Managing radical innovation as an innovative design process: generative constraints and cumulative sets of rules

Pierre-Antoine Arrighi (pi8@3ds.com), Pascal Le Masson (pascal.le_masson@mines-paristech.fr) and Benoit Weil (benoit.weil@mines-paristech.fr)
Additional contact information
Pierre-Antoine Arrighi: CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Pascal Le Masson: CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Benoit Weil: CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This paper focuses on the organization of design processes and the difficulty of simultaneously achieving control and exploration while aiming to achieve radical innovation. After a first generation of works that tended to oppose NPD processes (with controlled convergence and very limited exploration) to Innovation processes (with poorly controlled convergence and random (uncontrolled) exploration, the new generation of works proposed ways to combine control and convergence either through concept shift or through stable architectures. Relying a generic analytical framework (design space / value management) it appears that each model makes restrictive hypotheses (respectively smart leadership or stable architecture) to address two critical questions: Q1. How can one increase the efficiency of exploration? Q2. How can one ensure forms of cumulative convergence? Relying on the ame analytical framework we analyze two cases that explore the unknown in a controlled way and still don't correspond two either of the two models. We show that these two anomalies and the two models actually have two critical features in common: a focus on generative constraint and a logic of cumulative design rules. As a consequence these two features might generic to several processes where teams have to explore the unknown and still have to keep a rigorous control of exploration and convergence.

Keywords: Radical innovation; design process; design theory; concept shift; modular innovation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015-08-31
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-agr, nep-cse, nep-ino and nep-ppm
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://minesparis-psl.hal.science/hal-01199932v1
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Published in Creativity and Innovation Management, 2015, 24 (3), pp.373-390. ⟨10.1111/caim.12135⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://minesparis-psl.hal.science/hal-01199932v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01199932

DOI: 10.1111/caim.12135

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD (hal@ccsd.cnrs.fr).