Technology Innovation Management Review August 2018 (Volume 8, Issue 8)

Editorial: Transdisciplinary Innovation

Chris McPhee, Editor-in-Chief
Martin Bliemel and Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer, Guest Editors

From the Editor-in-Chief From the Guest Editors

Welcome to the August 2018 issue of the Technology We are living in a rapidly changing, hyper-connected
Innovation Management Review. This month’s editorial world and are facing increasingly global, complex, and
theme is Transdisciplinary Innovation, and it is my dynamic problem situations such as income disparity,
pleasure to introduce our Guest Editors, Martin Bliemel environmental crises, organized crime, and health
and Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer, who are both from the management issues. These complex or “wicked” prob-
Faculty of Transdisciplinary Innovation at the Uni- lems cannot be adequately tackled from the sphere of
versity of Technology Sydney, Australia. individual disciplines, because they are not individual
problems, they are interrelated and “intrinsically linked
Looking ahead to a related future issue, please note the in a meta-system of problems”, and as such cannot be
upcoming special issue on Action Research with guest solved in isolation (Rittel et al., 1973; Özbekhan, 1970:
editors Magnus Hoppe (the author of the first article in 13). Complex problem situations require what has been
this issue) and Erik Lindhult from Mälardalen Uni- defined as a transdisciplinary approach (Jantsch, 1972).
versity in Sweden. The submission deadline for ab- There are many definitions of transdisciplinary innova-
stracts is October 1, 2018. Please see the call for papers tion and transdisciplinary research, but a general con-
for details: tinyurl.com/yd5gacsv sensus is that transdisciplinary innovation has the
following characteristics: it is action-oriented and fu-
For other future issues, we are accepting general submis- ture-focused, participatory, holistic and systemic, and
sions of articles on technology entrepreneurship, innov- purposive, and it transcends individual disciplines or
ation management, and other topics relevant to practices (Jantsch, 1972; Klein, 2002; Polk, 2015).
launching and growing technology companies and solv-
ing practical problems in emerging domains. Please con- A transdisciplinary approach to innovation differs from
tact us (timreview.ca/contact) with potential article topics multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches in
and submissions, and proposals for future special issues. that it is not just about working towards a shared goal
or having disciplines interact with and enrich each oth-
Finally, we invite you to attend ISPIM Connects Ottawa er (Figure 1). Instead, transdisciplinary innovation is
(ispim-connects-ottawa.com), which will be held in Ottawa, about placing these interactions in an integrated sys-
Canada, from April 7–10, 2019. The TIM Review and its tem with a social purpose, resulting in a continuously
associated academic program at Carleton University, evolving and adapting practice (van der Bijl-Brouwer,
the TIM Program (timprogram.ca), are proud to be the loc- 2018). A by-product of transdisciplinary innovation is
al hosts of the event in collaboration with other partners. that the integrated solution contributes back to the dis-
ciplines it drew upon to evolve them, too.
Chris McPhee
Editor-in-Chief The term “transdisciplinarity” was originally coined
and developed within academia as a response to the
fragmented organization of universities into faculties,
schools, and degrees. More recently, transdisciplinarity
is increasingly relevant to innovators and entrepren-
eurs whose technologies or solutions are aimed at ad-
dressing complex societal problems. This larger-scale
emphasis moves innovation beyond “customer-
centred” to a “society-centred” perspective, and it re-
quires active collaboration with public and private sec-
tor organizations, governments, and communities.

timreview.ca 3
Technology Innovation Management Review August 2018 (Volume 8, Issue 8)

Editorial: Transdisciplinary Innovation

Chris McPhee, Martin Bliemel and Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer

Figure 1. A comparison of multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches to innovation

