Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual framework based on an understanding of the principles of popular mobile-enabled games, indicating how organisations in the tourism sector could meet the needs of Millennials and Generation Z through engaging with the existing gamified location-based practice of geocaching as an information and communication technology enabled gamified enhancement to the destination experience. Design/methodology/approach As a primarily conceptual paper, the authors take an inductive qualitative approach to theory building based on the understanding of an existing practice (geocaching) that is undertaken among a community of practitioners (geocachers), which results in the presentation of a conceptual framework, which is the theory itself that the authors have constructed from the understanding of what is going on and which principles can then be applied across other tourism practices. Findings Findings indicate that through engaging with geocaching, smaller entrepreneurial businesses even in non-urban destinations that fall outside of the remit of smart city developments, and in tourism destinations on the less technologically enabled or resource-rich side of the digital divide, can reap the benefits associated with employing the principles and practices associated with smart tourism to meet the needs of this new generation of tourism consumers who seek richer digital and often gamified tourism experiences. Originality/value This paper fills a gap in the literature regarding the way many different types of tourism destinations could meet the needs of Millennials and Generation Z tourists.

2015)Organizing practices of university, industry and government that facilitate (or impede) the transition to a hybrid triple helix model of innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. ISSN 0040-1625 Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/27643We recommend you cite the published version. The publisher's URL is: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.032Refereed: Yes (no note) Disclaimer UWE has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material. UWE makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited.UWE makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights. UWE accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT. Organizing practices of university, industry and government that facilitate (or impede) the transition to a hybrid triple helix model of innovation Abstract Drawing on the contemporary turn to discursive practices we examine how the organizing practices of industry, university and government facilitate (or impede) developing countries transition to a hybrid triple helix model of innovation. Placing emphasis on the everyday situated practices of institutional agents, their interactions, and collaborative relationships, we identified three domains of practices (advanced research capabilities and external partnerships, the quantification of scientific knowledge and outputs, and collective entrepreneurship) that constitutively facilitate (or impede) partnership and in turn the successful transition to a hybrid triple helix model. Our study also highlights the contextual influence of differential schemata of interpretations on how to organize innovation by the three institutional actors in developing countries.

An integrative framework is proposed to generate a more complete picture of strategic foresight as an organizing capability in high‐velocity environments.

The concept of strategic foresight has come to dominate contemporary management discourse in recent times with a remarkable upsurge in the number of scholarly papers reporting a positive influence of strategic foresight on innovation. This causal link has served not only as a point of convergence for many empirical and conceptual studies, but also the starting point for theorizing the relevance of strategic foresight in organizing. Drawing on an exhaustive sample of 258 academic publications from 1990–2014, this paper provides a comprehensive review of strategic foresight and its influence on innovation. Our review suggest that strategic foresight rather than directly resulting in innovation tend to rather influence it by shaping and giving form to innovation management tools, and future-oriented knowledge creation, which in turn cumulatively drive innovation performance. Our proposed integrative framework therefore specifies the conceptual linkages between strategic foresight and innovation performance.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to stimulate, shape and extend current discourse on the relevance of dynamic capabilities on firm competitiveness. Design/methodology/approach The authors delineate current debates on dynamic capabilities and synthesize them to develop some propositions and a heuristic framework to guide future research on dynamic capabilities as a strategic management construct. Findings The theoretical and methodological complexities involved in mapping the routines and processes’ underpinning dynamic capabilities has led to conceptual discrepancies, which in turn impede the understanding of the relevance and contribution of dynamic capabilities to competitiveness. Measuring dynamic capabilities remains the biggest barrier to progress in developing directions for theory and research in this area. Practical implications Stimulating and shaping the current discourse on the relevance of dynamic capabilities on competitiveness, the proposed integrated framework as a heuristic device can be to gauge the a firm’s dynamic capabilities vis-à-vis their competitors. Originality/value The authors propose a framework built around the inter-relationships of capabilities and hierarchies of capabilities to extend the understanding of how dynamic capabilities can be developed relative to a firm’s ability and embedded context.

No abstract

No abstract

Emphasizing practice as the site of the emergence of strategic foresight, this paper draws on the contemporary turn to 'practice' to examine how the organizing practices of members positioned further down the organization may facilitate (or constrain) their ability to enact foresightful actions. Adopting a case-based approach, three software companies engaged in four new product development projects served as our empirical research sites. With emphasis placed on their innovation teams' everyday practices, data for the empirical inquiry were collected using the qualitative methods of semi-structured interviews, ethnographical observation and project archival documents. Explicating the observed foresightful practices and their underlying activities under the general rubrics of organizing architecture and social coordination , we identified overcompartmentalization, over-determinism and (in)congruence-of-values as quintessentially embedded organizing practices, that constitutively enable (or impede) organizational foresightfulness. We conclude the paper with a discussion of the managerial implications and some limitations of our research.