Today, the health care sector has no test for early age-related deterioration in physical ability. The aim of this study was to evaluate questionnaires, videos and physical tests whose task will be to identify early markers related to an increased fall risk in middle-aged people. If the person is aware of deficits in physical ability related to fall risk, the person can then use that knowledge to perform relevant training that can strengthen the physical ability related to fall risk. Self-efficacy for balance and strength, physical ability related to fall risk and body composition were measured for 36 middle-aged test participants. This study shows that the tested physical exercises were useful for self-assessment of physical ability. Impairment in physical ability could not be identified solely with measurement of body composition, walking speed, questions, videos that show adjustments that are common in people with impaired balance, or an extended version of the Short version of Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale. This study indicates that a combination of questionnaires, videos and physical exercises can evaluate physical ability and act as a method to identify early markers related to increased fall risk. The questionnaire, videos and physical exercises can be implemented in a web tool that could make persons aware that they have decreased physical ability regarding fall risk or that they needlessly make physical compensations when performing daily activities and thus are missing opportunities to strengthen their physical ability every day.

This research suggests a conceptual process of how to create highperforming

innovation teams to meet the market’s need of faster ways of

conducting innovation work. The CIT-process (Creating high-performing

Innovation Teams) is a five-step-process systematically developed to meet

organizational-, team-, and individual perspectives. On a holistic level, this

research contributes to prior research by bringing research on innovation teams

and high-performing teams together to become a pre-stage to established group

dynamic processes and innovation processes. Practical implications and future

research are suggested.

 This research aims to explore how the understanding of agile innovation work methodologies affect innovation teams and the progress of innovation projects. In a long-term research, three innovation teams were studied through questionnaires, interviews, audio-recorded interviews and rich notes from. The data was analysed using group development theories and knowledge taxonomy to determine the relation of the teams' estimated knowledge and their performance in relation to the teams’ group development status. The results indicate that innovation teams that are unfamiliar with agile innovation work tend to not seek collaboration due to uncertainty, which results in slow progress. When an innovation team’s surrounding organisation is unfamiliar with agile innovation methodologies it tends to not offer their support until the innovation team can prove progress, also slowing the progress down. The opposite is noticed when innovation teams and the organisation understands how to apply agile innovation work methodologies, collaboration occurs easily, resulting in positive progress. Further research is suggested.

Det bubblar om innovation överallt. Alltfler förstår att innovation är avgörande för fortsatt framgång och överlevnad oavsett typ av organisation. Men nu är det dags att ta nästa steg - att få någonting gjort och dessutom snabbt och effektivt.

I Högpresterande innovationsteam får du veta hur du kan skapa innovationsteam i din organisation, som aktivt arbetar med att utveckla till exempel nya produkter, tjänster och processer mot ett givet mål. I boken finns konkreta tillvägagångssätt, råd och tips på hur du steg-för-steg skapar och etablerar ett högpresterande innovationsteam. Kärnan är att skapa ett team som är skapat utifrån sitt uppdrag – att innovera – som samtidigt inte hamnar i grupprelaterade problem.

Boken vänder sig till dig som är verksam med innovationsfrågor i din organisation, både i ledning och operativt, som utbildar om innovation på universitet och högskola eller som är konsult. Varje kapitel avslutas med reflektionsfrågor som hjälper dig att tänka igenom och konkretisera vägen framåt i skapandet av innovationsteam i din verksamhet.

This research aims to study if innovation enablers (Enablers), i.e. factors that enable innovation work, are important for innovation teams in on-going innovation work and if lack of Enablers affects innovation projects negatively. The background to this study is that prior research states that numerous factors are important for innovation work, but there’s still knowledge to gain whatever these Enablers are perceived to be important by innovation teams. Data from three innovation teams on-going innovation projects, supported by an external facilitator, were used within this study. The long-term qualitative study shows that all Enablers are important, but also that a facilitator is important. Lack of Enablers may cause negative effects on innovation projects, where nine enablers within this study were identified to be critical for avoiding project delays. Further research is suggested.

