+ All Categories
Home > Software > Manchester 2009

Manchester 2009

Date post: 05-Jul-2015
Category:
Upload: gualtiero-fantoni
View: 74 times
Download: 2 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
The presentation illustrates a novel model for collaborative crowdsourcing and other collaborative environments where IPR tracking and protection constitutes a key issue. After a comparison between different approaches for innovation and R&D, the new architecture is introduced, with a focus on problem solving activities. Particular attention is given to the relationships (scientific, social, economical, legal) between firms and participants to the sessions and among participants themselves. The study also investigates the complex IPR framework necessary to involve firms and to promote users’ participation exploiting simultaneously collaboration and meritocracy. The paper also presents an original software application tool for tracing and tracking the IPR generated in collaborative and Open Innovation environments. The software’s use and results are demonstrated through a case study.
25
IPR MANAGEMENT IN COLLABORATIVE CROVDSOURCING R. Apreda, G. Fantoni, M. Manenti, P. Valleri A. Bonaccorsi INNO-Grips project Manchester, January 26th and 27th 2009
Transcript
Page 1: Manchester 2009

IPR MANAGEMENT INCOLLABORATIVE CROVDSOURCING

R. Apreda, G. Fantoni, M. Manenti, P. Valleri

A. Bonaccorsi

INNO-Grips project

Manchester, January 26th and 27th 2009

Page 2: Manchester 2009
Page 3: Manchester 2009

The scenario

3

• Globalization

• Innovation

• Complexity

• Trasversality

• Integrated design

• ICT Tools

Creativity HABITATCreativity ROOM

Knowledge ROOM

MIND BUILDING

Technology museumTouch and experience!

Integrated methodologies

Immersive environmentVoice note approach

Paradox environmentCreative food

Intriguing gamesTrain your brain!

Creative community is an organismLiving LAB

Differences and diversity“Brain transfer”

Creativity SANDPIT

Rapid PrototypingSelective Laser Sintering

Shape Deposition Manufacturing

Virtual Team

Living Labs

University

Company

Plant1

Plant2

Individual

Page 4: Manchester 2009

Company B employees

Consulting CompanyPublic

Institutions

Free Lance 2

Free Lance 1

OBSTACLES:• Legal• Economical• Temporal

• Students • Ph.D.s• Researchers• Professos

Plant 1Plant 2 = Human Resource

Virtual Team

Page 5: Manchester 2009

Wait for the UNEXPECTED

5

10

15

Needspotting

Solutionspotting

Mentalinvention

Randomevents

Marketresearch

Trendfollowing

! SERENDIPITY !

Goldenberg, J., Lehmann, D. and Mazursky, D., (2001), The Idea Itself and the Circumstances of Its Emergence as Predictors of New Product Success, Management Science 47, n.1: 69-84.

Page 6: Manchester 2009

Adapted from “Lee Fleming, Perfecting Cross-pollination. Harvard Business review September 2004”.

High Low

Low

High

Val

ue

of

inn

ova

tio

n BREAKTHROUGH

AVERAGE

INSIGNIFICANT

Alignment of team members’ disciplines

Diversity & Breakthrough

Page 7: Manchester 2009

Type Advantages DrawbacksStandard approach Internal know how High cost, efficiency

Outsourcing Reduction of costs Know how outsourced, dissatisfaction of external workers

Crowdsourcing Tremendous cost reduction, pay per solution

One win, all the others lose

Open Source Collaborative environment

Open Innovation Collaborative environment Voluntary contribution not business oriented

Collaborative Crowdsourcing

Pay per solution, collaborative environment, high effectiveness and efficiency (time and cost reduction)

Management of collaboration and contracts, IPR and revenues sharing

Advantages and drawbacks of different approaches to R&D AND innovation

Page 8: Manchester 2009

Type Economical aspects of the IPR

Company’s employee (his activity is in design or R&D)

Inventive activity is part of the worker’s contractual duties, the company obtain all economical rights on the invention produced (invention of service)

Company’s employee (his activity is NOT in design or R&D)

The worker is entitled to a fair compensation (according to invention relevance, connection with ordinary duties, firm’s role) if its invention is patented by the company (enterprise invention).