This special issue includes a rich and nuanced set of 3. The third takeaway is consideration of what the level
takeaways for practitioners, academics, and members of of impact of the innovation is. Does it only affect the
the public or third sectors. We highlight four of them innovator (often referred to as a transdisciplinary in-
here, regarding learning, spaces, levels of impact, and novation researcher in this special issue)? Or, does it
partner selection. We nonetheless strongly encourage affect the collective group of people directly in-
you to read the entire set of articles to make sure you get volved? Or, are the broader social implications of
a balanced overview of different ways in which transdis- greater importance? Answering these questions can
ciplinary innovation occurs. influence how you aim to fund transdisciplinary in-
novation projects, as exemplified by the projects dis-
Key takeaways of this special issue: cussed in the articles by Baumber and co-authors, by
McGregor, and by Dorst.
1. The first of the overarching takeaways recognizes that
transdisciplinary innovation is more than coordin- 4. The fourth takeaway builds on this by encouraging
ated input from multiple knowledge domains to solve readers to carefully choose their partners for transdis-
a problem (see Figure 1: Multidisciplinarity). With ciplinary innovation projects. This means being con-
transdisciplinary innovation, solving the problem res- scious of the respective disciplines or practices being
ults in new knowledge forming via the integration of integrated as well as being conscious of there being
those domains that contributes back to them (see expertise in shepherding the transdisciplinary innov-
Figure 1: Transdisciplinarity, noting the two-way ation process. McGregor's article provides an excel-
arrow). In other words, learning is an inherent part of lent overview of how painstakingly slow
transdisciplinary innovation. This learning can occur transdisciplinary innovation can be if the process is
by individual innovators (see Zafeirakopoulos and left to emerge organically. Meanwhile, Dorst’s article
van der Bijl-Brouwer in this issue) or as a collective presents an alternative approach in which the integ-
(see Riedy et al., and Baumber et al., in this issue). ration can be designed into the process at a very early
stage.
2. The second key takeaway is that the unpredictability
of transdisciplinary innovation requires giving it The first article in this special issue is by Carolyn
“space” and not over-constraining or controlling it. McGregor AM, who draws on her personal decades-
The articles by Femenías and Thuvander and Riedy long journey of evolving a big data project about
and co-authors emphasize this with examples of neonatal intensive care into astronaut health monitor-
“space” in the sense of allocating time, physical space, ing. We selected this as the first article in the special is-
or nurturing interactions between others in a way that sue because it neatly contrasts i) disciplinary
does not try to (pre-maturely) force transdisciplinary innovation occurring in sequence, ii) multidisciplinary
innovation to progress along a prescribed path. innovation occurring as multiple disciplines in parallel,

timreview.ca 4
Technology Innovation Management Review August 2018 (Volume 8, Issue 8)

Editorial: Transdisciplinary Innovation

Chris McPhee, Martin Bliemel and Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer

