Strategies for Fostering Local New Service Development Teams in CapGemini and the MINALOGIC Cluster in Grenoble
In a world where innovation is seen as the source of progress and competitiveness, how does one innovate in a sustainable way? It is possible to consider this question in two different ways. The first way focuses on businesses and considers how these innovate. The second focuses on the industrial district or cluster and examines how the whole network of stakeholders who constitute the local “eco-system” innovates. There is no perfect superposition with regards to these two views, but rather an intersection. In this context, what is the nature of this convergence in interest and how can it be strengthened? This is the underlying question this chapter poses. Put simply, for any business, as for any district, the innovation equation can be expressed in the following way: resources – a “stockpile of technologies” and expertise – plus the ability to exploit these resources in order to transform them into innovative products and services, adding value for customers. This chapter deals with the second member of the equation: the ability to exploit the resources in question, in a context where the associated models of organization are undergoing rapid transformation. Actually, in companies – regardless of business type: large, small or emerging – and also in districts, new models of organization have appeared for the transformation of resources into innovative products and services. These require, for their part, the implementation of new strategies in order to strengthen their ability to innovate in a situation of increased competition, linked to the acceleration of globalization.
KeywordsProject Team District Level Development Team Business Unit Resource Center
- MATRI, a project financed by the European Commission in the context of the Article 6 program on the reorganization of the Social European Fund.Google Scholar
- Key factors in the success of the MINALOGIC competitiveness pole: a project financed by the French Minister of Industry and Research.Google Scholar
- Jean-Denis Culie, Christian Defélix, Didier Retour, Annick Valette, “Les pôles de compétitivité, laboratoires d’innovation en Ressources Humaines ?”, XVII AGRH Congress, “Le travail au coeur de la GRH”, Lille IAE and Reims Management School, 16-17 November 2006.Google Scholar
- Courlet C. (2008), L’Economie Territoriale, Grenoble, Presses Universitaires de Grenoble, p.44.Google Scholar
- Sanchez R., Mahoney J.T., (1996) “Modularity, Flexibility and Knowledge Management in Product and Organisation Design”, Strategic Management Journal 17, 63–76.Google Scholar
- Cross R., Prusak L.(2002) “The people who make organizations Go – or Stop”, Harvard Business Review, June 2002, p.105.Google Scholar
- Oswald J. (2006) “Developing Absorptive Capacity in Mature Organizations: The Change Agent’s Role”,– Management Learning 2006; 37; p.355Google Scholar
- Michel Callon, M.C., (1988), “A quoi tient le succès des innovations?”, Gérer et Comprendre, Annales des Mines Google Scholar
- Tidd J.J., Bessant J., Pavitt K. (2001), Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organisational Change, Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Chesbrough H.W. (2003), “The Era of Open Innovation”, MIT Sloan Management Review, SpringGoogle Scholar
- Baron X., Bruggeman F. (2009) “Réinventer la GTEC en temps de crise”, www.amnyos.com/Reinventer-la-Gestion-Territoriale.html.
- Veltz P. (2008), La grande transition. La France dans le monde qui vient, Paris, SeuilGoogle Scholar
- Moingeon B. Edmondson A. (1996), Organizational Learning and Competitive Advantage, London, Sage.Google Scholar