The aim of this research is to develop an understanding of factors that enable innovation teams to conduct agile innovation work in an industrial context. The background and reason for this research are not only that innovation is necessary for companies that want to stay in business, but also that these companies need to increase the speed of their innovation work to stay competitive. Research has demonstrated that cross-functional (X-functional) innovation teams are fast and agile, and are therefore assumed to be suitable for these activities. Still, there is much knowledge to be gained.

Prior research has identified factors that are seen as important from an organizational, team, and individual perspective to enable teams to work with potentially innovative outcomes. However, in cases where teams have been created with the purpose of conducting innovation work, i.e. innovation teams, problems related to e.g. performance and learning have occurred, and the innovation work has stopped shortly after conducted research projects due to the high level of complexity.

The research question (RQ) that this thesis explores is the following: “Which innovation enablers are important for innovation teams when conducting agile innovation work in an industrial context?” Based on the RQ, two sub-questions are formulated and operationalized to answer the RQ.

Qualitative data have been collected from five innovation teams in two phases. Two innovation teams in two small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were studied in the first phase to clarify the situation for innovation teams before innovation work is begun. In the second phase, which built on the first one, three innovation teams in a large industrial company were studied as they conducted three separate innovation projects.

This research revealed five main findings: first, knowledge about important innovation enablers (Enablers) revealed from a literature study; second, the Innovation Team Model (ITM), demonstrating innovation teams before innovation work is begun in relation to the individuals and organization in a holistic way; third, the innovation team creation process (CIT-process), a stepwise process in how to create an innovation team; fourth, the innovation facilitator, who supports and facilitates the innovation team throughout the CIT-process and the innovation projects; and fifth, the Extended Innovation Process (EIP), an extension of the traditional innovation process by a pre-phase, i.e. a Preparation-phase, to gather and prepare the innovation teams for forthcoming work. The findings regarding the importance of the CIT-process, the EIP, and the innovation facilitator were unexpected.

The findings formed the Innovation Team Framework (ITF), which represents all of the findings in relation to each other. The EIP is used as the basis for which the other innovation enablers are provided to the innovation teams through an innovation facilitator’s competence throughout the innovation project. The ITF is multidimensional: it could serve as a tool to describe both the simplicity and the complexity when creating an innovation team and forthcoming work and activities.

All separate findings within this research contribute to prior research in individual ways, however, the ITF is the main scientific contribution of this study to Innovation management.

Practitioners can use the ITF as a complement to already established methodologies for product development or similar; however one should be aware of the limited nature of the data set that served as the basis for analysis and development of the ITF.

Further studies regarding the ITF and its detailed models and processes are suggested.

This review consolidates research on innovation enablers for

innovation teams, defined within this research as factors that enable a crossfunctional

team within an organization to conduct innovation work, to provide a

deeper understanding of what factors enable innovation teams to conduct

innovation work, which means that this research involves three areas to provide

a holistic picture: the organizational context, the team itself, and the individuals

within the innovation team. A systematic database search was conducted in

which 208 relevant articles were identified and analyzed thematically way.

Twenty innovation enablers related to innovation teams were identified:

awareness, capabilities, climate, collaboration, culture, dedication, economy,

education, empowerment, entre- / intrapreneurship, human resources,

incentives, knowledge, knowledge management, management, mind-set, need,

processes, strategy, and time. This review contributes to prior research a deeper

understanding of what key factors enable innovative work for innovation teams.

Suggestions of both academic and practical use for the identified innovation

enablers are included in this review, and direction for future research is

suggested.

This paper focuses on innovation teams before innovation work is begun.

The reason is that innovation teams are considered to be successful doing such work.

