Search

The fourth industrial revolution has led to a tremendous increase in the demand for IT specialists. Until recently, this sector had traditionally recruited university graduates, but given the shortage of candidates, it has turned to individuals with vocational training, finding that they are capable of performing the same work with a similar level of efficiency. This article examines the role of IT technicians linked to VET, the objective being to obtain evidence that can help adapt the training system to the new economic model. This analysis is carried out as part of an action research process in Bilbao involving digital firms, VET institutions, policymakers, and the authors of the paper as researchers. Twenty-eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers of digital firms to determine the role and related skills (technical, transversal, and work-related organisation) of IT technicians. The findings demonstrate that IT technicians play a critical role in digital firms' business model and that their profile is currently on a par with those of university students. Also apparent is the necessity of establishing a shared language between firms, educational centres, and other agents in order to facilitate the adjustment of the training system in the fourth industrial revolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this paper is to contribute to the academic literature with an actionable framework of the roles of policy makers in entrepreneurial discovery processes (EDP) in the context of smart specialisation strategies (S3). The methodology used to define such roles is action research and, consequently, they are the result of learning and negotiation between policy makers and other territorial stakeholders facilitated by action researchers. The case study is based in the Bilbao Next Lab project (Bilbao, Basque region, Spain) where this methodology was chosen because policy makers wanted to explore EDP through collaborative governance. The key findings have been integrated in a framework named as the six roles of facilitative policymakers in EDPs. Its actionability is visible in the connection of the framework with the dilemmas, difficulties, and problems faced by policy makers when facilitating EDP processes. The framework is presented together with a discussion on the relevance of including tailored capacity development processes for policymakers as part of the EDP. The paper concludes with a final reflection on how the need for a facilitative role of policymakers also requires a transformation of research methodologies by social researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides a better understanding of how governance of Industry 4.0 policies can make knowledge services accessible for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The rationale is that when SMEs cannot access specific Industry 4.0 knowledge in the market, then governments and university social researchers can collaborate on developing new territorial governance to make such knowledge accessible. The case study here described spotlights how county development agencies and vocational training centres, with more affordable prices than knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS) and more capillarity than university and technology centres, collaborate with government and social researchers to develop governance of Industry 4.0. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to propose an analytical framework in which to study ambidexterity in the management of policy networks. The paper is inspired by the concept of organizational ambidexterity in the public sector (Smith and Umans, 2015). By focusing on policy networks fostered by public administration with the aim of supporting small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) innovation, the paper elaborates on the links between firm innovation and performance and regional development. The cases analyzed are policy networks fostered by two publicly owned county development agencies in the Basque Country (Spain). An analytical framework emerges from bridging the gap between theory and practice. By understanding ambidexterity as a dynamic capability, the authors found that key ambidexterity drivers are related to network features (motivation to balance exploration and exploitation and diversity in terms of participants) and the individual feature of diversity within the network management group. However, other individual characteristics (leadership style) and territorial features (local institutional capacity) did not provide conclusive insights, calling for a deeper analysis and complex models to capture specific nuances. Design/methodology/approach: The method used in the empirical part of the paper is the case study, as it considers the contextual conditions pertaining to a phenomenon (Yin, 2009) and helps understand present dynamics in specific contexts (Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 2009). Flyvbjerg (2006) examines common misunderstandings about case studies to conclude that social science may be strengthened by the execution of greater number of good case studies. Following his arguments, the authors consider that practical knowledge is also valuable together with theory, that is why the framework is not derived exclusively form theory but from the interaction and mutual influence of theory and practice. Findings: The case studies lead to a discussion on the effect of network, territorial and individual characteristics (including management/facilitation modes) on network outcomes, including innovation performance of firms and network sustainability. Additionally, these cases show the importance of different factors as necessary conditions and key discriminants when supporting ambidextrous networks. The case analysis and the integration of the theory in this analysis allow observing the evolution of both networks, developing some conclusions on the core factors that influenced these trajectories, thus proposing an analytical framework. Specifically, it can be seen that some of the factors conditioned the ambidextrous strategy of the network. Practical implications: The main implication of the paper in practice is that the concept of ambidexterity and the framework developed to understand some of its features are a useful tool to diagnose policy networks. The impact in society inspired in this implication is that authors, through the discussion workshops mentioned in the methodology section, have helped the community of policy network managers in Gipuzkoa reflect and improve their strategies and consider the potential of not exclusively focusing on exploration or exploitation. Consequently, the impact on society, in this case on policy networks in the region, has gone beyond the cases studied. Originality/value: The paper proposes the concept of ambidexterity as one that helps analyze the ability of policy networks to foster SMEs innovation. Managerial literature has extensively analyzed the importance of modes to foster ambidexterity within organizations (Gibson and Birkenshaw, 2004; He and Wong, 2004; Levinthal and March, 1993; Lubatkin et al., 2006) and also its individual dimension (Volery et al., 2015). Managerial focus on policy networks and its link to organizational ambidexterity thus remain understudied. Although private sector literature has explored both concepts, the relation between them has not been analyzed (Smith and Umans, 2015). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal of Action Research is the property of Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal of Action Research is the property of Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Since the concept of Smart Specialization was launched, an effort has been made to clarify and establish criteria for its implementation. Part of the difficulties in implementing Research and Innovation Smart Specialization Strategies (RIS3) is their emphasis on bottom-up approaches, which are required because there are public and private stakeholders that are better positioned than governments to find the domains in which the region is likely to excel. Regions must shift towards a new generation of industrial policy and the difficulties for advancing in this direction are already visible. Designing and implementing a smart specialisation strategy at regional level: Some open questions. The centrality of entrepreneurial discovery in building and implementing a smart specialisation strategy. Efforts to implement smart specialization in practice – leading unlike horses to the water. The paper is based on four cases related to governance and learning for smart specialization in the Basque Country (Spain) and presents three main lessons learnt. The first has to do with connections between regional and sub-regional governments in order to construct networks of territorial actors that can act as the senses of governments in the territory. The second is about the challenge of handling complexity and conflict and the third is about the integration of social researchers in RIS3 processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores how social innovation can be facilitated, a subject that has not been addressed adequately by literature. The results identify five key factors based on a local network developed in Goierri County (Basque Country, Spain). The network was created to foster local economic development through an action research process. The engagement of the author in this action research process permitted her to adopt an 'inside-out' position that enabled her to explore similarities in the assumptions that support social innovation and action research. Through an analysis of this process, the nature of the facilitator's knowing how is made explicit in understanding how social innovation is facilitated. The main argument is that action research can facilitate social innovation. The process approach that is applied for this analysis increases the reflexive capacity of the author, leading to a contribution of both new theoretical insight and new practical knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]