Journal Home Page

OPEN ACCESS

Managing Innovation: How Design Students Can Apply Management Principles to Multimedia Projects

Nazmia Jahan ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-1207-6771 Farah Anjum Neha ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5973-8757 Tahmina Kowsar Suravi ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1237-5676 Md. Sahriyer Sabbir ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9557-0939 Mohammad Farhan Khan Evan ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1511-1984 Department of Graphic Design & Multimedia Faculty of Design & Technology Shanto-Mariam University of Creative Technology Dhaka, Bangladesh

Prof. Dr Kazi Abdul Mannan Department of Business Administration Faculty of Business Shanto-Mariam University of Creative Technology Dhaka, Bangladesh Email: drkaziabdulmannan@gmail.com ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7123-132X   Corresponding author: Nazmia Jahan: nazmiajahan23@gmail.com

J. form. informal sect. 2025, 5(4); https://doi.org/10.64907/xkmf.v5i4.jfis.2

Submission received: 1 October 2025 / Revised: 9 November 2025 / Accepted: 1 December 2025 / Published: 25 December 2025

Download PDF (540 KB)

Abstract

Innovation is central to contemporary design education, particularly within multimedia projects that require the integration of creative practice, technology, and collaborative work. This paper examines how design students can apply established management principles to manage innovation within multimedia projects effectively. Drawing on the literature from innovation management, design studies, project management, and pedagogy, the article develops a theoretical framework that links managerial practices—planning and organising, leadership and team dynamics, resource management, process methodologies (e.g., agile and design thinking), and knowledge management—to the phases of multimedia project development. A qualitative research methodology is proposed and executed as a systematic thematic synthesis of existing literature and instructor interviews to identify actionable strategies for students. Findings reveal five cross-cutting themes: structured creativity through boundary conditions, iterative user-centred processes, collaborative leadership and shared ownership, capability building through reflection and documentation, and pragmatic resource and risk management. The article concludes with pedagogical recommendations, a proposed classroom toolkit, and directions for further empirical research.

Keywords: innovation management, design education, multimedia projects, design thinking, agile, thematic synthesis, project management

1. Introduction

Design education increasingly emphasises not only craft and aesthetic judgment but also the capacity to deliver innovative multimedia solutions under constraints of time, budget, and team complexity (Cross, 2006; Brown, 2008). Multimedia projects—encompassing video, interactive media, animation, sound design, and web-based experiences—pose specific management challenges: interdisciplinary skill integration, rapid technological change, distributed teamwork, and the need to balance experimentation with deliverable outcomes (Mayer, 2009; Tidd & Bessant, 2018).

For design students, developing competence in applying management principles to innovation processes is essential. Yet curricula often treat management and design as separate domains, leaving students to learn project coordination and strategic decisions through trial and error (Dorst, 2015). This work addresses that gap by translating classical and contemporary management concepts into practical approaches for managing innovation in multimedia student projects.

The article pursues three objectives:

• Synthesise literature on innovation management and design practice to create an applicable theoretical framework;
• Apply qualitative methods to synthesise thematic insights from scholarly texts and instructor perspectives; and
• Produce pedagogically grounded recommendations and a classroom toolkit for design educators and students.

The paper contributes a bridge between management scholarship and design pedagogy—centred on actionable strategies that foster both creativity and project delivery.

2. Literature Review

This section reviews four bodies of literature relevant to the topic: innovation management; management principles and project management; design practice and design education; and process frameworks used in multimedia and creative projects.

2.1 Innovation Management

Innovation management research examines how organisations and teams generate, select, and implement new ideas (Tidd & Bessant, 2018; Dodgson, Gann, & Salter, 2008). Key concepts include the innovation funnel (idea generation to commercialisation), ambidexterity (exploration vs. exploitation), open innovation, and dynamic capabilities (Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997). For student projects, the tension between exploration (experimentation) and exploitation (completion) is particularly salient: students must generate creative concepts while also delivering functioning multimedia artefacts within deadlines (Christensen, 1997).

