This article argues that a great deal of intellectual entrepreneurship happens in times and spaces that lie between institutions. Ideas are often born when people move from one context to another. During “between times” and in “between places” people come up with possibilities that might not fit within one institution alone. The realization of new ideas then requires combining energies and resources from different institutions, and it often involves pushing conventions aside, creating new space between existing institutions. The article explores the example of a business-and-research venture, CHOICE mobilitatsproviding GmbH, to illustrate the importance of multiple types of “between” and their significance for organizational learning.
Amabile, T. M., Hadley, C. N., & Kramer, S. J. (2002). Creativity under the gun. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 52-61.
2.
Amado, G., & Ambrose, A. (Eds.). (2001). The transitional approach to change. London: Karnac Books.
3.
Amado, G., & Sharpe, J. (2001). Review as a necessary ingredient in transitional change. In G. Amado & A. Ambrose (Eds.), The transitional approach to change (pp. 119-136). London: Karnac Books.
4.
Audi AG, Deutsche Bahn AG, StattAuto GmbH, & WZB gGmbH. (1998). CashCar: Der Bedeutungswandel des Privat-Automobils zum Kernmodul eines integrierten Verkehrsdienstleisters. Antrag auf Förderung im Rahmen des Ideenwettbewerbs “Mobilität in Ballungsräumen” des BMBF [Cash car. The private automobile’s change of meaning to a core module of an integrated transport system. Proposal for a project funded by the BMBF (Federal Ministry of Education and Research)]. Berlin, Germany: CHOICE Mobilitätsprovider.
5.
Berthoin Antal, A. (2004). The centrality of ‘between’ in intellectual entrepreneurship. In S. Kwiatkowski & P. Houdayer (Eds.) Intellectual entrepreneurship through or against institutions (pp. 27-52). Warsaw, Poland: Leon Koźmiński Academy of Entrepreneurship and Management.
6.
Bridger, H. (2001). Foreword. In G. Amado & A. Ambrose (Eds.), The transitional approach to change (pp. xi-xiv). London: Karnac Books.
7.
Canzler, W., & Franke, S. (2000). Autofahren zwischen Alltagsnutzung und Routinebruch. Bericht 1 der choice-Forschung [The private automobile between everyday use and breaking the routine. Report 1 on “choice” research] (WZB Discussion Paper FS II 00-102). Berlin, Germany: Social Science Research Center Berlin.
8.
Canzler, W., & Franke, S. (2002). Mit cash car zum inter-modalen Verkehrsangebot. Bericht 3 der choice-Forschung[With cash car to an intermodal transport. Report 3 on “choice” research] (WZB Discussion Paper FS II 02-104). Berlin, Germany: Social Science Research Center Berlin.
9.
Canzler, W., & Knie, A. (1998). Möglichkeitsräume. Grundrisse einer modernen Mobilitäts-und Verkehrspolitik [Outlines for a modern mobility and transport policy]. Wien, Austria: Böhlau Verlag.
10.
Canzler, W., & Knie, A. (2001). Die Verstärkung der Wirkungsmacht sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung. Bau und Betrieb eigener Forschungsobjekte. In A. Berthoin Antal & C. Krebsbach-Gnath (Eds.), Wo wären wir ohne die Verrückten? Zur Rolle von Aussenseitern in Wissenschaft, Politik und Wirtschaft[Increased effects of social science research. Project development and implementation] (pp. 99-117). Berlin, Germany: Edition Sigma.
11.
Clemens, E. S., & Cook, J. M. (1999). Politics and institutionalism: Explaining durability and change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 441-466.
12.
Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. (1996). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. London: Random House.
13.
de Botton, A. (2002). The art of travel. London: Penguin Books.
14.
Dierkes, M. (1986). Research in search of relevance and excellence. The management of creativity in the social sciences. In R. L. Kuhn (Ed.), Frontiers in creative and innovative management (pp. 221-243). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
15.
Dierkes, M., Berthoin, Antal, A., Child, J., & Nonaka, I. (Eds.). (2001). The handbook of organizational learning and knowledge. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
16.
Drucker, P. F. (2002). The discipline of innovation. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 95-102. (Original work published in 1985)
17.
Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. (2000). Organizational learning: Debates past, present, and future. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 783-796.
18.
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York. Basic Books.
19.
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributory processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2, 88-115.
20.
Knie, A., Koch, B., & Lübke, R. (2002). Das Carsharing-Konzept der Deutsche Bahn AG [The car sharing concept of the Deutsche Bahn AG (Germany Railways)]. Internationales Verkehrswesen, 54(3), 97-100.
21.
Knie, A., & Petersen, M. (1999). Intermodalität als wissenschaftsbasierte Dienstleistung: Das Unternehmen CHOICE. In R. Buhr, W. Canzler, A. Knie, & S. Rammler (Eds.), Bewegende Moderne. Fahrzeugverkehr als soziale Praxis [Intermodality as a science-based service. The CHOICE Ltd.] (pp. 133-146). Berlin, Germany: edition Sigma.
22.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23.
Kwiatkowski, S. (1999). Intellectual entrepreneurship (position paper). In S. Kwiatkowski & L. Edvinsson (Eds.), Knowledge café for intellectual entrepreneurship (pp. 15-27). Warsaw, Poland: Leon Koźmiński Academy of Entrepreneurship and Management.
24.
Lengwiler, M. (2005). Probleme anwendungsorientierter Forschung in den Sozialwissenschaften am Beispiel der Ausgründung “choice” [Problems in application-oriented socio-scientific research. The case “choice”] (WZB Discussion Paper SP III 2005-101). Berlin, Germany: Social Science Research Center Berlin.
25.
Merton, R. K. (1972). Insiders and outsiders: A chapter in the sociology of knowledge. American Journal of Sociology, 78(1), 9-47.
26.
Normann, R., & Ramírez, R. (1993). From value chain to value constellation. Designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review, 71(July/August), 65-77.
27.
Oldenburg, R. (1989). The great good place: Cafes, coffee shops, bars, hair salons and other hangouts at the heart of a community. New York: Marlow and Company.
28.
Pearson, A. E. (2002). Tough minded ways to get innovative. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 117-124.
29.
Projektgruppe Mobilität. (1999). Einleitung: Automobilität und Moderne. Vorschlag für einen Wechsel der Perspektive. In R. Buhr, W. Canzler, A. Knie, & S. Rammler (Eds.), Bewegende Moderne. Fahrzeugverkehr als soziale Praxis[Introduction: automobility and modernity. Suggestion for a change of perspective] (pp. 21-38). Berlin, Germany: edition Sigma.
30.
Robinson, J., & Godbey, G. (1999). Time for life: The surprising way Americans use their time (2nd ed.). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
31.
Smelser, N. J. (2001). Academics and the state. A U.S. view. In A. Berthoin Antal & C. Krebsbach-Gnath (Eds.), Wo wären wir ohne die Verrückten? Zur Rolle von Aussenseitern in Wissenschaft, Politik und Wirtschaft [Where would we be without maniacs? The role of outsiders in science, politics, and economy] (pp. 69-81). Berlin, Germany: edition Sigma.
32.
Tam, S. (1999). Routes to intellectual capital formation: The genesis and development of wealth creating knowledge in the entrepreneurial minds. In S. Kwiatkowski & L. Edvinsson (Eds.), Knowledge café for intellectual entrepreneurship (pp. 125-127). Warsaw, Poland: Leon Koźmiński Academy of Entrepreneurship and Management.
33.
Wolpert, J. D. (2002). Breaking out of the innovation box. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 77-83.
