Gerenciando a Inovação a Partir das Lentes da Ciência, Tecnologia e Estudos da Sociedade: A Partir de uma Perspectiva Construtivista e Crítica do Gerenciamento da Inovação Outros Idiomas

ID:
52637
Periódico:
Resumo:
O presente trabalho elabora uma discussão teórica e reflexão sobre a maneira pela qual a gestão da inovação pode ser compreendida e pesquisada. Esta discussão baseia-se no conceito de gestão da inovação definido por Dodgson, Gann e Phillips (2013). O texto analisa, em particular, o impacto da epistemologia e da compreensão do mundo apresentados na literatura de gestão da inovação, usando lentes que dão um estudo construtivista -Science, tecnologia e sociedade e crítica dele. A análise mostra a possibilidade de abrir novos rumos para a gestão da inovação. Como resultado, mostra a necessidade de compreender, de forma performativa, reflexivamente o fenômeno da gestão da inovação, uma operação que envolve o agrupamento necessário entre capital e trabalho para uma compreensão completa do gerenciamento da inovação.
Citação ABNT:
ESPINOSA-CRISTIA, J. F.Managing Innovation Based on Studies on Science, Technology, and Society: Toward a Constructivist and Critical Perspective of Innovation Management. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, v. 17, n. 1, p. 68-83, 2019.
Citação APA:
Espinosa-cristia, J. F.(2019). Managing Innovation Based on Studies on Science, Technology, and Society: Toward a Constructivist and Critical Perspective of Innovation Management. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 17(1), 68-83.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1679-395171625
Link Permanente:
http://www.spell.org.br/documentos/ver/52637/gerenciando-a-inovacao-a-partir-das-lentes-da-ciencia--tecnologia-e-estudos-da-sociedade--a-partir-de-uma-perspectiva-construtivista-e-critica-do-gerenciamento-da-inovacao/i/pt-br
Tipo de documento:
Artigo
Idioma:
Inglês
Referências:
AKRICH, M.; CALLON, M.; LATOUR, B. The key to success in innovation Part I: the art of interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, v. 6, n. 2, p. 187-206, 2002.

AKRICH, M.; LATOUR, B. A Summary of a Convenient Vocabulary for the Semiotics of Human and Nonhuman Assemblies. In: BIJKER, W.; LAW, J. (Orgs.). Shaping Technology-Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992.

ALVESSON, M.; WILLMOTT, H. Making Sense of Management: A Critical Introduction, Critical Theory and Management Practice. London: Sage, 2012.

ASHMORE, M. Ending up on the Wrong Side: Must the Two Forms of Radicalism Always be at War? Social Studies of Science, v. 26, n. 2, p. 305-322, 1996.

BIJKER, W. How is technology made? That is the question! Cambridge Journal of Economics, v. 34, n. 1, p. 63-76, 2010.

BIRKINSHAW, J.; HAMEL, G.; MOL, M. J. Management innovation. Academy of management Review, v. 33, n. 4, p. 825845, 2008.

BOWKER, G.; STAR, S. L. Sorting things out: classification and its consequences (inside technology). Boston: MIT Press, 1999.

BROWN, T. Change by design. Boston: Harper Collins Publishers, 2009.

CABANTOUS, L.; GOND, J. P. Rational decision making as performative praxis: explaining rationality’s Éternel Retour. Organization science, v. 22, n. 3, p. 573-586, 2011.

ÇALISKAN, K.; CALLON, M. Economization, part 2: a research programme for the study of markets. Economy and Society, v. 39, n. 1, p. 1-32, 2010.

CALLON, M. Economic markets and the rise of interactive agencements: from prosthetic agencies to habilitated agencies. In: PINCH, T.; SWEDBERS, R. (Org.). Living in a material world: economic sociology meets science and technology studies. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2008.

CALLON, M.; LATOUR, B. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath school! a reply to collins and yearley. In: PICKERING, A. (Org.). Science as practice and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.

CHESBROUGH, H. Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business Press, 2003.

CHESBROUGH, H.; VANHAVERBEKE, W.; WEST, J. (Ed.). Open innovation: researching a new paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

CHRISTENSEN, C. M. The innovator’s dilemma. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.

