Abstract
Several authors have claimed that there is an increasing demand for multidisciplinary and cross-disciplinary work in service science, management and innovation. Especially in the service area there is a need to break down the barriers between disciplines. At the same time here is evidence that joint multidisciplinary work by authors in academic journals is only increasing marginally. Another weakness is the lack of real academia–company interaction. Service sector companies have accumulated significant experiential knowledge base and tacit insight from their engagements with many real life applications and successes, but these have often not been studied by academicians for abstraction and understanding of principles. This calls for more study as well. As academia cannot bridge the gap alone with their traditional curricula, there is a most important role for new learning approaches incorporating cross disciplinary and academia–company learning at the group level. In this case, bringing the group approach to learning means contributions from a wide area of disciplines and participation from academia as well as from companies. Problem based learning (PBL) seems to be an approach that provides the necessary structure for systematic goal oriented collaboration while encouraging new paradigms to emerge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Agarwal, R. and Selen, W. (2009). Dynamic capability building in service value networks for service innovation, Decision sciences, 40 (3), 431–475.
Annabile, T. (1996). Creativity in context, Westview Press, Boulder.
Beckman, S. L. and Berry, M. (2007). Innovation as a learning process, California Management Review, 50 (1), 25–56, Fall.
Cambridge White Paper. (2008). Succeeding through service innovation, University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing. (www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/ssme/documents/080428ssi_us_letter.pdf accessed on 12/09/2009).
Christopherson, E., Coupe, P. S., Lenschow, R. J. and Townson, J. (1994). Evaluation of civil and construction engineering education in Denmark, Centre for Quality Assurance and Evaluation of Higher Education in Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Dutson, A. J., Todd, R. H., Magleby, S. P. and Sorensen, C. D. (1997). A review of literature on teaching design through project oriented capstone courses, Journal of Engineering Education, 76 (1), pp 17–28.
Dym, C. L. and Little, L. (2003). Engineering design: A project-based-introduction, 2nd edition, John Wiley, New York.
Eris, O. (2004). Effective inquiry for innovative engineering design, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA.
Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point, Little Brown, NY.
Godin, S. (2001). Unleashing the idea virus, Hyperion, NY.
Grinter, L. E. (1956). Report on the evaluation of engineering education, Engineering Education, 46, pp 25–63.
Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2003). A new approach to innovative design, Proceedings International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm, Sweden.
Holman, D., Pavlica, K. and Thorpe, R. (1997). Rethinking Kolb’s theory of experiential learning in management education, Management Learning, 28 (2), pp 135–148.
Johansson, F. (2006). The medici effect, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, Prentice-Hall, NJ, USA.
Kolb, A. Y. and Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential learning in higher education, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4 (2), pp 193–212.
Liedtka, J. (2000). Strategic planning as a contributor to strategic change: A generative model, European Management Journal, 18 (2), pp 195–206, April.
Lemmink, J. (2005). The need for more multidisciplinary research, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16 (1), pp 7–9.
Pinhanez, C. (2009). Services as customer-intensive systems, Design Issues, MIT, 25 (2), pp 3–13.
Reynolds, M. and Vince, R. (2004). Critical management education and action based learning, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (4), pp 442–456.
Spohrer, J. and Kwan, S. K. (2008). Service Science, Management, Engineering and Design (SSMED); Outline & References (http://www.col.sjsu.edu/ssme/ssmed.pdf accessed on 12/10/2009).
Svobodovas, L. (2008). The challenge of SSME (www.informatics-europe.org/ECSS08/Papers/svobodova.pdf accessed on 12/10/2009).
Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing, Journal of Marketing, 68 (January), pp 1–17.
Verganti, R. (2006). Innovation trough design, Harvard Business Review, 84 (12), pp 114–122.
Wilkerson, L. and Gijselaers, W. H. (Eds.) (1996). Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. New directions in teaching and learning, Jossey-Bass quarterly sourcebooks, number 68. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science and Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lemmink, J.G.A.M., Chatterjee, J. (2011). Service Science Learning: Exploring the Challenge of Cross Disciplinary and Academia–Company Collaboration. In: Demirkan, H., Spohrer, J., Krishna, V. (eds) The Science of Service Systems. Service Science: Research and Innovations in the Service Economy. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8270-4_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8270-4_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-8269-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-8270-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)