This thesis contends that communities of practice (CoPs) are an effective instrument for supporting collaborative activities in science-based small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that often have no formal strategy for knowledge acquisition and innovation. A review of the existing body of knowledge has indicated that this matter has not been the subject of thorough, in-depth research; and that this issue is important, given the relatively high level of efficacy that has been afforded to the role of CoPs in the innovation processes of large organizations. Indeed, the original communities of practice model had little to say about innovation per se; however, more recent theorizations have shown that CoPs can contribute to organizational innovation. This research makes a number of contributions to our understanding of CoPs as an enabler of knowledge acquisition and innovation: (i) theoretical: recontextualizing CoPs and demonstrating their applicability in science-based SMEs; (ii) methodological: extending the use of thematic template analysis; and (iii) applied: through the development of a contextualized framework for constructing CoPs in science-based SMEs. An exploratory case study of science-based SMEs was conducted using thematic template analysis. The study employed critical case sampling, a technique that focuses on selecting cases on the basis that they make a point dramatically or because, as in this instance, they are important in relation to the research questions In depth interviews were conducted with 25 individuals employed in technical (i.e. scientists and engineers) and commercial roles (i.e. operations, finance and purchasing). Although there was no evidence of managed CoPs, a range of emergent/informal and cultivated CoPs were leveraged for a variety of purposes, including facilitating knowledge acquisition, enhancing absorptive capacity, and improving the firm’s ability to generate innovative solutions. Apprentice-based CoPs emerged that supported individual learning, and both intra and inter-organizational CoPs emerged to support a range of radical and incremental innovation activities. Social capital was leveraged in CoPs, generating trust and reciprocity between SMEs and customer organizations, thus enhancing knowledge-sharing and innovative potential. Finally, this research confirms that CoPs are the privileged locus for knowledge acquisition and innovation in science-based SMEs.

The literature on the financing of innovative projects follows two trends: one contemplates that either the prospective fundees or the potential funders use their preferences to choose the other party out of a range of theoretical possibilities; the other refers to project owners or investors that actively look for an “opportunity” and try to talk the other party into entering the funding relationship. These views, however, cannot explain several facts such as: why projects rejected by some funders are accepted by others, why IPOs and markets are not attractive to all players or why that changes over time and across settings, how can State funds support a sector across regions, or how players’ and setting features and time affect funding criteria. A critique of these explanations sees three main shortcomings: lack of balance (i.e.,one party’s initiative prevails), bias (i.e., criteria of the domineering party prevail), and disembeddedness (i.e., milieu factors and changes over time are ignored). We think that an analysis supported by a sectoral approach may contribute to build a more articulate, integral insight about the funding of innovation. The bio-pharmaceutical sector was chosen because it exhibits amazing complexity related to the heterogeneity embodied by a multifaceted network of players (e.g., universities, companies, potential financiers, regulation bodies), to the nature and development path of innovative projects, and to the competitive/collaborative interactions framed in a particular setting. Hence, a qualitative approach based on the case study of the sector is the choice for this study. Case data are collected through semi-structured interviews with thirty participants that have played different roles in organisations of the bio-pharmaceutical sector or are highly experienced VC practitioners. Our findings allow us to propose an enhanced characterisation of innovation financing by showing that: i) Investors’ understanding of a sector is essential for funding decisions and can be updated through networking; ii) Networks facilitate firms-funders contact, coordination among funders, enhancement of financiers’ knowledge about the sector, and venture owners’ knowledge of track record and potential benefits of investors; iii) Interactions involve other actors in different roles and support network-based learning; iv) Funding decisions are impacted by the geographic availability of sources/mechanisms of finance and by their readiness to fund specific venture stages; v) Investors’ specificities matter; vi) Trends of change impact the availability of funding sources/mechanisms since they imply a reorganisation of the relations and interactions among players in the sector. Therefore, we propose a systemic analytic explanation where the strategy of funders (generalist or dedicated), therefore their role in a particular setting, is essentially defined in relation to the structure and dynamics of their knowledge consolidation system; then, we derive a number of implications for firm managers, investors, and policy-makers. Finally, the main limitations of this work and some further questions for future research are stated.