CHRISTIANSEN, J.; VARNES, C. Making decisions on innovation: meetings or networks? Creativity and Innovation Management, v. 16, n. 3, p. 282-298, 2007.

COHEN, W.; LEVINTHAL, D. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quaterly, v. 35. n. 1, p. 128-152, 1990.

CONWAY, S.; STEWARD, F. Managing and shaping innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

DODGSON, M.; GANN, D.; PHILLIPS, N. Perspectives on innovation management. In: DODGSON, M.; GANN, D.; PHILLIPS, N. (Orgs.). The Oxford handbook of innovation management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

DODGSON, M.; GANN, D.; SALTER, A. The management of technological innovation: strategy and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

DODGSON, M. Innovation management: a research overview. London: Routledge, 2017.

EKBIA, H.; NARDI, B. Inverse instrumentality: how technologies objectify patients and players. In: LEONARDI, P.; KALLINIKOS, J. (Orgs.). Materiality and organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

FAGERBERG, J.; FOSAAS, M.; SAPPRASERT, K. Innovation: exploring the knowledge base. Research Policy, v. 41, n. 7, p. 1132-1153, 2012.

FAGERBERG, J.; MOWERY, D.; NELSON, R. (Orgs.). The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

GASPARIN, M.; NEYLAND, D. We have always been modern(ist): temporality and the organisational management of ‘timeless’ iconic chairs. Organization, v. 25, n. 3, p. 354-373, 2017.

GOND, J. P.; CABANTOUS, L.; HARDING, N.; LEARMONTH, M. What do we mean by performativity in organizational and management theory?The uses and abuses of performativity. International Journal of Management Reviews, v. 18, n. 4, p. 440-463, 2016.

HULL, R.; KAGHAN, W. Editorial: innovation-but for whose benefit, for what purpose?. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, v. 12, n. 3, p. 317-325, 2000.

JENSEN, C. Sorting attachments: usefulness of sts in healthcare practice and policy. Science as Culture, v. 16, n. 3, p. 237-251, 2007.

JOHANSSON, U.; WOODILLA, J. Towards an epistemological merger of design thinking, strategy and innovation. In: EUROPEAN ACADEMY OF DESIGN CONFERENCE. 8. 2009. Aberdeen. Anais… Aberdeen: The Robert Gordon University, 2009. . Accessed on: August 16, 2009.

KAGHAN, W. Beyond the panopticon?Technology, organizing, and forms of resistance. In: INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL MANAGEMENT STUDIES CONFERENCE, 4. 2005. Cambridge. Anais… Cambridge: Uversity of Cambridge, 2005. . Accessed on: August 16, 2005.

KAGHAN, W. Invention, innovation, and emancipation: research worlds and trajectories of social change. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, v. 12, n. 3, p. 343-347, 2000.

KNORR-CETINA, K.; MULKAY, M. Science observed: perspectives on the social study of science. London: Sage, 1983.

KORNBERGER, M.; CLEGG, S. Strategy as performative practice: the case of Sydney 2030. Strategic Organization, v. 9, n. 2, p. 136-162, 2011.

LAM, A. Organizational Innovation. In: FAGERBERG, J.; MOWERY, D.; NELSON, R. R. (Orgs.). The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

LATOUR, B. From the world of science to the world of research? Science, v. 280, n. 5361, p. 208-209, 1998.

LATOUR, B. La esperanza de Pandora: ensayos sobre la realidad de los estudios de la ciencia. Madrid: Gedisa Editorial, 2001.

LATOUR, B. On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, v. 3, n. 4, p. 228-245, 1996.

LATOUR, B. The pasteurization of France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988.

LATOUR, B.Visualization and cognition. Knowledge and Society, v. 6, p. 1-40, 1986.

LAW, J. After method: mess in social science research. London: Routledge, 2004.

LAW, J.; SINGLETON, V. Performing technology’s stories: on social constructivism, performance and performativity. Technology and Culture, v. 41, n. 4, p. 765-775, 2000.

LEÓN, F. ¿Son los obreros idiotas e irracionales?. Convergencia, v. 17, n. 53, p. 253-283, 2010.

