Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:20:46.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A MODEL OF THE INNOVATIVE PURPOSE FOR RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION: TOWARDS DESIGN-BASED CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Part of: Socio-technical Issues in Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

J. Lévêque ,
K. Levillain  and
B. Segrestin
J. Lévêque*
Affiliation:
Mines ParisTech, France
K. Levillain
Affiliation:
Mines ParisTech, France
B. Segrestin
Affiliation:
Mines ParisTech, France
*
*[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Evolutions in corporate law recently introduced an optional commitment mechanism in the corporate contract: a purpose. Its writing is a pivotal but is yet puzzling from a design perspective. Especially it raises questions about how that could help shaping a responsible governance model for innovation. Our paper builds on an extended-decision framework to propose a formal model of how a stated-purpose shapes the decision situation. Our results highlight several purpose formulation strategies and finally a typology regarding how robustness to changes is embedded in the process is proposed.

Keywords

purposeresponsible governancesocial responsibilitydecision makingdesign theory
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 1999 - 2008
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Agogué, M. (2013), L'innovation orpheline. Presses des MINES, Paris.Google Scholar
Alvarez, S.A. and Barney, J.B. (2005), “How Do Entrepreneurs Organize Firms Under Conditions of Uncertainty?”, Journal of Management, Vol. 31, pp. 776–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berthet, E.T., Segrestin, B. and Hickey, G.M. (2016), “Considering agro-ecosystems as ecological funds for collective design: New perspectives for environmental policy”, Environmental science & policy, Vol. 61, pp. 108–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coutts, E.R. et al. (2017), “Is product design evil?”, in: DS 87-1 (ICED 17) Vol 1: Resource Sensitive Design Vancouver, Canada, 21-25.08. 2017. pp. 209–218.Google Scholar
Gillier, T., Kazakci, A.O. and Piat, G. (2012), “The generation of common purpose in innovation partnerships”, European Journal of Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601061211243684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillier, T. and Piat, G. (2008), “Co-designing broad scope of technology-based applications in an exploratory partnership”, in: DS 48: Proceedings DESIGN 2008, Dubrovnik, Croatia. pp. 927–934.Google Scholar
Grandori, A. (2013), Epistemic Economics and Organization: Forms of Rationality and Governance for a Discovery Oriented Economy, Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandori, A. and Furlotti, M. (2019), “Contracting for the unknown and the logic of innovation”, European Management Review, Vol. 16, pp. 413–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gravier, M.J. and Swartz, S.M. (2009), “The dark side of innovation: Exploring obsolescence and supply chain evolution for sustainment-dominated systems”, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, Vol. 20, pp. 87–102.Google Scholar
Hart, O. and Moore, J. (1990), “Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm”, Journal of political economy, pp. 1119–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2009), “CK design theory: an advanced formulation”, Research in engineering design, Vol. 19, pp. 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiller, J.S. (2013), “The Benefit Corporation and Corporate Social Responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 118, pp. 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1580-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooge, S. and Dalmasso, C. (2015), “Breakthrough R&D stakeholders: The challenges of legitimacy in highly uncertain projects”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 46, pp. 54–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, J. and Cardin, M.-A. (2015), “Generating flexibility in the design of engineering systems to enable better sustainability and lifecycle performance”, Res Eng Design, Vol. 26, pp. 121–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-015-0189-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husted, B.W. and De Jesus Salazar, J. (2006), “Taking Friedman Seriously: Maximizing Profits and Social Performance*”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43, pp. 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00583.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaksson, O. et al. (2019), Perspectives on Innovation: The Role of Engineering Design.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karnani, A. (2011), “CSR Stuck in a Logical Trap: A Response to Pietra Rivoli and Sandra Waddock's ‘First They Ignore You…’: The Time-Context Dynamic and Corporate Responsibility”, California Management Review, Vol. 53, pp. 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kokshagina, O. et al. (2012), “Risk management strategies in a highly uncertain environment: Understanding the role of common unknown”, Presented at the IPDM, p. 26.Google Scholar
Le Masson, P. et al. (2019), “Designing Decisions in the Unknown: A Generative Model”, European Management Review, Vol. 16, pp. 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Masson, P. and Weil, B. (2014), “Réinventer l'entreprise: la gestion collégiale des inconnus communs non appropriables”.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Masson, P. et al. (2012), “Why are they not locked in waiting games?”, Unlocking rules and the ecology of concepts in the semiconductor industry. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 24, pp. 617–630.Google Scholar
Levillain, K., Agogué, M. and Berthet, E. (2014), “Framing a generative common purpose: a critical skill for social entrepreneurs to achieve social innovations”, Presented at the ISPIM Americas.Google Scholar
Levillain, K. and Segrestin, B. (2019), “From primacy to purpose commitment: How emerging profit-with-purpose corporations open new corporate governance avenues”, European Management Journal, Vol. 37, pp. 637–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levillain, K., Segrestin, B. and Hatchuel, A. (2019), Profit-with-Purpose Corporations: An Innovation in Corporate Law to Meet Contemporary CSR Challenges, Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Loch, C.H., DeMeyer, A. and Pich, M. (2011), Managing the unknown: A new approach to managing high uncertainty and risk in projects, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Mac Cormac, S. and Haney, H. (2012), “New Corporate Forms : One Viable Solution to Advancing Environmental Sustainability”, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, C., Cohen, S.R. and Fox, T. (2014), “Profit-with-Purpose Businesses - Subject paper of the Mission Alignment Working Group”, Social Impact Investment Taskforce, G8.Google Scholar
Sandberg, J. (2011), “Socially Responsible Investment and Fiduciary Duty: Putting the Freshfields Report into Perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 101, pp. 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0714-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A.G. and Voegtlin, C. (2018), “Corporate Governance for Responsible Innovation: Approaches to Corporate Governance and Their Implications for Sustainable Development. Academy of Management Perspectives”.Google Scholar
Schulte, J. and Hallstedt, S. (2017), “Challenges and preconditions to build capabilities for sustainable product design”, in: DS 87-1 ICED 17 Vancouver, Canada, 21-25.08. 2017. pp. 001–010.Google Scholar
Segrestin, B. (2005), “Partnering to explore: The Renault-Nissan Alliance as a forerunner of new cooperative patterns”, Research policy, Vol. 34, pp. 657–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H.A. (1976), “From substantive to procedural rationality”, in: Kastelein, T.J., Kuipers, S.K., Nijenhuis, W.A., Wagenaar, G.R. (Eds.), 25 Years of Economic Theory. Springer US, Boston, MA, pp. 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wald, A. (1950), Statistical decision functions, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Winkelman, P.M. (2013), “Sustainability, design and engineering values, in: DS 75-2: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13) ”, Design for Harmonies, Vol. 2: Design Theory and Research Methodology, Seoul, Korea, 19-22.08. 2013.Google Scholar