Policies of related variety in practice: the case Innovation Session Method

References

• Andersson, U. (2001). Network embeddedness and transfer of information and innovation in MNCs—The dual role of the subsidiary. Occasional Paper 2001/1. Uppsala: Företagsekonomiska institutionen, Uppsala Universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Asheim, B. T., Moodysson, J., & Tödtling, F. (2011). Constructing regional advantage: Towards state-of-the-art regional innovation system policies in Europe? European Planning Studies, 19(7), 1133–1139. doi:10.1080/09654313.2011.573127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A. (2005a). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320887
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A. (2005b). Editorial: Role of proximity in interaction and performance: Conceptual and empirical challenges. Regional Studies, 39(1), 41–45. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. (2008). Constructing regional advantage: Related variety and regional innovation policy. A Report for the Dutch Scientific Council for Government Policy. Utrecht: University of Utrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2009). The spatial evolution of innovation networks: A proximity perspective. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography # 09.05. Department of Economic Geography Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., & Iammarino, S. (2007). Related variety and regional growth in Italy. SPRU Electronic Working Paper Series, Paper No. 162.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., & Iammarino, S. (2009). Related variety, trade linkages, and regional growth in Italy. Economic Geography, 85(3), 289–311. doi:10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01034.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., Minondo, A., & Navarro, M. (2012). Related variety and regional growth in Spain. Papers in Regional Science, 91(2), 241–256. doi:10.1111/j.1435-5957.2011.00387.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burt, R. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burt, R. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399. doi:10.1086/421787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152. doi:10.2307/2393553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. (2012). The increasing use of dramaturgy in regional innovation practice. In H. Melkas & V. Harmaakorpi (Eds.), Practice-based innovation: Insights, applications and policy implications (pp. 277–301). Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, R. G. (1993). Winning at new products: Accelerating the process from idea to launch. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Evaluation of the Finnish National Innovation System—Full Report. (2009). Taloustieto Oy (on behalf of the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Employment and the Economy). Helsinki: Helsinki University Print. Retrieved from www.evaluation.fi
   Google Scholar
• Finnish National Innovation Strategy. (2008). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/download_en/finland_national_innovation_strategy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Frenken, K., Van Oort, F. G., Verburg, T., & Boschma, R. (2004). Variety and regional economic growth in the Netherlands. Final report to the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Frenken, K., Van Oort, F., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697. doi:10.1080/00343400601120296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futurelab. (2009). Innovation workshops, Futurelab, Bristol. Retrieved July 1, 2009, from http://www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/innovations-workshops
   Google Scholar
• Gertler, M. S. (1995). “Being there”: Proximity, organization, and culture in the development and adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies. Economic Geography, 71(1), 1–26. doi:10.2307/144433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380. doi:10.1086/225469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510. doi:10.1086/228311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M. (2005). The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(1), 33–50. doi:10.1257/0895330053147958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harmaakorpi, V., Tura, T., & Artima, E. (2006, June 28–30). Balancing regional innovation policy between proximity and distance. Paper presented at Fifth Proximity Congress, Bordeaux, France.
   Google Scholar
• Harmaakorpi, V., Tura, T., & Melkas, H. (2011). Regional innovation platforms. In P. Cooke, B. Asheim, R. Boschma, R. Martin, D. Schwartz, & F. Tödtling (Eds.), The handbook of regional innovation & growth (pp. 556–572). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(2), 71–89. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00121.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koen, P., Ajamian, G., Burkart, R., Clamen, A., Davidson, J., D'Amore, R., … Wagner, K. (2001). Providing clarity and a common language to the ‘fuzzy front end’. Research and Technology Management, 44(2), 46–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leikas, J. (2007). Idea movement of aging citizens: Lessons-learnt from innovation workshops. In C. Stephanidis (Ed), Universal access in HCI, Part III, HCII 2007, LNCS 4556 (pp. 923–931). Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Nooteboom, B. (2012). A pragmatist theory of innovation. In H. Melkas & V. Harmaakorpi (Eds.), Practice-based innovation: Insights, applications and policy implications (pp. 17–27). Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Nooteboom, B., Van Haverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., & Van Den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36(7), 1016–1034. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunes, S., & Lopes, R. (2015). Firm performance, innovation modes and territorial embeddedness. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1796–1826. doi:10.1080/09654313.2015.1021666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parjanen, S. (2012). Creating possibilities for collective creativity. Brokerage functions in practice-based innovation. Acta Universitatis Lappeenrantaensis 474. Lappeenranta: Lappeenranta University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Parjanen, S., Melkas, H., & Uotila, T. (2011). Distances, knowledge brokerage and absorptive capacity in enhancing regional innovativeness: A qualitative case study of Lahti region. Finland, European Planning Studies, 19(6), 921–948. doi:10.1080/09654313.2011.568804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pässilä, A., & Oikarinen, T. (2014). Research-based theatre as a facilitator for organisational learning. In P. Meusburger, Berthoin Antal, & L. Suarsana (Eds.), Learning organizations: Extending the field (pp. 203–221). Dordrecht: Springer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Pässilä, A., Frantsi, T., & Tura, T. (2008). Älyllistä ristipölytystä; innovaatiosessiomenetelmä. In V. Harmaakorpi & H. Melkas (Eds.), Innovaatiopolitiikkaa järjestelmien välimaastossa, Acta series no. 200 (pp. 172–185). Helsinki: Suomen Kuntaliitto & Lappeenrannan teknillinen yliopisto. In Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• The Research and Innovation Council of Finland. (2010). Research and innovation policy guidelines for 2011–2015. ISBN 978-952-485-997-4; ISBN 978-952-485-998-1 (pdf). Retrieved from www.vn.fi/hallitus/tutkimusneuvosto/en.jsp; www.minedu.fi/OPM/Tiede/tutkimus-_ja_innovaationeuvosto/?lang=en
   Google Scholar
• Tura, T. (2009). Innovaatiosessio [Innovation session]. A presentation (in Finnish). Lahti Science and Business Park/Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lahti. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Tura, T., Harmaakorpi, V., & Pekkola, S. (2008). Breaking inside the black box: Towards a dynamic evaluation framework of regional innovative capability. Science and Public Policy, 35(10), 733–744. doi:10.3152/030234208X363169
   Google Scholar
• Uotila, T., Harmaakorpi, V., & Melkas, H. (2006). A method for assessing absorptive capacity of a regional innovation system. Fennia—International Journal of Geography, 184(1), 49–58.
   Google Scholar
• Uotila, T., Harmaakorpi, V., & Hermans, R. (2012). Finnish mosaic of regional innovation system—Assessment of thematic regional innovation platforms based on related variety. European Planning Studies, 20(10), 1583–1602. doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.713331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, R. Y., & Strong, D. M. (1996). Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(4), 5–34. doi: 10.1080/07421222.1996.11518099
   Google Scholar
• Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar