Improving Team Activities in the Concept Development Stages: Addressing Radical Development and Open-Ended Problems

References

• Baer, M., Dirks, K. T., & Nickerson, J. A. (2013). Microfoundations of strategic problem formulation. Strategic Management Journal, 34(2), 197–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergström, M. (2009). Probing for innovation: How small design teams collaborate. Luleå Tekniska Universitet. Doctoral thesis, Sweden: Luleå University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Bergström, M., Ericson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2010). 4I4I: Four I's for innovation: A book with easy to use methods and ideas to foster innovative product development. Luleå, Sweden: Universitetstryckeriet.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2009). Change by design, how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, R. G. (2008). Perspective: The Stage-Gate® idea-to launch process-update, what's new, and nexgen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 213–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, C., Wenngren, J., Holmqvist, J., & Ericson, Å. (2014). Tendencies toward problem-setting and problem-solving: A study of operations derived from motivation strategies. International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society, 10(2), 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Coyne, R. (2005). Wicked problems revisited. Design Studies, 26(1), 5–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (2000). Engineering design methods: Strategies for product design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drucker, P. F. (1998). The Discipline of Innovation. Harvard Business Review, November-December, 76(6), 149–157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ericson, Å., Johansson, C., & Nergård, H. (2015). Manufacturing knowledge: Going from production of things to designing value in use. Intelligent Decision Technologies, 9(1), 79–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faste, R. (1987). Perceiving needs, (No. 871534). SAE Technical Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Frankel, A. (2003). Barriers and limitations in the development of industrial innovation in the region. European Planning Studies, 11(2), 115–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: A literature review. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19, 110–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gero, J. S. (1990). Design prototypes: A knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine, 11(4), 26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gero, J. S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2004). The situated function—behaviour—structure framework. Design Studies, 25(4), 373–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hausman, A. (2005). Innovativeness among small business: Theory and propositions for future research. Industrial Marketing Management, 34, 263–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hey, J. H., Joyce, C. K., & Beckman, S. L. (2007). Framing innovation: Negotiating shared frames during early design phases. Journal of Design Research, 6(1), 79–99.
   Google Scholar
• Hyman, B. I. (2002). Fundamentals of engineering design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Heunks, F. (1998). Innovation, creativity and success. Small Business Economics, 10, 263–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacoby, R., & Rodriguez, D. (2007). Innovation, growth, and getting to where you want to go. Design Management Review, 18(1), 10–15.
   Google Scholar
• Khurana, A., & Rosenthal, S. R. (1997). Integrating the fuzzy front end of new product development. Sloan Management Review, 38, 103–120.
   Google Scholar
• Kraut, R., Egido, C., & Galegher, J. (1988). Patterns of contact and communication in scientific research collaboration. Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, January, 1988. pp. 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Kurtz C. F., & Snowden, D. J. (2003). The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3), 462–483.
   Google Scholar
• Könnölä, T., & Unruh, G. C. (2007). Really changing the course: The limitations of environmental management systems for innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(8), 525–537.
   Google Scholar
• Leifer, L. J., & Steinert, M. (2011). Dancing with ambiguity: Causality behavior, design thinking, and triple-loop-learning. Information, Knowledge, Systems Management, 10(1), 151–173.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. London, UK: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2012). Design thinking research. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research: Studying co-creation in practice. Berlin Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parida, V., Oghazi, P., & Ericson, Å. (2014). Realization of open innovation: A case study in the manufacturing industry. Journal of Promotion Management, 20(3), 372–389.
   Google Scholar
• Parida, V., Sjödin, D. R., Lenka, S., & Wincent, J. (2015). Developing global service innovation capabilities: How global manufacturers address the challenges of market heterogeneity. Research-Technology Management, 58(5), 35–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patnaik, D., & Becker, R. (1999). Needfinding: The why and how of uncovering people's needs. Design Management Journal, 10(2), 37–43.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Tukker, A., & Tischner, U. (2006). Note from the field: Product-services as a research field: Past, present and future. Reflections from a decade of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 1552–1556.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2012). Product design and development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies, 19(3), 249–271.
   Google Scholar
• Volkema, R. J. (1983). Problem formulation in planning and design. Management Science, 29(6), 639–652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilde, D. J. (2008). Teamology: the construction and organization of effective teams. London, UK: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. (2003). Case study research design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar