Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:14:55.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eco-innovation and knowledge management: issues and organizational challenges to small and medium enterprises

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2019

Ahmed Cherifi ,
Patrick M'Bassègue ,
Mickaël Gardoni ,
Rémy Houssin  and
Jean Renaud
Ahmed Cherifi*
Affiliation:
Ecole de Technologie Supérieure, 1100 Notre-Dame Street West, H3C 1K3, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Patrick M'Bassègue
Affiliation:
École Polytechnique, Montréal, Canada
Mickaël Gardoni
Affiliation:
Ecole de Technologie Supérieure, 1100 Notre-Dame Street West, H3C 1K3, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Rémy Houssin
Affiliation:
Laboratoire ICube - UMR7357, INSA, Strasbourg, France
Jean Renaud
Affiliation:
Laboratoire ICube - UMR7357, INSA, Strasbourg, France
*
Author for correspondence: Ahmed Cherifi, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The proposed methodology is based on a (global and multi-criteria) simplified environmental but thorough assessment. In this stage we do not directly give the solution to designers. It will therefore translate the results of evaluation design axes, but in general, the lines proposed are inconsistent or contradictory. Therefore, what we find is a compromise given to the solution. The challenge we are facing in an industrial reality is that one should not go for a compromise solution. TRIZ (Teorija Reshenija Izobretateliskih Zadatch) or the theory of solving inventive problems, in the field, will be reformulated and go through the contradiction matrix and then intervene with the principles of interpretation resolutions to give possible solutions. To assist small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in their product development, the objective of this paper is to propose a methodological approach named Ecatriz, that will allow us to achieve our eco-innovative goal. The applicability of this method is justified by the many contradictions in the choices in a study of the life cycle. As a starting point, a qualitative multi-criteria matrix will allow the prioritization of all impacts on the environment. A customized implementation of the inventive TRIZ (Teorija Reshenija Izobretateliskih Zadatch, Russian acronym for theory of solving inventive problems) principles will help us choose eco-innovative solutions. To that end, we have created a new approach named Ecatriz (ecological approach TRIZ), based on a new contradiction matrix. It was tested in various contexts, such as the “24 h of Innovation” competition and eco-innovative patents.