<p>Resilience is studied as a systemic property in several disciplines such as engineering, psychology, systems biology, and ecological sciences. Yet, the system view on resilience is not pervasive in management science. This dissertation is on Enterprise Resilience, which is an emerging topic within the fields of organization and management science. Corporate enterprises are viewed as type 1 complex adaptive systems (CAS) operating within an external business environment. Thus, perturbations occurring in the environment affect enterprises, whose resilience then depends on their adaptive response to them. Therefore, the focus is on system perturbances and on investigating drivers of the enterprises’ adaptive response. As a result, enterprise resilience is more granularly defined as an enterprise’s ability to continually remain valuable to stakeholders by simultaneously managing short-term shocks and long-term stressors. This re-definition brings forth an actionable pathway to enterprise resilience- the pursuit of improved management of the enterprise’s risk and growth management functions.</p><p>Two challenging issues plaguing the risk and growth functions are the lack of a comprehensive understanding of risks (especially of unknowns) and their inter-connections, and a weak link between risk management and the enterprise’s growth strategy intended to continually and increasingly generate value. This work addresses both issues via the development of an enterprise-agnostic comprehensive risk typology, and by building a conceptual link between risk and growth strategy through the business model construct and its use in the study of repeatable patterns of innovation. Therefore, this work develops one pathway toward enterprise resilience i.e., via improved risk management and systematic growth management. Furthermore, it advances knowledge by bridging the theoretical conceptualization of an enterprise as a CAS1 into actionable methods for practice in the form of risk management tools and systematic innovation frameworks that aid the enterprise’s adaptive response.</p><p>The interdisciplinary dissertation develops hypotheses and employs appropriate qualitative and quantitative methods to test them. Overall, a theory building process is undertaken using the constructionist school of thought and using methods based in inductive logic such as the scholarship of integration, thematic analysis, and case studies. Additionally, to achieve wide and comprehensive coverage, data-driven quantitative methods using advanced computing such as data mining, machine learning, and natural language processing are employed.</p>

<p>This dissertation focuses on the creation of a paradigm shift in building innovation. Challenges in achieving building energy-efficiency at scale highlight the complexity of the building performance problem, which is embedded with social, cultural, physical, environmental, and economic factors. Traditional approaches to building design have difficulty accounting for these multi-faceted variables and related longitudinal barriers and intangible impacts. Firstly, key stakeholders and their economic constraints change throughout time, and this variability is not traditionally considered upfront or addressed throughout a building’s operation. Secondly, buildings have social, cultural, environmental and economic implications that are difficult to quantify and evaluate against strictly functional design objectives. Therefore, current deeply technical and often system-specific building design strategies could benefit from whole-building solutions that account for this complexity and enable a paradigm shift in design toward human-centered outcomes (i.e., well-being, health, financial sustainability) and effective (i.e., equitable and sustainable) buildings. </p> <p>To drive this shift, an impact-based innovation framework was employed to pursue system-level and ecosystem-level strategies to optimize longitudinal building value assessment and distribution. First, a grounded theory study was pursued which identified gaps in current design practice that miss underlying building subsystem interactions which influence building performance. A system-level taxonomy of the building was then defined, linking identified sub-system synergies to functional, emotional and social building benefits for inhabitants. Then, an exploratory mixed-methods study was pursued, yielding a longitudinal building value framework that helps characterize key stakeholders, building design choices, and shared efficacy metrics. Building on these inputs, a multi-stakeholder, longitudinal building value assessment model was developed. The model was tested on two residential building development scenarios, highlighting its ability to capture the true impact of buildings on affected stakeholders over time in terms of tangible and intangible building costs and benefits. Finally, business model innovation concepts were employed to identify specific changes in stakeholder value delivery and capture strategies that could redistribute building costs and benefits over time, and thereby facilitate a shift in the paradigm of design and value capture in the residential building industry. </p>