MACKAY, H. et al. Reconfiguring the user: using rapid application development. Social Studies of Science, v. 30, n. 5, p. 737-759, 2000.

MACKENZIE, D. An engine, not a camera: how financial models shape markets. Cambridge, MIT Press, 2006.

MARCH, J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, v. 2, n. 1, p. 71-87, 1991.

Marx, K. The Marx-Engels reader. New York: Norton, 1972.

OCDE. Oslo manual: guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. France: OECD publishing, 2005.

OSTERWALDER, A.; PIGNEUR, Y.; TUCCI, C. Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the association for Information Systems, v. 16, n. 1, 2005. 1 p.

PARMAR, B.; PHILLIPS, R.; FREEMAN, E. Pragmatism and organization studies. In: MIR, R.; WILLMOTT, H.; GREENWOOD, M. (Orgs.). The Routledge companion to philosophy in organization studies. New York: Routledge, 2016.

PHILLIPS, J. Agencement/assemblage. Theory Culture and Society, v. 23, n. 2-3, p. 108, 2006.

PICKERING, A. The mangle of practice: time, agency, and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.

PISANO, G. Profiting from innovation and the intellectual property revolution. Research Policy, v. 35, n. 8, p. 1122-1130, 2006.

POLLOCK, N.; D’ADDERIO, L. Give me a two-by-two matrix and I will create the market: Rankings, graphic visualisations and sociomateriality. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 37, n. 8, p. 565-586, 2012.

POMEROY, A. Marx and Whitehead: process, dialectics, and the critique of capitalism. Albany: SUNY, 2004.

PORTER, M. 1980. Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press, 1980.

RYLANDER, A. Design thinking as knowledge work: Epistemological foundations and practical implications. Design Management Journal, v. 4, n. 1, p. 7-19, 2009.

SALTER, A.; ALEXY, O. The nature of innovation. In: DODGSON, M.; GANN, D.; PHILLIPS, N. (Orgs.). The Oxford handbook of innovation management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

SERRES, M. The parasite. Baltimore: John Hopkins University, 2006.

SPOELSTRA, S. Robert Cooper?Beyond organization. The Sociological Review, v. 53, n. s/i 1, p. 106-119, 2005.

STENNER, P. A. N. Whitehead and Subjectivity. Subjectivity, v. 22, n. 1, p. 90-109, 2008.

SUCHMAN, L. Human-machine reconfigurations: plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

SUMMERTON, J. Do electrons have politics?Constructing user identities in Swedish electricity. Science, Technology & Human Values, v. 29, n. 4, p. 486-511, 2004.

TEECE, D. Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, v. 51, n. 1, p. 40-49, 2017.

TEECE, D. Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range planning, v.43, n. 2-3, p. 172-194, 2010.

TEECE, D. Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, v. 28. n. 13, p. 1319-1350, 2007.

TEECE, D.; PISANO, G.; SHUEN, A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, v. 18, n. 7, p. 509-533, 1997.

TEECE, D. Profiting from technological innovation. Research Policy, v. 15, n. 6, p. 286-305, 1986.

TEECE, D. Reflections on “profiting from innovation”. Research Policy, v. 35, n. 8, p. 1131-1146, 2006.

TETHER, B. S. Services, innovation, and managing service innovation. In: DODGSON, M.; GANN, D.; PHILLIPS, N. (Orgs). The Oxford handbook of innovation management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

VON HIPPEL, E. Democratizing innovation. Boston: MIT press, 2005.

VON HIPPEL, E. Learning from open-source software. MIT Sloan management review, v. 42, n. 4, p. 82-86, 2001.

WHITEHEAD, A. N. Process and reality: an essay in cosmology. New York: The Free Press, 1985.

WHITTLE, A.; SPICER, A. Is actor network theory critique?. Organization Studies, v. 29, n. 4, p. 611-629, 2008.

WOOLGAR, S. Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. In: LAW, J. (Org.). A sociology of monsters: essays on power, technology and domination. London: Routledge, 1991.

WOOLGAR, S. The turn to technology in social studies of science. Science, Technology & Human Values, v. 16, n. 1, p. 20-50, 1991.