Keywords

Eco-designeco-innovationknowledgeTriz, Eca
Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 33 , Special Issue 2: Knowledge Engineering and Management Applied to Innovation , May 2019 , pp. 129 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albers, JA and Brewer, S (2003) Knowledge management and the innovation process: the eco-innovation model. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice 5.Google Scholar
Altshuller, G. (1984) Creativity as an Exact Science: The Theory of the Solution of Inventive Problems (Translated by Williams, A.). New York, NY: Gordon & Breach, ISBN: 0-677-21230-5.Google Scholar
Baroulaki, E and Veshagh, A (2007) Eco-Innovation: Product Design and Innovation for the Environment. In Proceedings of the 14th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering. Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan, June 11–13.Google Scholar
Ben Moussa, F-Z, Rasovska, I, Dubois, S, De Guio, R and Benmoussa, R (2017) Reviewing the use of the theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ) in green supply chain problems. Journal of Cleaner Production 142, 2677–2692.Google Scholar
Carrillo-Hermosilla, J, Del Río, P and Könnölä, T (2010) Diversity of eco-innovations: reflection rom selected case studies. Journal of Cleaner Production 18, 1073–1083.Google Scholar
Chechurin, L and Borgianni, Y (2016) Understanding TRIZ through the review of top cited publications. Computers in Industry 82, 119–134.Google Scholar
Cheng, JY and Jahau, LC. (2011). Accelerating preliminary eco-innovation design for products that integrate case-based reasoning and the TRIZ method. Journal of Cleaner Production. 19. 998e100.Google Scholar
Cherifi, A, Gardoni, M and Dubois, M (2015) Methodology for innovative ecodesign based on TRIZ. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing 9, 167–175.Google Scholar
Cherifi, A, M'Bassègue, P, Gardoni, M, Renaud, J and Houssin, R (2017) Eco-innovation and Knowledge management: Issues and organizational challenges to small and medium enterprises. ICED17:21st Conference Design of Engineering Design. pp. 21–25 August 2017. Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
Chulvi, V and Vidal, R (2011) Usefulness of evolution lines in eco-design. Procedia Engineering 9, 135–144.Google Scholar
Dalmanco, G, Maehler, AE, Trevisan, M and Schiavini, JM (2017) The Use of Knowledge Management Practices by Brazilian Stratup Companies. RAI, 14, 3, July–September, pp. 226–234.Google Scholar
Dangelico, RM and Pontrandolfo, P (2010) From green product definitions and classifications to the green option matrix. Journal of Cleaner Production 18, 1608–1628.Google Scholar
Diego A. de, JP, ten Caten, CS, Navas, HVG, Jung, CF, Cruz-Machado, V and Lopes, GHN (2016) Systematic eco-innovation in Lean PSS environment: an integrated model. Procedia CIRP 47 , 466–471.Google Scholar
Eric, P and René, M (2013) Traverse de chemin de fer. Publication patent. No. EP 2539508A1.2013. Available at http://www.google.com/patents/EP2539508A1?cl=frGoogle Scholar
Falk, J and Ryan, C (2001) Inventing a sustainable future: Australia and the challenge of eco-innovation. Futures 39, 215–222.Google Scholar
Filippi, S and Barattin, D (2015) Exploiting TRIZ tools in interaction design. Procedia Engineering 131, 71–85.Google Scholar
Hede, S, Ferreira, PV, Lopes, MN and Rocha, LA (2015) TRIZ and the paradigms of social sustainability in product development endeavors. Procedia Engineering 131, 522–538.Google Scholar
Houssin, R and Coulibaly, A (2011) An approach to solve contradiction problems for the safety integration in innovative design process. Computers in Industry 62, 398–406.Google Scholar
Jahau Lewis, C and Chih Chen, L (2001) Development of product green innovation design method. Proceedings Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, pp. 168–173. IEEE. doi: 10.1109/ECODIM.2001.992340.Google Scholar
Kallel, WS (2010) Développement d'une méthode d'eco-innovation: Eco-Mal'in. Doctoral thesis. ENSAM-0058.Google Scholar
Klemmer, P, Lehr, U and Lobbe, K (1999) Environmental Innovation. Volume 3 of publications from a Joint Project on Innovation Impacts of Environmental Policy Instruments. Synthesis Report of a project commissioned by the German Ministry of Research and Technology (BMBF), Analytica-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Mansoor, M, Mariun, N and AbdulWahab, NI (2017) Innovating problem solving for sustainable green roofs: Potential usage of TRIZ – Theory of inventive problem solving. Ecological Engineering 99, 209–221.Google Scholar
Matthieu, AL (2008) L’éco innovation ou la contribution de la firme au développement durable dans sa sphère d'influence. XVIIème Conférence de l'Association Internationale de Management Stratégique, Nice, 28–30 mai 2008.Google Scholar
Nagano, MS, Vick, TE and Moura Madrika, LM (2017) Support of knowledge management in eco-innovation. RISTI 22, 37–56.Google Scholar
Nonaka, I and Takeuchi, H (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Olivier, L and Brunot, T (2007) Semelle pour chaussure, Publication Patent. No. WO2007036637 A1.2007. Available at http://www.google.com/patents/EP1928277A1?cl=fr.FrenchGoogle Scholar
Prax, J-Y (2003) Le manuel du knowledge management. Une approche de 2ème génération. Dunod, Paris.Google Scholar
Rennings, K (2000) Redefining innovation: eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics. Journal of Ecological Economics 32, 319–332.Google Scholar
Russo, D, Regazzoni, D and Montecchi, T (2009) Eco-design with TRIZ laws of evolution. Procedia Engineering 9, 311–322.Google Scholar
Russo, D, Rizzi, C and Montelisciani, G (2014) Inventive guidelines for a TRIZ-based eco-design matrix. Journal of Cleaner Production 76, 95–105Google Scholar
Russo, D., Schöfer, M and Bersano, G (2015) Supporting ECO-innovation in SMEs by TRIZ Eco-guidelines. Procedia Engineering 131, 831–839.Google Scholar
Tatiana, RC (2007) L’écoconception dans les PME:les mécanismes du cheval de Troie méthodologique et du choix de trajectoires comme vecteurs d'intégration de l'environnement en conception. Doctoral thesis. Laboratoire ISMAA. Supmeca Toulon.Google Scholar
Tyl, B (2011) L'apport de la créativité dans les processus d’éco-innovation. Proposition de l'outil Eco-Asit pour favoriser l'idéation de systèmes durables. Doctoral thesis. Bordeaux.Google Scholar
Vidal, V, Salmeron, JL, Mena, A and Chulvi, V (2015) Fuzzy cognitive Map-based selection of TRIZ (theory of inventive problem solving) trends for eco-innovation of ceramic industry products. Journal of Cleaner Production 107, 202–214Google Scholar
Vincent, B (2007) Céramique à base de mâchefers d'incinération d'ordures ménagères. Available at http://www.google.com/patents/EP1215182B1?cl=fr.FrenchGoogle Scholar
Wang, M, Zhang, D and Zhang, L (2015) Introduction of TRIZ theory for the conflict-solving in the building energy and environment management system innovation. Procedia Engineering 121, 2232–2239.Google Scholar