2.2 Management Principles and Project Management

Classical management theories—planning, organising, leading, and controlling—remain relevant when applied to project-based learning in design contexts (Fayol, 1949; Drucker, 1954). Contemporary project management frameworks like PMBOK (Project Management Institute, 2017) and agile methods (Beck et al., 2001) offer tools for scope management, scheduling, resource allocation, and stakeholder communication. Agile approaches and lean practices adapted to creative teams—often combined with user-centred design—support iterative delivery and continuous feedback loops (Highsmith, 2002; Rigby, Sutherland, & Takeuchi, 2016).

2.3 Design Practice and Design Education

Design scholarship highlights the distinctive cognitive, social, and material practices underpinning creative work (Cross, 2006; Lawson, 2006). Design thinking, as articulated by Brown (2008) and others, offers a problem-framing and iterative prototyping approach that aligns with innovation aims. Educational research stresses experiential learning and reflective practice (Kolb, 1984; Schön, 1983), suggesting that management interventions should be taught through active project work rather than solely by lecture.

2.4 Process Frameworks in Multimedia Projects

Multimedia production often borrows film and software development practices: pre-production (research and planning), production (creation), and post-production (editing, testing, and delivery) (Mayer, 2009). Integration of UX research methods—persona building, usability testing, and collaborative production tools (version control, task boards) supports the successful coordination of creative and technical tasks (Norman, 2013; Sanders & Stappers, 2008).

3. Theoretical Framework

To guide application, this paper synthesises management theory and design practice into a pragmatic framework for student multimedia projects. The framework organises managerial concerns along five domains, each tied to stages of a multimedia project: Initiation & Framing, Planning & Resource Management, Execution & Iteration, Evaluation & Knowledge Capture, and Scaling & Handover (see Figure 1).

3.1 The Five Domains

Initiation & Framing (Strategic Orientation): Drawing on sensemaking and framing literature (Weick, 1995), this domain emphasises defining the problem space, stakeholder analysis, and alignment of innovation goals with learning outcomes. Techniques: stakeholder maps, brief co-creation sessions, opportunity framing.

Planning & Resource Management (Operational Design): Grounded in Fayol’s planning and organising and PMBOK’s scope/resource planning, this domain deals with timelines, role allocation, budget (time/technical resources), and risk registers adapted for student contexts.

Execution & Iteration (Process & Methods): Incorporates agile and design thinking principles to structure sprints, prototyping cycles, peer reviews, and usability testing (Brown, 2008; Beck et al., 2001). Emphasis on rapid prototyping to maintain momentum while enabling creative exploration.

Evaluation & Knowledge Capture (Learning & Quality): Combines reflective practice with quality control—project retrospectives, formative assessment, documentation of decisions, and archiving of assets for re-use (Schön, 1983; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Scaling & Handover (Sustainability & Impact): Focuses on packaging deliverables for broader use, dissemination strategies, and considerations for future scaling or iteration beyond course deadlines—connecting student work to portfolios, repositories, or community stakeholders.

3.2 Underlying Theories

The framework rests on complementary theoretical foundations:

• Design Thinking and Human-Centred Design (Brown, 2008; Norman, 2013): Provides methods for empathising with users and iterative prototyping.
• Ambidexterity and Dynamic Capabilities (Teece et al., 1997; O’Reilly & Tushman, 2004): Balances creative exploration with disciplined project delivery.
• Knowledge Creation and Communities of Practice (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Wenger, 1998): Emphasises shared artefacts and reflective documentation as mechanisms for organisational learning.
• Agile/Lean Principles (Beck et al., 2001; Ries, 2011): Support iterative cycles, validated learning, and rapid feedback in creative workflows.

This multi-theoretical scaffold helps translate management principles into specific practices that align with design pedagogy and the realities of multimedia production.

