@article {1197,
	title = {A Practice Method for Studying Creative Communities},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {11/2018},
	pages = {22-31},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Explaining innovation {\textendash} even merely spotting it actually happening {\textendash} is difficult. In this article, I introduce an industry-friendly approach that will enable practitioners and researchers alike to observe, interpret, and understand the different types of creativities {\textendash} the raw materials necessary for innovation {\textendash} that happen in creative communities. The Practice Method for Studying Creative Communities (PMSCC) is based on theories developed by Nonaka and Takeuchi. However, unlike mainstream practice-oriented methods, the PMSCC does not necessitate the use of theory-heavy conceptualizations; instead, it focuses on the everyday, creative micro-interactions in communities. As I describe in this article, the PMSCC offers practitioners and researchers an effective way to gain new insights into an otherwise relatively opaque process. Besides outlining the method, I also present results from a research project utilizing the PMSCC, showing how the method can produce worthwhile findings, foster new insights, and help practitioners hone their creative processes.},
	keywords = {communities, creativity, innovation, practice, research method, teamwork},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1197},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1197},
	author = {Pekka Buttler}
}
@article {919,
	title = {Business, Innovation, and Knowledge Ecosystems: How They Differ and How to Survive and Thrive within Them},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {08/2015},
	pages = {17-24},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In management studies, the ecosystem metaphor is often utilized without clear definition and, thereby, several partially overlapping concepts such as industrial, business, service, innovation, and knowledge ecosystems have been introduced. The purpose of this conceptual article is to go beyond the confusion to define what is meant by different concepts regarding an ecosystem and especially describe the relationships between the three different ecosystem types: business, innovation, and knowledge ecosystems. The article contributes to the literature by describing how the ecosystem types differ in terms of their outcomes, interactions, logic of action, and actor roles. The results show that the three ecosystem types are interconnected from the viewpoint of the ecosystem actor. For practitioners, the article sheds more light on how the rules of the game (i.e., the logic of action) differ in the different types of ecosystems and demonstrates that different models are needed in order to operate in different ecosystems.},
	keywords = {business ecosystem, communities, conceptual paper, ecosystem, innovation ecosystem, knowledge ecosystem, logic of action, man-made ecosystem, platforms},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/919},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/919},
	author = {Katri Valkokari}
}
@article {914,
	title = {The Creativity Canvas: A Business Model for Knowledge and Idea Management},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {07/2015},
	pages = {50-58},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Innovation depends on ideas generated through creativity and the knowledge and research that make it possible to put ideas to work. However, these two activities are very dependent on the people who perform them. As demonstrated by a pilot project realized at Hydro-Qu{\'e}bec{\textquoteright}s research institute (IREQ), any approach that does not take this understanding into account is doomed to failure. This article proposes that what must be developed is a knowledge and idea management system designed as a coherent ecosystem that takes all controlling factors into account and is based on stakeholder interest and preferences. This ecosystem is the result of a meticulous design of each of the elements that must generally be taken into account in a business model. A business model approach includes not only developing a value proposition for knowledge and idea management that suits the target clientele but also a good understanding of the resources and activities required to deliver this value proposition and especially the ways to finance them. Key to the development of such an ecosystem is the creation of fully functional innovation communities, which are responsible for building up and nurturing their ideas and knowledge assets and getting value out of them.},
	keywords = {business model, business model canvas, communities, creativity, ecosystem, ideas, knowledge, R\&D, research institute, technological innovation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/914},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/914},
	author = {Raouf Naggar}
}
@article {758,
	title = {Overcoming Barriers to Collaboration in an Open Source Ecosystem},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {01/2014},
	pages = {18-27},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Leveraging open source practices provides value to businesses when entrepreneurs and managers understand how to collaborate effectively in an open source ecosystem. However, the complex mix of different actors and varying barriers to effective collaboration in the ecosystem pose a substantial challenge. How can a business create and capture value if it depends on effective collaboration among these different groups? In this article, we review the published research on open source collaboration and reveal insights that will be beneficial to entrepreneurs and managers. We organize the published research into four streams based upon the following actor groups: i) governance actors, ii) competitors, iii) complementors, and iv) the core community. Then, through induction and synthesis, we identify barriers to collaboration, first by ecosystem and then by actor group. Finally, we offer six recommendations for identifying and overcoming barriers to collaboration in an open source ecosystem.},
	keywords = {business ecosystem, collaboration, collaboration barriers, communities, competitors, complementors, core community, governance, open source},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/758},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/758},
	author = {Derek Smith and Asrar Alshaikh and Rawan Bojan and Anish Kak and Mohammad Mehdi Gharaei Manesh}
}
@article {654,
	title = {Editorial: Platforms, Communities, and Business Ecosystems (February 2013)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {02/2013},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {business ecosystems, communities, platforms, technology entrepreneurship},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/654},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/654},
	author = {Chris McPhee and Steven Muegge}
}
