Conference Agenda

Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).

 
Session Overview
Session
19-PM1-01: ST2.1 - Fab Labs, Makerspaces and Coworking Spaces as Sites of Innovation
Time:
Wednesday, 19/Jun/2019:
1:00pm - 2:30pm

Session Chair: Julie Fabbri, emlyon business school
Session Chair: Andreea Gorbatai, University of California at Berkeley
Session Chair: Albane Grandazzi, CRG-i3 Ecole Polytechnique
Location: Amphi Painlevé (Polytechnique)

Session Abstract

Within the past decade we’ve witnessed unprecedented changes in the nature of leisure and work. Most significantly, the proliferation of online social media platforms and marketplaces such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Etsy has led to the emergence of social media based entrepreneurs and has allowed people to share, and, respectively access vast amounts of knowledge all around the globe. One of the consequences of this access has been the diffusion of practices, ranging from cultural art forms such as music and dance styles to practical tutorials demonstrating a wide range of how-to’s, from home repairs to crafts to innovative designs. In parallel, the move towards the sharing economy has led many people to seek entrepreneurial venues for their skills. Despite these developments, interactions in physical space remain central to everyday experience. One novel site of such interactions is represented by physical locations for work such as fab labs, makerspaces and coworking spaces. These novel organizational forms vary wildly in terms of structure and content, but, generally speaking, coworking spaces often host small firms and solo entrepreneurs and prospective entrepreneurs, providing access to a business service infrastructure, while fab labs and makerspaces offer more material support for hobbyists and entrepreneurs, such as 3D printers, welding, and carpentry tools. From an academic perspective this topic raises questions about the role of these spaces in generating and diffusing innovation, the importance of space structure and norms in the emergence of entrepreneurial ventures, the network of relationships between different spaces and locations, and the place of these new organizational forms in the business ecosystem and urban life. Accordingly we seek to shed light on these areas, calling for theoretical and empirical studies that may expand and stimulate existing knowledge and debates about the role of these spaces, as well as highlight challenges and opportunities for innovation scholars and practitioners alike.


Show help for 'Increase or decrease the abstract text size'
Presentations

L’appropriation des pratiques issues du coworking par les grandes entreprises

Pierre Naves, Laetitia Gabay-Mariani

Conseil & Recherche, France

Context

Depuis quelques années, les entreprises commencent à s’intéresser au coworking, en tant que nouveau mode d’organisation du travail et de l’espace. Ses valeurs (ouverture, transparence, flexibilité, mobilité) entrent aujourd'hui en résonnance avec les logiques d'open innovation valorisées par les entreprises.

Literature

Les recherches sur les espaces de coworking ont insisté particulièrement sur leur fonction socialisatrice. Ces tiers-lieux (Oldenburg, 1989) sont avant tout des espaces de sociabilité professionnelle destinés aux travailleurs indépendants et aux petites entreprises (Fabbri et Charue-Duboc 2016; Garrett, Spreitzer, et Bacevice 2017; Blein 2016), leur permettant en outre d’accéder à des services mutualisés dans une logique d’économie collaborative (Botsman, Rogers, 2010).

Literature Gap

A notre connaissance, aucun travail n'a encore été proposé pour saisir la manière dont les pratiques et valeurs inspirées du coworking étaient réinvesties par les grandes entreprises, et comment elles hybridaient et articulaient ces pratiques avec leurs propres logiques organisationnelles.

Research Questions

Comment les valeurs du coworking sont-elles appropriées par les entreprises ?

Comment influencent-elles la conception des espaces de travail ?

Quel est leur impact sur les modes d'organisation du travail et la révision des modèles managériaux ?

Assiste-t-on à une simple translation ou à une hybridation ?

Methodology

L'enquête empirique a reposé sur trois sources principales :

- des entretiens semi-directifs

- des observations directes réalisées dans des espaces de coworking et des entreprises ayant développé des espaces de travail inspirés par les espaces de coworking

- une analyse documentaire extensive de la littérature managériale consacrée aux nouveaux usages des espaces de travail

Empirical Material

Nous avons mené notre enquête dans trois pays : France, Pays-Bas et Etats-Unis.

