

Can processes make relationships work? The Triple Helix between structure and action

research-article

Author(s): Kevin Grant ^a , Martin Meyer ^a ^, ^b ^, ^c , Jari Kuusisto ^b

Publication date (Print): 1 December 2014

Journal: Prometheus

Publisher: Pluto Journals

Bookmark

Abstract

This contribution seeks to explore how complex adaptive theory can be applied at the conceptual level to unpack Triple Helix models. We use two cases to examine this issue – the Finnish Strategic Centres for Science, Technology & Innovation (SHOKs) and the Canadian Business-led Networks of Centres of Excellence (BL-NCE). Both types of centres are organisational structures that aspire to be business-led, with a considerable portion of their activities driven by (industrial) users' interests and requirements. Reflecting on the centres' activities along three dimensions – knowledge generation, consensus building and innovation – we contend that conceptualising the Triple Helix from a process perspective will improve the dialogue between stakeholders and shareholders.

Content

Author and article information

Contributors

Kevin Grant

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: 351-368

Affiliations

[ ^a ]Kent Business School, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK

[ ^b ]University of Vaasa, SC-Research, Lapua, Finland

[ ^c ]Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, ECOOM, Leuven, Belgium

Article

Publisher ID: 08109028.2015.1110425

DOI: 10.1080/08109028.2015.1110425

SO-VID: 734f0497-60bc-4a04-8060-157d8f9176d7

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

Note

This approach focuses on the problem the new organisational form seeks to address. The second P is the people, who are the stakeholders, actors, agents, agencies and shareholders in the new hybrid form, and whose agenda is being satisfied (both overtly and covertly) by the policy. This is followed by the next P, which is for place. Place is to ascertain how much foreground and background is given to each player/agent/agency contained within the network to see who has pride of place and why. This is followed by an exploration of the actual policy-making – that is, how the policy of creating and operationalising the hybrid structure was developed and implemented. This P was not adopted for this study. Nor was the price tag P – that is, the cost of the policy options and how resources are allocated. This was because of insufficient access to policy-makers to gauge how they implemented the policy within their respective agencies. The next P of the policy circle is for paper – that is, what is actually stated in the policy about the purpose of the new organisational forms. The final two Ps are for programmes and performance – the programmes and activity that have resulted and how well they have achieved their intended goals.

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] This approach focuses on the problem the new organisational form seeks to address. The second P is the people, who are the stakeholders, actors, agents, agencies and shareholders in the new hybrid form, and whose agenda is being satisfied (both overtly and covertly) by the policy. This is followed by the next P, which is for place. Place is to ascertain how much foreground and background is given to each player/agent/agency contained within the network to see who has pride of place and why. This is followed by an exploration of the actual policy-making – that is, how the policy of creating and operationalising the hybrid structure was developed and implemented. This P was not adopted for this study. Nor was the price tag P – that is, the cost of the policy options and how resources are allocated. This was because of insufficient access to policy-makers to gauge how they implemented the policy within their respective agencies. The next P of the policy circle is for paper – that is, what is actually stated in the policy about the purpose of the new organisational forms. The final two Ps are for programmes and performance – the programmes and activity that have resulted and how well they have achieved their intended goals.