4. Research Methodology

Given the practice-oriented nature of the research question, a qualitative approach was selected to explore how management principles are applied (or could be applied) in student multimedia projects. The research comprised two complementary components: a systematic thematic synthesis of peer-reviewed and practitioner literature, and semi-structured interviews with experienced design instructors and project supervisors. This section outlines sampling, data collection, analytic procedures, and ethical considerations.

4.1 Research Design: Qualitative Synthesis + Interviews

A qualitative synthesis (methodological adaptation of systematic review approaches) allowed integration of conceptual and empirical insights across disciplinary literatures. The interview component provided practitioner perspectives, validating and enriching themes emerging from the literature.

4.2 Sampling and Data Sources

• Literature corpus: Peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and practitioner reports spanning innovation management, design education, and multimedia production (time frame: foundational texts through contemporary sources). Approximately 80 sources were reviewed purposively to capture theoretical breadth and applied practice.
• Participants for interviews: Purposive sampling targeted 8–12 design educators and project supervisors with experience overseeing multimedia coursework in higher-education design programs. Participants were recruited via professional networks and program webpages. Interviews lasted 45–60 minutes and were conducted via videoconference.

4.3 Data Collection Procedures

• Literature extraction: Each source was coded for themes related to management practices, project phases, pedagogical strategies, barriers, and enabling conditions.
• Interviews: Semi-structured interviews followed an interview guide focusing on: pedagogical goals, common failure modes in student multimedia projects, management techniques that instructors teach or apply, assessment strategies, and examples of innovation in student work.

Interviews were audio-recorded with participant consent and transcribed verbatim for analysis.

4.4 Data Analysis

Thematic analysis, following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase approach, was employed: familiarisation with data, initial coding, theme development, review of themes, defining/naming themes, and producing the report. Coding was both deductive (based on the theoretical framework) and inductive (allowing unexpected themes to emerge).

For literature synthesis, a similar thematic extraction was conducted and cross-referenced with interview themes to triangulate findings.

4.5 Trustworthiness and Reflexivity

To enhance credibility, the research used multiple sources of evidence, provided thick descriptions for themes, and engaged in reflexive memoing. The researcher acknowledged positionality as a design educator with interests in both management pedagogy and practice-based learning; this perspective influenced coding and interpretation.

4.6 Ethical Considerations

Participants provided informed consent. Data were de-identified. The research design respected confidentiality and intellectual property norms for the course materials discussed in interviews.

5. Findings

Thematic synthesis of literature and instructor interviews yielded five primary themes representing how management principles can support innovation in multimedia student projects:  structured creativity through boundary setting, iterative user-centred processes, collaborative leadership and role clarity, knowledge capture and reflective practice, and pragmatic resource and risk management. Each theme is described with illustrative practices and pedagogical implications.

5.1 Structured Creativity Through Boundary Setting

Multiple sources and instructors emphasised that creativity benefits from well-defined constraints: clear briefs, timelines, and success criteria provide scaffolding that channels ideation toward feasible outcomes (Stokes, 2006; Dorst, 2015). One interviewee noted:

“Students often mistake openness for license to wander. When we set clear milestones and a tight brief, their concepts become richer because they’re solving a real, bounded problem.”

Practical strategies: constrained ideation exercises (time-limited sprints), graded milestones, and brief templates that require problem framing, target audience, and deliverables. These measures align with classical planning principles while preserving space for exploration.

5.2 Iterative User-Centred Processes

Design thinking and agile practices converged in recommendations to prioritise iterative cycles with user feedback (Brown, 2008; Beck et al., 2001). Students who integrated early testing (peer and user feedback) refined concepts more effectively and avoided late-stage rework. Instructor accounts highlighted low-fi prototyping (paper mockups, storyboards, clickable wireframes) as high-impact interventions.

Practical strategies: schedule multiple usability checkpoints, require prototypes before production, and use lightweight feedback instruments (heuristic checklists, short surveys). This approach operationalises the execution & iteration domain of the theoretical framework.