Dans ces trois pays, nous avons rencontré 15 responsables d'espaces de coworking (dont la plupart hébergeaient des équipes de collaborateurs de grandes entreprises) et 15 entreprises ayant développé de nouveaux usages de leurs espaces de travail : flex office, délocalisation d'équipes en espaces de coworking, corpoworking. Nous nous sommes entretenus, dans ces entreprises, avec des personnes aux responsabilités variées : office managers, responsable de services généraux, DRH, etc.

Nous avons également réalisé une vingtaine d'entretiens avec des salariés (collaborateurs et managers) de grandes entreprises impactés par la réorganisation de leur espace de travail et observé le travail "en train de se faire" dans ces nouveaux espaces.

Results

- Bien que peu nombreuses encore, de plus en plus d’entreprises commencent à utiliser des espaces de coworking pour leurs collaborateurs. Leur usage des espaces de coworking répond à plusieurs enjeux : plus grande flexibilité dans la stratégie immobilière et la gestion des évolutions de l’activité et des effectifs, accès à un écosystème d’entreprises dans une démarche d’open innovation.

- Les entreprises s’inspirent de plus en plus, dans la manière de concevoir leurs espaces de travail, du design des espaces de coworking, misant sur une diversité des aménagements dans une logique d’activity-based working.

- Au-delà de l’aménagement des espaces de travail, le coworking comme pratique de travail inspire également un renouvellement des modes d’organisation du travail misant sur le collaboratif, l’intelligence collective et le désilotage des activités.

- Cependant, en fonction de la manière dont le changement est conduit, l'impact sur la transformation est très variable et de fortes résistances peuvent émerger, notamment au niveau du management intermédiaire.

Contribution to Scholarship

L'enjeu théorique principal de cette contribution est de contribuer à un rapprochement entre les recherches sur les nouveaux espaces de travail (espaces de coworking, notamment) et les littératures en sociologie des organisations et sciences de gestion. La notion de "coworking" qui décrit la possibilité pour des travailleurs d'organisations indépendantes de travailler au sein d'un même espace peut-elle s'appliquer à la manière dont les grandes entreprises se saisissent de ces pratiques et de ces valeurs ?

Contribution to Practice

Les entreprises sont des acteurs dont les pratiques sont, historiquement, très éloignées des valeurs du coworking. Mais elles cherchent aujourd'hui à s'en rapprocher, pour valoriser des modes d'organisation du travail centrés sur la cocréation, l'intelligence collective, etc. Il est donc important pour elles de pouvoir bénéficier d'un regard critique sur leurs pratiques afin de les accompagner dans cette transformation.

Fitness

Le sujet proposé s'inscrit pleinement dans l'axe proposé par le Track 2.1. Notre angle d'analyse propose cependant un pas de côté, en mettant l'accent sur la manière dont les espaces de coworking contribuent à produire des innovations managériales dans les grandes entreprises.

Bibliography

Blein. 2016. « Le coworking, un espace pour les transactions hors marché ? » Réseaux, no 196, p.147‑76.

Bostman, Rogers (2010). What's Mine is Yours: How Collaborative Consumption is Changing the Way We Live. HarperCollins

Bréchignac, Anca Boboc, Ould-Ferhat. 2017. « Corporate coworking : « hacker » le travail ? » Sociologies pratiques, no 34, p. 93‑101.

Fabbri, Charue-Duboc. 2016. « Les espaces de coworking : nouveaux intermédiaires d’innovation ouverte ? » Revue française de gestion, no 254, p. 163‑80.

Garrett, Spreitzer, Bacevice. 2017. « Co-Constructing a Sense of Community at Work: The Emergence of Community in Coworking Spaces ». Organization Studies, 170840616685354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616685354.

Oldenburg. 1989. The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Community Centers, Beauty Parlors, General Stores, Bars, Hangouts, and How They Get You Through The Day. Paragon House.