and iii) interdisciplinary innovation occurring at the in- practice as it underpins innovation and catalyzes organ-
teraction of the knowledge domains. The article con- izational and social change. To nurture individual and
cludes with iv) a constructive approach to structure a collective learning, they acknowledge informal learning
path for purposeful transdisciplinary innovation in pre- opportunities including unplanned conversations,
cision public health. while also actively shaping “formal crossroads” includ-
ing collective writing, annual retreats – “the centrepiece
Next, Alex Baumber, Graciela Metternicht, Peter of transdisciplinary practice” – and roundtable sessions.
Ampt, Rebecca Cross, and Emily Berry examine the
co-production of online land management tools. This In the next article, Mariana Zafeirakopoulos and Mieke
article goes beyond conventional concepts in innova- van der Bijl-Brouwer further discuss the concept of
tion management that are built on Rogers' adoption of learning within transdisciplinary innovation. Where
innovation. To do so, this article elaborately presents a Riedy and co-authors focus on the collective learning ex-
case study of transdisciplinary innovation as a particip- periences of academics, this article is focused on the in-
atory development process that integrates perspect- dividual learning experiences of innovation
ives, including those of the end users. But, practitioners who have started to shift their originally
transdisciplinary innovation is not quite so easy. It sim- positivist approach to transdisciplinary ways of working
ultaneously involves reflexivity, wherein participants to address complex problems. Based on a series of inter-
challenge assumptions, including their own, thereby views with innovation professionals, the authors identi-
learning and developing a more open-minded or trans- fy the motivations and drivers of practitioners to start
formative approach to co-producing the innovation. and continue transdisciplinary learning, their emotions
experienced during the shift, and the dissemination of
In the third article, Paula Femenías and Liane their new learning into professional practice. These in-
Thuvander add further nuance to the management of sights help us reflect on intervention points throughout
transdisciplinary innovation by reflecting on 14 years the whole-of-life education journey that practitioners
of experience with transdisciplinary research in the undertake to spark, revive, or amplify the required atti-
built environment. This article highlights the import- tudes that enable innovation.
ance of creating a protected or neutral space where
transdisciplinary innovation participants can meet as The first five articles in this special issue highlight the
equals to co-produce the innovation. The importance need to bring people together who have different types
of this space and its sense of ownership is revealed in of knowledge towards transdisciplinary innovation. To
the authors’ humbling insights of how participants ex- complement this view, Kees Dorst presents a more stra-
pected the facilitators to own or control the space and tegic approach to address a particular complex problem
tell participants what to do, when the facilitators were and to learn from other disciplines. To achieve this,
primarily presenting the opportunity for participants Dorst presents a layered model of “practices”, which are
to take ownership of the space. The ability of the facilit- the smaller units of action within disciplines. Practices
ators to instil a sense of ownership by all participants is consist of the values we find important, the principles
challenged further by the turnover in participants dur- we use to think about them, and the methods and ac-
ing the transdisciplinary innovation process, with new tions we are going to apply. Framing, a design-based
participants distrusting the facilitator and other parti- practice, is suggested as means to identify practices that
cipants, plus a general reluctance to take ownership of can be “mixed” and integrated to innovatively address a
a project their predecessors started. particular complex problem. Dorst furthermore pro-
poses to use the layered model for “practice dialogues”
In a similar vein, Chris Riedy, Dena Fam, Katie Ross, between professionals to promote the exchange of prac-
and Cynthia Mitchell of the University of Technology tices between disciplines.
Sydney’s Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) reflect
on long-term experiences with transdisciplinary re- We hope that this special issue provides inspiration to
search. Based on two decades of work aimed at creat- “think bigger” and to integrate multiple disciplines and
ing change towards sustainable futures, Riedy and practices on your next projects to the benefit of a larger
co-authors share how they have started to shape learn- contingent of society and your own learning. For a more
ing spaces or “crossroads” within the ISF to facilitate practical toolkit to facilitate cross-disciplinary collabora-
individual and collective learning. They argue that tion, see Griffith, Carruthers, and Bliemel (2018, due in
learning is central to transdisciplinary research and October) for a review or search online for “method

timreview.ca 5
Technology Innovation Management Review August 2018 (Volume 8, Issue 8)

Editorial: Transdisciplinary Innovation

Chris McPhee, Martin Bliemel and Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer

