Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (387)
- Conference Proceeding (318)
- Part of a Book (72)
- Workingpaper / Report (34)
- Master's Thesis (8)
- Book (5)
- Doctoral Thesis (5)
- Collection (4)
- Preprint (4)
- Patent (3)
Language
- English (851) (remove)
Keywords
- VSVR (39)
- DOAJ (37)
- Virtual (TV) Studio (23)
- FHD (22)
- Forena (12)
- Poster (8)
- security (8)
- security requirement (7)
- DEAL (6)
- Lehre (6)
Department/institution
- Fachbereich - Medien (343)
- Fachbereich - Maschinenbau und Verfahrenstechnik (295)
- Creative Media Production and Entertainment Computing (142)
- Fachbereich - Sozial- & Kulturwissenschaften (90)
- Fachbereich - Elektro- & Informationstechnik (67)
- Sound and Vibration Engineering (42)
- Digitale Vernetzung und Informationssicherheit (30)
- Fachbereich - Architektur (22)
- Fachbereich - Wirtschaftswissenschaften (18)
- Intelligente Mensch-Technik-Interaktion (12)
The article argues that European innovators can profit from some of the concepts of philosophical Daoism, namely "wu-wei" (non-interference) and "ziran" ("go with the flow"). Whereas most Western approaches to innovation emphasize the different stages of the creative process as well as tools to enhance creativity, the Daoist world view allows for the mind to just wander and thus spontaneously discover the solution to a problem in a rather detached state of mind. Creative minds need space for personal development and the permission to wander around without being exposed to control and instant judgement on the results. Training individuals in the tools and techniques of problem solving and creativity as the common approach in innovation management is certainly necessary, but in the end it is the intellectual accomplishment of a creative mind that produces innovation. Managers can allow this to happen when they get the balance of control and non-interference right.
There is a popular saying in German: Innovation is when the market shouts “Hooray!”. Thus, a new idea is only as good as its diffusion into the addressed social system. The question is what affects the adoption or rejection of a new idea. Carsten Deckert shares his experience on the main innovation resistances and on ways to increase the acceptance of new ideas. He talks about which perceived attributes of innovations are conducive to the rate of adoption of an innovation and which are characteristics of failed innovations.
The working paper at hand assumes that differences of innovativeness of different countries can be explained to a certain extent by cultural differences. Thus, the paper deals with the research question of which cultural dimensions have an influence on national innovativeness. Previous research mainly uses the Hofstede-dimensions to describe cultural differences and often focuses on single parameters to describe national innovativeness (e.g. number of patents per capita). This paper, instead, uses the dimensions of the GLOBE-study which builds on the findings of Hofstede but is more up-to-date and comprehensive and uses two innovation indexes – the Global Innovation Index (GII) and the Innovation Union Scoreboard (IUS) – to describe national innovativeness. The authors use correlation analysis to find relationships between the GLOBEdimensions and the innovation indexes. They find positive correlations of innovativeness (both indexes) to Future Orientation (practice scale), Gender Egalitarianism (value scale), Human Orientation (value scale) and Uncertainty Avoidance (practice scale) as well as negative correlations to In-Group Collectivism (practice scale), Future Orientation (value scale) and Uncertainty Avoidance (value scale). Some of the findings are contrary to existing hypotheses, e.g. only a weak negative correlation of Power Distance to one of the indexes. Furthermore the findings show significant differences between practice scales and value scales, especially concerning Future Orientation and Uncertainty Avoidance which deserve further examination. Overall it can be concluded that culture has an impact on national innovativeness. The different cultural dimensions of the GLOBE-study show a multi-faceted interrelationship between culture and innovation. To come to a concise answer for the question which dimensions affect national innovativeness in which way additional research will be necessary.
The definition of individual creativity is based on a tension between novelty on the one side and usefulness respectively appropriateness on the other side. The paper explores how this tension pervades the stage and componential theories of creativity. To achieve this, the so called value square (“Wertequadrat”) developed by Helwig (1967) and Schulz von Thun (1998)is used which balances a value with its countervalue to analyze creativity. The author identifies tensions of action and inaction, expertise and mindfulness, precision and ambiguity as well as immersion and detachment permeating the creative process and the components of creativity. As a conclusion a morphological box for creativity is presented which allows one to show which combination of characteristics of the tensions support different stages of creativity. Furthermore implications for development and time management are discussed.
A central question for managers in charge of innovation is to what extent creativity and inno-vation can be controlled and supervised, or whether they just have to be set free and allowed to take shape. In assessing this dilemma the authors conclude that there is a contradiction of action versus inaction on the personal level as well as a contradiction of control versus loss of control on the organizational level. What European innovators can learn from philosophical Daoism is an attitude that allows a process to just develop “naturally” and refrains from prem-ature interference with the intention to permanently be in control. In business structures that judge everything according to its usefulness, i.e. profitability for the company, a look at the laid-back attitude of Daoism where usefulness and uselessness are relative qualities might relief the pressure on people to perform in a premeditated way. Innovation can be supported, but creativity cannot be forced. It can only be allowed to happen when control, interference, and action are balanced out with non-interference, and go-with-the-flow. This attitude in not an excuse for stressed-out managers to neglect their duty, but a time honoured worldview of one of the oldest civilizations in the world that can give them the sovereignty to “get out of the way” and let innovation happen.