Co-innovation: the X factor of science

Science and its advances are more than ever at the heart of the news with all the upheavals that the world is currently experiencing. Can or should co-innovation participate? On what subjects? Under what terms? That’s the whole point ofa survey carried out in collaboration between Futura and EDF Pulse & You in December 2021. The subject turned out to be fascinating given the enthusiasm for answers and the first lessons, while waiting to discover all the answers published in the Futura’s first paper review.

“All subjects can be addressed, it is even the essence of innovation to go beyond the perceptible limits”

According to the participants, a co-innovation project must have a multiple impact: 82% ecological (82%) but also on science (73%) and society (64%). Only 39% are in favor of an economic impact, which seems secondary, no doubt because it is more a means than an end in itself. The most anticipated topics concern the environment (79%), technology (70%), energy (70%) or Science (63%). On the other hand, very divisive subjects, which are too strategic or too expert, for example politics, seem less conducive to co-innovation. One of the participants also underlined the need to also cross-reference subjects: “ We too often take the subjects one after the other instead of thinking more globally. This is the challenge for our species. “The main thing for another is that” it does not serve an individual or a group of individuals for the benefit of another, everyone must be a winner “.

“Co-innovation can advance science by shaking up established ideas or concepts by bringing wacky or original ideas”

Concerning science in particular, co-innovation makes it possible to shake up certainties and encourages questioning, provided that it is truly multidisciplinary. ” Co-innovation allows several individuals mastering different skills and from various fields to discuss and try to concretize an idea or even several. These ideas would thus make it possible to advance science “, explains in particular a participant. Another virtue: it encourages the democratization of subjects and involves the citizen in scientific subjects. Even the most that are based on unfounded ideological bases are favorable to co-innovation because they bring contradictory ideas to the table and fuel the work of the co-innovator “.

Co-innovation also refocuses on the real use of innovations and promotes appropriation by the general public as this desire to ” create more bridges between science and the economic world / society: co-innovation can, in my opinion, make it possible to better establish the link between scientific advances (in matter knowledge, technologies, etc.) and their concrete implementation in everyday life, so that they can really have an impact on society “.

“Knowing how to listen is to possess, in addition to one’s own, the brains of others”

This quote from Leonardo DeVinci was acclaimed for defining the virtues of co-innovation on par with that of Albert Einstein : “ Creativity is contagious, pass it on ! The notions of listening, dialogue and creativity are therefore rather valued to the detriment of the idea of ​​disruptive innovation embodied by the quote from Henry Ford, which received only 5% of the votes: “ If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses. “. The contribution is considered primarily in terms of ideas (81%) and product or service testing (55%), more than advice (22%) or organization (12%), highlighted by one participant: co-innovation, by involving people with needs – ideas, will force researchers to push their thinking further and translate their concepts into feasible products. Attracting financiers and talents “. It should be noted that 49% of respondents agree to contribute “unconditionally” or just “with recognition of their work”.

“It is through the prism of each that an overall vision becomes accessible”

How should co-innovation take place? Transparent, universal, applied to current issues…, the words that come up the most reflect a desire for openness on the part of the participants, as one of them puts it, ” it is through the prism of each that an overall vision becomes accessible “. The principle of co-innovation is to bring together a sufficient number of participants so that ideas and solutions emerging, with citizens (at 37%) and companies (30%) as a priority, who are expected to propose topics, while the public authorities, at only 8%, seem to have lost their legitimacy in this area. The participants are in any case open to sharing their ideas. Only 11% of them believe they own them, while 45% want to manage them as common property, therefore by a community of users, and 42% opt for open source, therefore modified and released by any individual.