5.3 Collaborative Leadership and Role Clarity

Managing teams emerged as a central challenge. Research on creative teamwork indicates that distributed leadership—where leadership functions (vision, task coordination, conflict mediation) rotate or are shared—supports engagement and accountability (Sawyer, 2007). Interviews revealed that explicit role charters and short-term task owners reduce coordination overhead and conflict.

Practical strategies: develop role charters (creative lead, technical lead, production manager), weekly stand-ups, and peer assessment mechanisms to reinforce shared ownership.

5.4 Knowledge Capture and Reflective Practice

Instructors stressed the importance of documenting process decisions, failed experiments, and rationale—both for assessment and for students’ future practice. The literature on reflective practice and knowledge creation argues that artefacts of process (diaries, version histories) function as learning resources and as institutional memory (Schön, 1983; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Practical strategies: require process journals, commit versioned assets to repositories (Git, cloud storage), and conduct structured retrospectives at project milestones.

5.5 Pragmatic Resource and Risk Management

Finally, effective student projects contend with resource constraints: limited access to hardware/software, time pressure, and differing skill levels. Borrowing from project management, instructors recommended simple risk registers, contingency planning, and modular production pipelines (tasks that can be paralleled or scaled down).

Practical strategies: a lightweight risk log, minimum viable deliverable definitions, and contingency task lists that can be activated if core elements fail.

6. Discussion

The thematic findings converge on a central insight: management principles—when adapted to the specificities of design pedagogy—are not antithetical to creativity but rather enable more ambitious and reliable innovation outcomes. This section discusses theoretical implications, pedagogical translations, and tensions that instructors must navigate.

6.1 Management as Enabler of Creative Ambidexterity

The dynamic capabilities perspective suggests that successful innovation requires organisations to be ambidextrous—capable of both exploration and exploitation (O’Reilly & Tushman, 2004). In student projects, management practices (planning, iterative checkpoints, and role clarity) help teams toggle between divergent ideation and convergent execution. The framework’s domains operationalise ambidexterity by specifying when and how to introduce constraint, iteration, and reflection.

6.2 Pedagogical Implications

Embedding management principles in course design requires intentional scaffolding. The following pedagogical moves are recommended:

• Design a modular assessment that values process as well as product (e.g., grading rubrics that include documentation, peer feedback, and iterative prototypes).
• Teach lightweight management tools: one-page briefs, sprint backlogs, role charters, and risk logs tailored for student workflows.
• Simulate real-world constraints: budgets (time/credits), stakeholder feedback, and assignment briefs from external partners to create authentic pressure points.

These measures align with experiential learning theory and prepare students for professional practice where management and creativity are tightly interwoven.

6.3 Balancing Structure and Freedom

A recurring tension is how much structure to impose. Excessive control can stifle risk-taking; too little leads to unfocused projects. The article suggests an adaptive approach: increasing structure in early phases (to align teams and define scope), shifting to looser constraints for ideation phases, and then reintroducing tighter controls during production and delivery.

6.4 Limitations and Further Research

This study’s synthesis approach and interviews provide rich conceptual guidance, but empirical validation is needed. Future research should include longitudinal studies tracking student teams across multiple project cycles, experimental designs comparing different management interventions, and cross-cultural studies exploring how local educational norms shape management strategies.

7. Pedagogical Recommendations and a Classroom Toolkit

The translation of theoretical insights and findings into classroom practice requires detailed, structured pedagogical strategies that educators can implement within design programs. This section expands on earlier recommendations to provide a comprehensive pedagogical framework and a classroom toolkit tailored for managing innovation in multimedia projects. Drawing on scholarship in pedagogy, management education, and design practice, the expanded section presents strategies for scaffolding learning, aligning assessment, fostering collaboration, and sustaining reflective practice.