Co-working spaces as a creative escape from everyday practices of harassment? An exploration of co-working in employed work relationships

Fabio James Petani, Damien Richard, Didier Chabanet

INSEEC School of Business & Economics, France

Context

In this paper we suggest that co-working spaces might function as spatial exhaust valves to everyday practices of harassment, examining the case of employed work, and proposing co-working spaces as a third way, between physical presence in corporate spaces and telework.

Literature

A lot of literature has examined how telework, often conflated with ‘working from home’, contributes to different kinds of advantages and disadvantages for employers, employees, and their organizational coordination and performance (Bailey & Kurland, 2002; Peters, Poutsma, der Heijden, Bakker, & Bruijn, 2014; Taskin, 2010), and on how co-working spaces help entrepreneurs or independent workers. Research has more rarely focused on what theoretical and practical distinctions can be drawn between telework and the special case of co-working in employed work relationships, and little empirical or theoretical evidence has investigated which new practices of harassment may have emerged from this new spatiotemporal work environment.

Literature Gap

For instance, little we know about what role, if any, do and can co-working spaces play, in alternative to (or in combination with) telework, to minimize the effect of distress that employed labor suffers as a consequence of everyday harassment practices in the traditional physical workplace.

Research Questions

If telework is a well-covered area of employed work relationships, human resource management and organizational literature accounting for this spatiotemporal hybrid situation (Halford, 2005; Sewell & Taskin, 2015), co-working spaces is more at the margins, and its collective organizational dynamics await to be appreciated.

Methodology

Our exploratory work adopts an ethnographic approach and draws from literature on materiality, organizational space and practice-based organization studies (Carlile, Nicolini, Langley, & Tsoukas, 2013; De Vaujany, Adrot, Boxenbaum, & Leca, 2019; Orlikowski, 2007). We contribute insights into both the undertheorized area of co-working spatial practices in employed work relationships, and in the affordances and constraints that alternative spatiotemporal organizations of work produce in respect to old and emerging practices of harassment.

This research uses an exploratory and inductive approach.

Empirical Material

Two case studies are articulated and focused on Now-Coworking in France and Impact Hub in Italy. We will investigate the conditions that enhance the quality of work relationships and therefore QWL.

Results

We expect the users of co-working spaces to belong to a majority of non-employees, but to reveal pasts in respect to which they measure the advantage of the co-working spatial organization. In addition, we explore the minority of employees working in co-working spaces honestly not expecting Something in particular, but curious to learn 1) if co-working is found to mitigate negative harassement-related effects of physical presence at corporate workplaces and 2) if co-working spaces improve the quality of work life (QWL) and wondering whether there are harassment-related and co-working space-specific side-effects.

Contribution to Scholarship

Co-working spaces are associated with independent or freelance workers, (Gerdenitsch, Scheel, Andorfer, & Korunka, 2016). Co-working spaces drive a new type of work organization with a transformation of the way people work and collaborate (Leclercq-Vandelannoitte & Isaac, 2016), but there is very few research on the impact of these new work practices on quality of work life (QWL). More specifically, the literature is relatively silent about the role of co-working spaces in employed relationships, and it is not clear if the practice of allowing employees to work in co-working spaces is beneficial to mitigate employees’ suffering from a number of harassment exposure typical of physical office presence. On the other hand, there is little discussion about any harassment-related side effects of co-working in general, and of co-working for employed labor in particular.

Contribution to Practice

It is relevant for practitioners and R&D professionals to explore all spatiotemporal combinations of work organization. A better awareness of affordances and constraints of different possibilities of work design, not only promises to contribute strategies to improve the QWL of employees, but also to foster innovation in more open ways, imagining alternatives to physical presence and telework, and considering co-working spaces as a third way possibly more apt to fight harassment related stress.

Fitness

We address the topic of co-working spaces from an original perspective that can shed insights on HRM, but also R&D organizational dynamics. The question of how can organizations make the best use of co-working spaces for their employees' wellbeing, and their performance, is relevant and pertinent to the conference.

Bibliography

Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: Findings, new directions, and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 383–400.

