Accidental Innovation: Supporting Valuable Unpredictability in the Creative Process

Historical accounts of human achievement suggest that accidents can play an important role in innovation. In this paper, we seek to contribute to an understanding of how digital systems might support valuable unpredictability in innovation processes by examining how innovators who obtain value from accidents integrate unpredictability into their work. We describe an inductive, grounded theory project, based on 20 case studies, that looks into the conditions under which people who make things keep their work open to accident, the degree to which they rely on accidents in their work, and how they incorporate accidents into their deliberate processes and arranged surroundings. By comparing makers working in varied conditions, we identify specific factors (e.g., technologies, characteristics of technologies) that appear to support accidental innovation. We show that makers in certain specified conditions not only remain open to accident but also intentionally design their processes and surroundings to invite and exploit valuable accidents. Based on these findings, we offer advice for the design of digital systems to support innovation processes that can access valuable unpredictability.

[1]  S. Shane.  Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities , 2000 .

[2]  Les Gasser,et al.  A Design Theory for Systems That Support Emergent Knowledge Processes , 2002, MIS Q..

[3]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[4]  Douglas B. Holt,et al.  How Brands Become Icons: The Principles of Cultural Branding , 2004 .

[5]  R. Cooper,et al.  New Products: What Separates Winners from Losers? , 1987 .

[6]  Richard J. Boland,et al.  Managing as Designing , 2004 .

[7]  William J Mitchell.  BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: Constructing Complexity in the Digital Age , 2004, Science.

[8]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[9]  Sten Jönsson,et al.  Designing semiconfusing information systems for changing organizations , 1982, DATB.

[10]  Ben Jonson,et al.  Design ideation: the conceptual sketch in the digital age , 2005 .

[11]  Robert D. Austin,et al.  Artful Making: What Managers Need to Know About How Artists Work , 2003 .

[12]  Lynne P. Cooper,et al.  Knowledge Reuse for Innovation , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[13]  J. Schumpeter,et al.  The Theory of Economic Development , 2017 .

[14]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  Research on the management of innovation : the Minnesota studies , 1991 .

[15]  Kathryn Henderson,et al.  The Role of Material Objects in the Design Process: A Comparison of Two Design Cultures and How They Contend with Automation , 1998 .

[16]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[17]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Managing as Designing: Lessons for Organization Leaders from the Design Practice of Frank O. Gehry , 2008, Design Issues.

[18]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[19]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[20]  R. Grant,et al.  Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration , 2022 .

[21]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Strategy Formation in an Adhocracy. , 1985 .

[22]  Saras D. Sarasvathy,et al.  Effectuation , 2008 .

[23]  Stefan H. Thomke,et al.  Experimentation Matters: Unlocking the Potential of New Technologies for Innovation , 2003 .

[24]  H. Chaiklin,et al.  The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity , 2005 .

[25]  Gabriel Szulanski.  The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness , 2000 .

[26]  J. March.  Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[27]  Rajiv Sabherwal,et al.  Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contingency Perspective , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[28]  R. Cooper,et al.  An Investigation into the New Product Process: Steps, Deficiencies, and Impact , 1986 .

[29]  Stephen Brown,et al.  Science, serendipity and the contemporary marketing condition , 2005 .

[30]  Kent L. Beck,et al.  Extreme programming explained - embrace change , 1990 .

[31]  W. W. Royce,et al.  Managing the development of large software systems , 1970 .

[32]  Michael Schrage,et al.  Serious Play: How the World's Best Companies Simulate to Innovate , 1999 .

[33]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Creativity support tools: accelerating discovery and innovation , 2007, CACM.

[34]  H. D. Thomas,et al.  SUCCESSFUL KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS , 1998 .

[35]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[36]  Kathryn Henderson,et al.  Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering , 1991 .

[37]  James A. Highsmith,et al.  Adaptive Software Development: A Collaborative Approach to Managing Complex Systems , 1999 .

[38]  L. Argote,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A BASIS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN FIRMS , 2000 .

[39]  Henry Mintzberg.  The rise and fall of strategic planning , 1993 .

[40]  P. Andel.  Anatomy of the Unsought Finding. Serendipity: Orgin, History, Domains, Traditions, Appearances, Patterns and Programmability , 1994, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[41]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry , 1995 .

[42]  R. W. Zmud,et al.  DSS implementation activities, problem domain characteristics and DSS success , 1993 .

[43]  Walter Bradford Cannon.  The Role of Chance in Discovery , 1940 .

[44]  B. Glaser.  Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory , 1978 .

[45]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[46]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving , 1989, Distributed Artificial Intelligence.

[47]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Codex, memex, genex: the pursuit of transformational technologies , 1998, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[48]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Managing New Product Definition in Highly Dynamic Environments , 1998 .

[49]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  Serendipity in Entrepreneurship , 2009 .

[50]  Peter T. Ward,et al.  Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance , 2003 .

[51]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Special Issue: Organizational Design: From Organization Design to Organization Designing , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[52]  Ernst Mach,et al.  On the Part Played by Accident in Invention and Discovery. , 1896 .

[53]  Omar El Sawy,et al.  Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[54]  Dov Te'eni,et al.  From generative fit to generative capacity: exploring an emerging dimension of information systems design and task performance , 2009, Inf. Syst. J..

[55]  S. Kauffman,et al.  Towards a general theory of adaptive walks on rugged landscapes. , 1987, Journal of theoretical biology.

[56]  Eric Bonabeau,et al.  A more rational approach to new-product development. , 2008, Harvard business review.