7.1 Pedagogical Foundations for Integrating Management Principles

Embedding management principles within design education requires pedagogical approaches that honour the creativity of students while introducing structures that cultivate professional readiness. According to Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning cycle, students learn most effectively through concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation, and active experimentation. Multimedia projects are ideally suited for this model, as they allow students to ideate, prototype, test, and reflect in iterative cycles.

Schön’s (1983) reflective practitioner framework further emphasises the importance of reflection-in-action, where students adapt management tools in real time as challenges emerge. Educators must therefore scaffold learning so that students not only adopt management tools mechanically but also critically reflect on their value, limitations, and adaptability to different creative contexts. This dual emphasis fosters metacognitive awareness of how management principles support innovation.

7.2 Structuring Courses Around Innovation Management

One effective approach is to design courses around the five domains of the theoretical framework outlined earlier: initiation and framing, planning and resource management, execution and iteration, evaluation and knowledge capture, and scaling and handover. Each domain can serve as a module in a semester-long course, with deliverables aligned to both creative outcomes and managerial practices. For example:

• Module 1 (Initiation & Framing): Students create project briefs and stakeholder maps, learning to articulate scope and innovation goals (Weick, 1995).
• Module 2 (Planning & Resource Management): Teams develop role charters, schedules, and lightweight risk registers, building operational discipline (Fayol, 1949).
• Module 3 (Execution & Iteration): Students run short design sprints with prototyping and user testing, reflecting agile and design thinking methods (Beck et al., 2001; Brown, 2008).
• Module 4 (Evaluation & Knowledge Capture): Emphasis is placed on reflective journals, retrospectives, and archiving of process artefacts (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Schön, 1983).
• Module 5 (Scaling & Handover): Students prepare final deliverables with accompanying documentation, portfolios, or dissemination plans (Wenger, 1998).

Such a curriculum scaffolds both creative and managerial skill sets, ensuring students understand management not as an external imposition but as an integral dimension of design practice.

7.3 Assessment Strategies that Balance Process and Product

Assessment design strongly influences student priorities. Traditional grading often overemphasises final outputs, leading students to underinvest in process management. Research on design education suggests that assessing both process and product better reflects authentic professional practice (Cross, 2006; Dorst, 2015). A balanced assessment rubric could weight conceptual quality, technical execution, collaboration, iteration, and reflection.

For instance, students might be graded not only on the final multimedia artefact but also on the quality of their project brief, their role performance in teams, their documentation of process, and their ability to incorporate feedback from user testing. Such rubrics reinforce the value of management principles and encourage accountability throughout the project lifecycle (Biggs & Tang, 2011).

7.4 Teaching Lightweight Management Tools

Students are often overwhelmed by complex project management frameworks like PMBOK, which are designed for large-scale professional contexts (Project Management Institute, 2017). Instead, instructors can adapt simplified versions of tools, such as:

• One-page project briefs to define goals, deliverables, and constraints.
• Role charters outlining responsibilities and expectations within teams.
• Weekly stand-ups (short meetings) to track progress and identify blockers.
• Risk logs identifying top risks, mitigation strategies, and contingency plans.
• Process journals combining reflections, sketches, and documentation.

These lightweight tools strike a balance between structure and usability, aligning with findings that students require constraints that channel but do not stifle creativity (Stokes, 2006).

7.5 Fostering Collaboration and Team Dynamics

Collaboration is at the heart of multimedia projects, and management pedagogy must emphasise interpersonal skills alongside technical and creative abilities. Sawyer (2007) highlights the role of group genius, where innovation emerges from collaborative improvisation. Instructors can foster collaboration by introducing peer assessment mechanisms, rotating leadership roles, and facilitating structured team-building exercises.

In practice, instructors may require teams to submit a collaboration agreement early in the project, outlining norms for communication, conflict resolution, and decision-making. Peer evaluation at multiple points in the semester ensures accountability and mitigates free-rider problems. Such practices help students internalise the interpersonal dimensions of management, preparing them for professional environments where collaboration is non-negotiable (Rigby et al., 2016).