Full time researcher 1) The researcher is authorizated to offer his professional services outside the institution. He keeps all moral and economical rights.

2) The problem solving falls within institutional research activities. Institution is entitled to a quota (usually around 30%) of revenues.

3) The study is commissioned and financed by a private enterprise. Economical rights are subject to the contract stipulated.

Researcher with temporary job He cannot work as external professional man (at least in Italy)

Professional man The professional is entitled to a retribution pro quota from the commissioning subject

Legal aspects

Page 9: Manchester 2009

The Hidden Opportunities

Why is Pisa famous all over the world?....

For a mistake! A mistake that has become the town's greatest resource.

Anything else unique?

A concentration of talented people, a creative potential that the economy of the region is not able to value and it is often wasted in unsatisfactory jobs.

Just another mistake or a goldmine to be harnessed?

Page 10: Manchester 2009

Core Services

• PROBLEM SOLVING

• PRODUCTS DEVELOPMENT

• NEW IDEAS

• METHODS & TOOLS PatCruncher.lnk

gym equipment, camper, textile, robotics, biomedical, constructions, automotive

wiimote tracking, 3d images, non-newtonian fluids, smart materials, piezoelectric actuators

OneIdeaxDay

IPR tracking, FA techniques to support brainstorming sessions

Page 11: Manchester 2009

Why IPR is crucial?

• Protect people

• Increase collaboration and exchange

• Protect enterprises

• Knowledge management

• Patent analysis

• Team selection

• Development of new creativity methods

• ....

Page 12: Manchester 2009

Collaborative Problem Solving

• Individual Talent (often unused)

• Great Expertize

• Large Numbers

• Wide Range of Expertize

• Framework, methods, tools

• Tracking of Intellectual Property Rights (trust & fair remuneration)

• Reward, motivation, self-entrepreneurship

• Multidisciplinarity is winning

• Collaboration & Meritocracy strenghten each other

Leaning Lab

Page 13: Manchester 2009

How to solve the IPR problem

PatCruncher.lnk

Page 14: Manchester 2009

Web engine

Text

AuthorPost n Surrogated Text

Indexer

Parser

Search

Knowledge Base

SurrogatedText

AuthorPost m

RSS from the forum

Ranking results

Page 15: Manchester 2009

““Clean dirtness”Clean dirtness”??

A test case

Page 16: Manchester 2009
Page 17: Manchester 2009
Page 18: Manchester 2009

The session

From the forum to a

RSS

Disambiguation of terms with

multiple meanings

Parsing+Tagging+Measuring software applications

Page 19: Manchester 2009

IPR tracking

Users

Statement of the problem

Time

Consolle

Solution

Time scale

Page 20: Manchester 2009

IPR tracking

Relationships among contributions

Page 21: Manchester 2009

IPR tracking

Users’ statistics

Relationships with previous contributions

Intensity of the relationship

Relationships with previous contributions

Following contributions belonging to

#14

Page 22: Manchester 2009

IPR tracking

Page 23: Manchester 2009

IPR tracking

Page 24: Manchester 2009

• IPR protected (+collaboration & meritocracy)

• Collaborative Problem Solving is versatile

• Group management

• Stakeholders are people, anyone, anywhere.

• Users / partners: SMEs, Large Enterprises, Istitutions, other Living Labs

Key Issues

Page 25: Manchester 2009

R. ApredaG. FantoniP. ValleriM. ManentiA. Bonaccorsi

University of Pisa

Via Bonanno Pisano 25b56125 Pisa

email:[email protected]@[email protected] [email protected]@gmail.com

R. ApredaG. FantoniP. ValleriM. ManentiA. Bonaccorsi

University of Pisa

Via Bonanno Pisano 25b56125 Pisa

email:[email protected]@[email protected] [email protected]@gmail.com

http://www.leaninglab.org

Contacts

http://www.unipi.it


Recommended