Carlile, P. R., Nicolini, D., Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (2013). How matter matters: Objects, artifacts, and materiality in organization studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

De Vaujany, F.-X., Adrot, A., Boxenbaum, E., & Leca, B. (2019). Materiality in Institutions. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fabbri, J. (2015). Les espaces de coworking pour les entrepreneurs : Nouveaux espaces de travail et dynamiques interorganisationnelles collaboratives. Ecole Polytechnique.

Gerdenitsch, C., Scheel, T. E., Andorfer, J., & Korunka, C. (2016). Coworking spaces: A source of social support for independent professionals. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–12.

Halford, S. (2005). Hybrid workspace: Re‐spatialisations of work, organisation and management. New Technology, Work and Employment, 20, pp. 19-33.

Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, A., & Isaac, H. (2016). The new office: how coworking changes the work concept. Journal of Business Strategy, 37(6), 3–9.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448.

Peters, P., Poutsma, E., der Heijden, B. I. J. M., Bakker, A. B., & Bruijn, T. de. (2014). Enjoying New Ways to Work: An HRM-Process Approach to Study Flow. Human Resource Management, 53(2), 271–290.

Sewell, G. and Taskin, L. (2015). Out of sight, out of mind in a new world of work? Autonomy, control, and spatiotemporal scaling in telework. Organization Studies, 36, pp. 1507-1529.

Taskin, L. (2010). La déspatialisation. Enjeu de gestion. Revue Française de Gestion, 36(202), 61–76.



Fab Lab and Makerspaces: Fostering Innovation skills

Thierry Rayna1, Ludmila Striukova2

1École Polytechnique, France; 2SKEMA Business School, France

Context

User innovation has long been considered beneficial both for individual innovator and for society (Henkel & von Hippel, 2005). The phenomenon us constantly growing and whereas originally user innovators were not commercialising their innovations (von Hippel, 1988), now more user innovators become user entrepreneurs (Shah and Tripsas, 2007).

Literature

Despite numerous successful user innovation and commercialisation examples, the process is not always flawless: some users may have innovative ideas, but never be able to develop solutions (Luthje et al, 2005). In order for users to become more successful in diffusing and commercialising their innovations, it is important for them to be able to develop old skills and acquire new skills easily.

One set of skills which stands out today is the so called ‘21st century skills’, which takes into account the increasing role played by digital technologies, especially in removing barriers to entrepreneurship (OECD, 2017). As digital technologies become more complex and often more related to the ‘physical’ world, it is getting increasingly easier to design and manufacture something (von Hippel et al., 2011, Rayna and Striukova, 2016), but new skills are often required (Dickens and Minshall, 2016).

Literature Gap

This is the first study to investigate the role of fables and makerspaces in helping users acquire 21st century skills.

Research Questions

Our objective is to assess the role played by fab labs and makerspaces in delivering 21st century skills.

Methodology

Semistructured interviews and focus group were used

Empirical Material

For this research work, we combined two exploratory methodologies: 13 semi-structured interviews of fab lab and makerspaces founders of an educational ‘fab space’ network located across Russia, followed by a focus group with fab lab and makerspaces managers. The interviews enabled to uncover the different skills practically fostered by these ‘fab spaces’, while the focus group provided indications as to which skills were deemed particularly important to foster innovation.

The interviews enabled to uncover the different skills practically fostered by these ‘fab spaces’, while the focus group provided indications as to which skills were deemed particularly important to foster innovation.

Results

The results show that, while fab spaces ‘naturally’ foster some entrepreneurial 21st century skills, covering all these skills requires proactive activities. However these spaces themselves do not have the competences to grow entrepreneurial skills, which imply, from a policy standpoint, that resources may be needed to support the development of entrepreneurial education in fab labs and makerspaces. This point is critical, as these skills that may enable user innovators to turn into user entrepreneurs.

In regard to technical skills, fab spaces enable to develop skills that go beyond 21st century digital skills, simply because these spaces are not just about digital technologies, but about ‘making’ technologies. Consequently, they may well not be the most suitable place to foster the whole range of 21st century digital skills, simply because they are not purely online digital environment, but combine both digital and physical realms.