However, prior studies show problems in innovation-related-knowledge, -

knowledge gaps, -information and -awareness why this research aims to

understand these aspects and how they relate to newly formed innovation team as

they need to handle these aspects. Two case studies conducted during 1,5 years

show that a newly formed innovation team is in a very complicated situation where

the identified aspects relate not only to the individual members but also to the

team, its context and network within and outside the organization. Practical

implications for this research could be used when planning-, creating- and

starting up new innovation teams, helping management and team members to

understand the complexity, for which a model is developed and described.

Product lifecycles are shorter than ever and agile innovation processes and teams are being developed to meet challenging product lifecycle deadlines. Teaching how to create innovation teams is however shown to be both complex and time consuming, which is not optimal in a time where the business environment demands faster pace when innovating. This research has explored the potential of using Prisoner's dilemma as a workshop tool to stimulate learning and collaboration, which is the core of innovation team’s work, to be further developed to educational tools if being successful. The workshop setting was based on the participating organisations' individual and concrete ideas to be developed, where game elements were designed as game mechanisms. Management from six organisations participated in the research, three of the organisations conducted a workshop designed as a modified Prisoner's dilemma, and the other three organisations participated in a non-gamified workshop based on the same content as the gamified one. Empirical data were collected through statement-based questionnaires, rich field notes, and observations from the video-recorded workshops. The findings indicate that Prisoner's dilemma may be used as a workshop tool for educational purposes. However, significant findings indicate that collaboration felt somewhat mandatory and learning was not optimized due to the dilemma. The research' limitations are discussed and further research is suggested. 

This research aims to gain knowledge regarding the group development process of newly formed innovation teams. In this comparative research, five multi-functional innovation teams based on voluntary members have been studied in an industrial context, all intending to conduct innovation projects after being educated in innovation management. In total 36 respondents have been studied. Qualitative data have repeatedly been collected from observations, interviews, questionnaires, and notes from team meetings in a timeframe of 6 - 18 month. Three of the teams were created in accordance with an explicit and stepwise methodology to create innovation teams, the other two teams were gathered to a sequence of educational seminars. Significant findings were that the teams created in accordance with the innovation-team-creation-methodology didn’t suffer from group dynamic problems, while the other two teams did. Further, the first three teams started innovation projects while the other two teams did not. Further research is suggested.

This research aims to study the importance of innovation enablers (Enablers), i.e. factors that enable innovation work, for innovation teams in on-going innovation work and to identify which Enablers that are most important. Prior research states that Enablers are important for innovation work, but there’s still knowledge to gain regarding their relative importance. Data from three innovation teams, supported by an external facilitator, were used within this study. The long-term qualitative study demonstrates that the Enablers’ importance varies, but Collaboration, Dedication and Mind-set were the most important Enablers in general to overcome innovation project related problems. Further research is suggested.

This research develops the understanding of the innovation facilitator’s (facilitator) role in terms of inexperienced innovation teams in an industrial context. Qualitative data was collected from three X-functional innovation teams’ members and their sponsor to identify the requirements for a facilitator. Forty characteristics were identified and charted in an innovation process. Significant findings, contributing to prior research, are that the facilitator’s presence and involvement in the innovation teams was crucial in the pre-phase and first phase of the innovation process due to the very high complexity; in these phases, personal characteristics as well as skills in, for example, facilitating, teaching, coaching, and group dynamics were central. The importance of the pre-phase was unexpected, resulting in an extended innovation process, during which an initial preparation phase has been added to the traditional innovation process. This knowledge is applicable, for example, when creating and educating new innovation teams within an organization. Future research is suggested.

This study explores the role of science and technology parks (STPs) as facilitators in the creation of an innovation-advising organization network (IAON) within the health, social welfare, and medical technology sector (health-tech). The background to this study is that more and more products using Industry 4.0 technology, i.e., robotics, artificial intelligence, and Internet of Things products, are being developed for the health-tech sector, leading to safer and more secure and cost-effective healthcare and social welfare. The challenge, however, as identified by an STP, is that the innovation-advising organizations are not collaborating efficiently, which results in scattered advise to the small and medium-sized enterprise/startups (SME) and an insufficient understanding of each other’s work when advising the same SME. In this study, the STP, successfully, initiated and facilitated the work to develop an IAON. Similar initiatives are suggested. Because challenges and success factors were identified, further studies are also recommended.