7.6 Embedding Reflection and Knowledge Capture

Knowledge management principles are particularly valuable for design students, who often struggle to articulate the rationale behind their design choices. Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) knowledge-creation theory emphasises the transformation of tacit knowledge (intuitive insights) into explicit knowledge (codified documentation). Reflective journals, design diaries, and process portfolios serve this function in educational contexts.

To embed reflection, instructors can assign structured prompts that guide students to analyse decision-making, challenges, and outcomes. Retrospective sessions at project milestones can be facilitated using simple frameworks such as “start, stop, continue,” encouraging both individual and team reflection. These practices develop students’ metacognitive skills while also producing artefacts useful for future reference and portfolio development (Schön, 1983).

7.7 Simulating Real-World Constraints

Authenticity is a key principle in experiential learning. By simulating real-world constraints, instructors can prepare students for professional innovation environments. These constraints may include strict deadlines, limited resources, stakeholder feedback, or industry-standard deliverables. External partners, such as nonprofit organisations or local businesses, can provide authentic briefs, offering students a chance to apply management principles to projects with real-world impact (Sanders & Stappers, 2008).

Simulating constraints has motivational benefits as well, fostering a sense of urgency and relevance. However, instructors must balance difficulty to avoid overwhelming students. Providing safety nets, such as flexible deadlines for formative tasks or additional support sessions, ensures constraints function as productive challenges rather than barriers (Christensen, 1997).

7.8 A Comprehensive Classroom Toolkit

Drawing together the above strategies, the classroom toolkit can be expanded into a robust resource for both educators and students. Key components include:

• One-Page Project Brief Template with clear sections for context, objectives, deliverables, constraints, and success criteria.
• Role Charters specifying rotating leadership roles, expectations, and accountability mechanisms.
• Sprint Plans aligned with course modules, including milestones for ideation, prototyping, production, and reflection.
• Assessment Rubrics that balance creativity, execution, process, collaboration, iteration, and reflection.
• Peer Evaluation Tools enabling anonymous feedback on collaboration, role fulfilment, and contribution.
• Process Journals and Retrospectives to capture decision-making, reflections, and lessons learned.
• Risk Logs and Contingency Plans that introduce students to basic risk management principles.
• Portfolio Integration Guidelines to help students connect classroom projects with professional identity-building.

8. Conclusion

Managing innovation in multimedia projects is an educational imperative for design programs preparing students for the collaborative, technology-mediated workplaces of contemporary creative industries. This article demonstrated that management principles—when translated into lightweight, practice-oriented tools—support student creativity, improve project reliability, and foster transferable professional skills. By adopting a five-domain framework and the classroom toolkit, design educators can help students learn to balance exploration with disciplined delivery.

Further empirical work is needed to test specific interventions and refine assessment strategies. Nonetheless, the synthesis and practitioner insights presented here provide a practical roadmap for integrating management into design pedagogy without dampening creative potential.

References

Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., … & Thomas, D. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. http://agilemanifesto.org/

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92.

Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business Review Press.

Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. Springer.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). SAGE.

Dodgson, M., Gann, D., & Salter, A. (2008). The management of technological innovation: Strategy and practice. Oxford University Press.

Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by design. MIT Press.

Drucker, P. F. (1954). The practice of management. Harper & Row.

Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management (C. Storrs, Trans.). Pitman. (Original work published 1916)

Highsmith, J. (2002). Agile software development ecosystems. Addison-Wesley.Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.

Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think: The design process demystified (4th ed.). Routledge.

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press.

Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic Books.

O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organisation. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74–81.

Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Crown Business.

Rigby, D. K., Sutherland, J., & Takeuchi, H. (2016). Embracing agile. Harvard Business Review, 94(5), 40–50.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.

Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Sawyer, R. K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. Basic Books.

Stokes, P. D. (2006). Creativity from constraints: The psychology of breakthrough. Springer.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

Tidd, J., & Bessant, J. (2018). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organisational change (6th ed.). Wiley.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organisations. Sage Publications.