Contribution to Scholarship

Our main contribution is two fold. First of all we add to the literature on makerspaces and fablabs, by showing how they could be instrumental in helping users acquire 21st century skills, secondly we contribute to the rather scarce literature on 21st skills, showing that the importance of physical skills does not fade away only because we live in the digital age.

Contribution to Practice

considering that fab labs and makerspaces go beyond what is generally thought as 21st century digital skills and the growing importance of digital manufacturing, this research might be a first step towards the definition of a new set of 21st century skills that move away from a purely digital and online environment to a world where objects while becoming digital still remain physical and competencies for both worlds have become critical. This dual competency is precisely what is needed nowadays to foster further user innovation and entrepreneurship.

Fitness

This paper fits well the general theme of the conference

Bibliography

Dickens, P. and Minshall, T. (2016). UK national strategy for additive manufacturing—update report 2: What did the initial evidence reveal? mimeo, University of Cambridge.

Henkel, J. and von Hippel, E. (2005). “Welfare implications of user innovation”. Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 30, no. 1-2, pp. 73-87.

Lüthje, C., Herstatt, C. and von Hippel, E. (2005). “User-innovators and ’local information’: The case of mountain biking”. Research Policy, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 951-965.

OECD (2017). OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2017. OECD Publishing, Paris.

Rayna, T. and Striukova L. (2016). “Involving consumers: The role of digital technologies in promoting ‘prosumption’ and user innovation”. Journal of Knowledge Economy pp. 1–20. 

Shah, S. K., and Tripsas, M. (2007). “The accidental entrepreneur: The emergent and collective process of user entrepreneurship”. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, vol.1, pp. 123-140.

von Hippel, E. (1988). The Source of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Von Hippel, Eric, Ogawa, S, and J. Jong (2011). "The Age of the Consumer-Innovator." MIT Sloan Management Review, vol 53, no. 1., pp. 27-35.



Herding zebras: the role of coworking spaces in imprinting hybrid ventures

Julie Fabbri, Benjamin Huybrechts

emlyon business school, France

Context

This paper explores how coworking spaces can support entrepreneurs in building “hybrid ventures” combining institutional logics from different fields. We examine social enterprises combining a mission associated to the social welfare domain with a commercial activity typical of the business domain (Battilana, 2018).

Literature

Over the last decade, there has been growing attention to new “hybrid” forms of venturing that draw on distinct institutional logics. In the context of social entrepreneurship, recent research has documented several ways through which they can be managed so as to avoid “mission drift” (Ebrahim, Battilana, & Mair, 2014).

This research mainly focuses on single and formal ventures, overshadowing at least two dimensions. There has been little work at the intersection between the two dimensions, i.e. collaborative dynamics among nascent hybrids (Dufays & Huybrechts2018; Huybrechts & Haugh, 2016). Understanding these dynamics is important to highlight how solid hybrid models can be experimented with through peer-to-peer interactions at the early phases, imprinting the nascent organization with a model that could potentially be more resilient to mission drift (Grimes, Williams, & Zhao, forthcoming). We suggest that coworking spaces offer an interesting setting in which these interactions take place.

Literature Gap

Coworking spaces have been shown to provide opportunities for interaction and exchange among entrepreneurs, diversifying their practices (Vidaillet & Bousalham, 2018) and building their sense of community (Garrett, Spreitzer, & Bacevice, 2017). The way in which participating in coworking spaces impacts the entrepreneurs’ hybrid ventures remains unexplored so far.

Research Questions

How can coworking spaces provide entrepreneurs with opportunities to reinforce their hybrid ventures?

Methodology

Our research draws on a longitudinal study of a French coworking space gathering social entrepreneurs. After extensive research on the space and its use by the coworker entrepreneurs in 2011-2013, we returned to the coworking space managers and to several of the coworkers six years later to understand the evolution of their social enterprises as hybrid ventures.