This study explores science and technology parks’ (STP) role as facilitators when an innovation advising organization network (IAON) within the health, social welfare, and medical technology sector (health-tech) develops a quality-assured innovation advising process (QAIP). The background is that more and more products using Industry 4.0 technology are being developed for the health-tech sector. The challenge, however, as recognized by an STP, is that the IAON’s members use individual innovation advise processes, which results in inaccurate advice to the SME and insufficient collaboration between the advising organizations when advising the same SME. In this study, one STP initiated and facilitated the work to develop a QAIP, which was developed stepwise through a series of workshops in an iterative process. This study indicates that STPs may play an active part in supporting IAONs developing specialized innovation processes for certain business and technology areas, although further studies are suggested.

This study explores what role science and technology parks (STP) can play when aiming to increase knowledge regarding the implementation of products for the health, social welfare, and medical technology sector (health-tech), including Industry 4.0 technology-based products (products), on a national level in Sweden. Such products, have problems reaching the market due to increased complexity from a purchase perspective. In this study, an STP developed a guideline on implementation-advice based on user-needs, literature studies, and focus groups. The guideline was presented at a seminar, where representatives from all regions in Sweden attended. The STP initiated the project, developed the guideline, and disseminated it successfully at a national level. The guideline was evaluated six months after the seminar, indicating that it created value in practice. This indicates that STPs could take an active role supporting products in the health-tech sector. New seminars are planned, and further studies are suggested.

This research aims to gain knowledge on how inter-organisational collaborative innovation and research projects can be initiated through a systematic workshop series. A series of workshops was planned and executed by an intermediator organisation. Sixteen participants representing academia, industry, and funding institutions were invited with the goal of initiating collaborative innovation or research projects. Data were collected through observations, statement-based questionnaires, and interviews. At the end of the workshop series, no projects were initiated. The problems were identified as the intermediator’s lack of knowledge in selecting and preparing participants for this setting, but also the participants’ lack of knowledge regarding innovation work and collaboration on an inter-organisational basis. Further research is suggested. 

This research explores the success factors of the research-based process for creating high-performing innovation teams, called the CIT-process. This paper is part of a study through which problems in the implementation of high-performing innovation teams were identified (Johnsson et al., 2019) when being used by innovation management practitioners (practitioners). The CIT-process is a five-step process prior to the innovation process. Before organizations were involved, practitioners at an innovation management firm were educated in the CIT-process and evaluated. Three innovation teams were created by the practitioners, conducting real innovation projects, facilitated by the practitioners. Data were collected through filed notes and interviews with participants and the practitioners. Three main themes appeared as key success factors: knowledge adoption, knowledge transition and knowledge transfer. Limitations are highlighted and future research is suggested.

This research explores problems occurring when practitioners use a research-based methodology regarding how to create high-performing innovation teams, namely the CIT-process, which has not been used by practitioners before. The CIT-process is recommended to be used prior to the ideation phase, which otherwise is considered to be the first phase in the innovation process. The CIT-process is a five-step process in which the innovation project kick-off is the final step. Prior steps refer to management commitment and identification and to the preparation of a convener and team members. A consultancy firm was educated and evaluated before organisations were involved, who brought real innovation projects to work on. Three innovation teams were created. Data were collected through observations at team meetings and interviews. Any problems were mainly caused by management that underestimated the value of preparation in innovation work. Scepticism towards the newly developed CIT-process and the practitioners' inexperience with the CIT-process were also addressed as reasons. The need for educational tools was highlighted. Further research is suggested.