This is an interesting vacancy. Space for change.
The chairgroups ‘Communication Strategies’ and ‘Communication & Innovation Studies’ conduct research
on the role of communication in individual and collective change processes in four life science domains:
-food and health
-nature, water and environment
-agriculture and land-use and
Our joint research programme ‘Communication and Space for Change’ offers considerable room for pursuing
your own research interest.
I might be interested; I would really welcome a ‘framework’ to help me get round to more and better thinking, learning and writing. But is a university the place to be if you want to keep track of change and space for change?
I can follow the reasoning in the research program very well. Some of it really makes sense to me.
“meaningful innovation is dependent on changes in discourses, representations and storylines that are mobilised by interacting social actors”… “The emergence of ‘space for change’, then, can be interpreted as being associated with an altering of what we call ‘Discursive Space’ at different interfaces in a network.”
Actually, it phrases some of the things i am trying to understand for myself. i.e how can non-organizations flourish? How can they connect to others in a world already mapped out?
What role do boundary spanners have? What are organisational and business models to accomodate multiple stakeholders?
under the heading Self-organisation in networks: “This line of research seeks to increase our understanding of processes of self-organisation and the role of communication and communication infrastructures (e.g. the Internet) therein. At the same time we wish to gain insight in how formal organisations, deliberate communicative intervention and processes of self-organisation interact and influence each other, and how such interaction patterns contribute to or hamper processes of space creation in networks and organisations.”
under the heading Innovation systems and the role of boundary spanners in forging space: …” to enhance our insight in the roles that newly emerging ‘boundary spanners’ may play in assisting stakeholders to arrive at a negotiated space for change. At the same time we wish to contribute to the development of better institutional arrangements and methodological approaches for brokering between, for example, problem owners, applied research and advisory services.”
I will continue to look for answers in my own way: taking part, blogging, interacting. I do hope the successful candidates for these posts will share generously and early.