Empirical Material

Launched in May 2008, La Ruche was one of three pioneer coworking spaces in France. Our first research design draws upon two series of semi-structured interviews with La Ruche’s managing team and with La Ruche coworkers. The first dataset is made up of 14 semi-structured interviews with the founder of La Ruche, the employees – CFO, interns…, and the architect of the workspace. The second dataset is made up of 29 semi-structured interviews with La Ruche members - social entrepreneurs. Our second research design draws upon the same two series of semi-structured interviews in 2019 - ongoing study.

Results

Our research highlights four avenues through which participating in a coworking space enhances hybrid venturing, either directly, or indirectly through engaging entrepreneurs in a “hybrid” community, experimenting with the coworking space as a hybrid venture in itself, and extending beyond cross-field interactions to favor the emergence of a new hybridized field.

Contribution to Scholarship

These findings contribute to the literature in at least three ways. To the literature on hybrid organizing, we show how early-stage interactions among entrepreneurs bring concrete avenues to managing hybridity that imprint their nascent ventures, complementing extant work regarding collaboration among already established hybrid organizations. Second, we extend the literature on the effects of coworking spaces by yielding insights on the intended and unintended effects of gathering entrepreneurs combining logics from different fields. Finally, the research also contributes to the literature of social entrepreneurship through highlighting coworking as a promising tool for strengthening nascent social enterprises, besides extant work on social entrepreneurship networks, incubators, and competitions.

Contribution to Practice

Finally, the research also contributes to the practice of social entrepreneurship through highlighting coworking as a promising tool for strengthening nascent social enterprises, besides extant work on social entrepreneurship networks, incubators, and competitions.

Fitness

Coworking spaces are a relatively recent phenomenon and have only received limited attention from researchers (Garrett et al., 2017). Indeed, there is limited literature on the role of coworking spaces for entrepreneurs.

Bibliography

Battilana, J. (2018). Cracking the organizational challenge of pursuing joint social and financial goals: Social enterprise as a laboratory to understand hybrid organizing. M@n@gement, 21, 1278–1305.

Dufays, F., & Huybrechts, B. (2016). Where do hybrids come from? Entrepreneurial team heterogeneity as an avenue for the emergence of hybrid organizations. International Small Business Journal, 34(6), 777-796.

Fabbri, J., & Charue-Duboc, F. (2013). Un modèle d’accompagnement entrepreneurial fondé sur des apprentissages au sein d’un collectif d’entrepreneurs : le cas de La Ruche. Management international, 17, 86–99.

Furnari, S. (2014). Interstitial Spaces: Microinteraction Settings and the Genesis of New Practices Between Institutional Fields. Academy of Management Review, 39, 439–462.

Garrett, L. E., Spreitzer, G. M., & Bacevice, P. A. (2017). Co-constructing a Sense of Community at Work: The Emergence of Community in Coworking Spaces. Organization Studies, 0170840616685354.

Grimes, M., Williams, T. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (forthcoming). Anchors Aweigh: The Sources, Variety, and Challenges of Mission Drift. Organization Studies, forthcoming.

Huybrechts, B., & Haugh, H. (2018). The Roles of Networks in Institutionalizing New Hybrid Organizational Forms: Insights from the European Renewable Energy Cooperative Network. Organization Studies, 39, 1085–1108.

Martí, I. (2018). Transformational Business Models, Grand Challenges, and Social Impact. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-018-3824-3

van Weele, M., van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Nauta, F. (2017). You can’t always get what you want: How entrepreneur’s perceived resource needs affect the incubator’s assertiveness. Technovation, 59, 18–33.

Vidaillet, B., & Bousalham, Y. (2018). Coworking spaces as places where economic diversity can be articulated: Towards a theory of syntopia. Organization, 1350508418794003.

York, J., Hargrave, T., & Pacheco, D. (2016). Converging winds: Logic hybridization in the Colorado wind energy field. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 579-610.



 
Contact and Legal Notice · Contact Address:
Privacy Statement · Conference: R&D Management Conference 2019
Conference Software - ConfTool Pro 2.6.129+TC
© 2001 - 2019 by Dr. H. Weinreich, Hamburg, Germany