A Business Incubator, Accelerator, or Coworking Space? Case Health Innovation Village at GE

Health Innovation Village at GE is one of the new communities targeted for startup and growth-oriented companies. It has been established at the premises of a multinational conglomerate that will promote networking and growth of startup companies. The concept combines features from traditional business incubators, accelerators, and coworking spaces. This research compares Health Innovation Village to these concepts regarding its goals, target clients, source of income, organization, facilities, management, and success factors. In addition, a new incubator classification model is introduced. On the other hand, Health Innovation Village is examined from its tenants’ perspective and improvements are suggested. The work was implemented as a qualitative case study by interviewing GE staff with connections to Health Innovation Village as well as startup entrepreneurs and employees’ working there. The most evident features of Health Innovation Village correspond to those of business incubators although it is atypical as a non-profit corporate business incubator. Strong network orientation and connections to venture capitalists are common characteristics of these new types of accelerators. The design of the premises conforms to the principles of coworking spaces, but the services provided to the startup companies are considerably more versatile than the services offered by coworking spaces. The advantages of Health Innovation Village are that there are first-class premises and exceptionally good networking possibilities that other types of incubators or accelerators are not able to offer. A conglomerate can also provide multifaceted special knowledge for young firms. In addition, both GE and the startups gained considerable publicity through their cooperation, indeed a characteristic that benefits both parties. Most of the expectations of the entrepreneurs were exceeded. However, communication and the scope of cooperation remain challenges. Micro companies spend their time developing and marketing their products and acquiring financing. Therefore, communication should be as clear as possible and accessible everywhere. The startups would prefer to cooperate significantly more, but few have the time available to assume the responsibility of leadership. The entrepreneurs also expected to have more possibilities for cooperation with GE. Wider collaboration might be accomplished by curation in the same way as it is used in the well-functioning coworking spaces where curators take care of practicalities and promote cooperation. Communication issues could be alleviated if the community had its own Intranet pages where all information could be concentrated. In particular, a common calendar and a room reservation system could be useful. In addition, it could be beneficial to have a section of the Intranet open for both the GE staff and the startups so that those willing to share their knowledge and those having project offers could use it for advertising.

User Experience Patterns for/of Innovation by Design: A Survey on Design Practices in the Software Development and Innovation Lifecycle

The User Experience (UX) designers are undoubtedly aware of how many UX design methods currently exist and that sometimes it becomes a problem to choose an appropriate one. What are all of methods that designers have in their “arsenal”? When can they use them? This thesis presents the research on the design methods in the contemporary context of User Experience (UX) and Innovations by using a survey approach. The study is limited to cover the domain of consumer mobile services development and provider companies around the world. The study follows 2 clear objectives: (1) to understand what design methods are currently used in that context and to what extent they are used (2) to identify at what stage according to the UX design thinking process for creating innovations they are placed. The study contributes to the research in the field of UX design and Innovations and extends the knowledge in that field together with communities’ (UXPA, SIGCHI, SIGSOFT) members’ cooperation. The research is vital due to lack of information on design practices and their application in the chosen context.

Opportunity meets uncertainty. Towards sustainable business in the Arctic region

The Arctic region is experiencing a significant change in terms of climate change and a growing economic interest towards its natural resources and emerging business opportunities. The purpose of this study is to explore how can Finnish companies create sustainable business in the Arctic. This is done by examining the arctic business environment, identifying sectors with growth potential, addressing challenges related to operating in the Arctic and suggesting how to ensure sustainability and succeed in the globally competed arctic market. The theoretical framework is based on theories of sustainable development, corporate social responsibility and the role of strategy in creating sustainable business. Empirical data was collected by using qualitative research methods: first, background knowledge was formed based on written documents and, secondly, six expert interviews were conducted in early 2014. The interviewees represented the viewpoints of companies, political decision makers and NGO’s. The analysis of the data was conducted using thematic categorization. The empirical findings of the study suggest that in order to create sustainable business in the Arctic companies should adopt a long-term perspective, embrace a holistic approach to sustainability, understand interdependencies between the dimensions of sustainability and aim at high-level engagement in responsible behavior. To succeed in the arctic market core competencies, customer needs, multivendor cooperation and long-term presence need to be invested in on a company level. In addition, to promote and advance arctic development on a national level support is needed in terms of investments in infrastructure, funding research and design, creating a regulative framework and removing barriers of trade.