cards” including ones by our Faculty of Transdisciplin-

ary Innovation (tinyurl.com/ybdkjwnl) at the University of About the Editors
Technology Sydney, Ontario Digital (medium.com/
ontariodigital), IDEO (ideo.com), 18f.gov (18f.gsa.gov), and Chris McPhee is Editor-in-Chief of the Technology
others. Of course, many of the sources mentioned in Innovation Management Review. Chris holds an MASc de-
each article in this special issue are also well worth gree in Technology Innovation Management from Car-
tracking down to learn more about the philosophy, art, leton University in Ottawa, Canada, and BScH and MSc
and practice of transdisciplinary innovation. degrees in Biology from Queen’s University in Kingston,
Canada. He has nearly 20 years of management, design,
Martin Bliemel and Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer and content-development experience in Canada and
Guest Editors Scotland, primarily in the science, health, and education
sectors. As an advisor and editor, he helps entrepreneurs,
executives, and researchers develop and express their
ideas.
References
Martin Bliemel is the Director of the Diploma in In-
van der Bijl-Brouwer, M. 2018. Transdisciplinary Innovation and novation at the new Faculty of Transdisciplinary In-
Design. Medium, February 11, 2018. Accessed August 20, 2018: novation at the University of Technology Sydney
https://medium.com/@miekevanderbijl/transdisciplinary-
innovation-and-design-d19d1520ddca
(UTS). Martin holds a BSc (Mechanical Engineering)
and MBA from Queen’s University in Kingston,
Griffith, S., Bliemel, M. & Carruthers, K. (Eds.) 2018. Visual Tools for Canada, and a PhD in Business from Simon Fraser
Developing Student Capacity for Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration,
Innovation and Entrepreneurship. A. Rourke & V. Rees (Series University in Vancouver, Canada. His research in-
Curators), Transformative Pedagogies in the Visual Domain: Book terests include entrepreneurial networks, accelerators,
No. 6. Champaign, IL: Common Ground Research Networks. education, research commercialization, entrepreneur-
Jantsch, E. 1972. Towards Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity in ial ecosystems, and the entrepreneurial university. His
Education and Innovation. In L. Apostel, G. Berger, A. Briggs, & G. research has been published in several prestigious
Michaud (Eds.), Interdisciplinarity, Problems of Teaching and journals including Nature Nanotechnology, Entrepren-
Research in Universities: 97–121. Paris: OECD Publications.
eurship Theory and Practice, Education+Training, the
Klein, J. T. 2002. Unity of Knowledge and Transdisciplinarity; Contexts International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior &
of Definition, Theory and the New Discourse of Problem Solving. In Research, and the Entrepreneurship Research Journal,
G. Hirsch Hardon (Ed.), Unity of Knowledge in Transdisciplinary
Research for Sustainability: 35–69. Oxford, UK: Eolss Publishers Co. where one of his articles on entrepreneurship educa-
Ltd. tion is the journal’s most downloaded article. Martin
Özbekhan, H. 1970. The Club of Rome – The Predicament of Mankind: A
is a recipient of the nationally competitive Office of
Quest for Structured Responses to Growing World-Wide Complexities Learning and Teaching Citation.
and Uncertainties. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania:
Management and Behavioural Science Center. Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer is a Senior Lecturer at the
Pohl, C. 2010. From Transdisciplinarity to Transdisciplinary Research. Faculty of Transdisciplinary Innovation at the Uni-
Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science, 1(1): 74–83. versity of Technology Sydney in Australia. Her re-
Polk, M. 2015. Transdisciplinary Co-Production: Designing and Testing search interests span the fields of human-centred
a Transdisciplinary Research Framework for Societal Problem design, systemic design, and public and social sector
Solving. Futures, 65: 110–122. innovation. As a lecturer, she is responsible for co-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.11.001
ordinating part of the transdisciplinary degree Bachel-
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of or of Creative Intelligence and Innovation. Mieke
Planning. Policy Sciences, 4: 155–169. holds a Master of Science degree in Industrial Design
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
Engineering from Delft University of Technology and
Scholz, R. W., & Steiner, G. 2015b. The Real Type and Ideal Type of a PhD on the topic of user-centred design from the
Transdisciplinary Processes: Part I – Theoretical Foundations.
Sustainability Science, 10(4): 527–544.
University of Twente, both in the Netherlands.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0326-4

Citation: McPhee, C. Bliemel, M., & van der Bijl-Brouwer, M. 2018. Editorial: Transdisciplinary Innovation. Technology Innovation Management
Review, 8(8): 3–6. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1173

Keywords: transdisciplinary, transdisciplinarity, innovation, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, learning, practice

timreview.ca 6
 Technology Innovation
Management Review timreview.ca

Academic Affiliations and Funding Acknowledgements

The Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern

Ontario (FedDev Ontario; feddevontario.gc.ca) is part of the
Innovation, Science and Economic Development portfolio and
one of six regional development agencies, each of which helps
to address key economic challenges by providing regionally-
tailored programs, services, knowledge and expertise.

• The TIM Review receives partial funding from FedDev

Ontario's Investing in Regional Diversification initiative.

Technology Innovation Management (TIM; timprogram.ca) is an

international master's level program at Carleton University in
Ottawa, Canada. It leads to a Master of Applied Science
(M.A.Sc.) degree, a Master of Engineering (M.Eng.) degree, or a
Master of Entrepreneurship (M.Ent.) degree. The objective of
this program is to train aspiring entrepreneurs on creating
wealth at the early stages of company or opportunity lifecycles.

• The TIM Review is published in association with and receives

partial funding from the TIM program.