Technology is assumed to be important for enhancing older adults' life quality and for ameliorating age-related problems, but older adults nevertheless typically exhibit lower technology adoption rates than young people. Gamification has the potential to address this problem by motivating older adults, but its value for the elderly has thus far been undermined through gamification design biases favoring young people. This study addressed this problem by developing a purpose-built gamified learning system, based on a popular mobile payment platform, to test the potential of employing a gamification-and-learning approach to the design of gamification systems for enhancing knowledge transfer and technology adoption by older adults. The research employed structural equation modeling, incorporating user knowledge and gamification-related constructs, drawing upon the established Technology Acceptance Model. Data were collected from older adults in Hong Kong with an appropriate demographic and market profile, following a one-group pretest–posttest research design. The results revealed notable gamification-induced improvements in the knowledge and technology adoption intentions of older adults, and significant positive relationships between gamification effectiveness and technology adoption constructs. The research demonstrates the significant positive effects which gamification may have on the acceptance and usage of technology by older adults and evokes policy implications for the silver-hair market.

Purpose In this study, we investigate how capability in managing intellectual property may be treated as a type of “dynamic capability,” and we seek to understand how, when it is linked to the new technology development capability of a complex technological organization, these two types of dynamic capabilities may coevolve. Design/methodology/approach We conducted a longitudinal empirical case study of Airbus, incorporating an abductive research methodology that required investigating theory and empirical data concurrently and iteratively. The data, ranging over a period of two decades from 2000 to 2021, was collected from four different sources, including interviews, internal company documents, publicly available information and patent data. Findings Our main findings are that the capabilities and roles of the Intellectual Property function in Airbus and their interaction with the company's Technology function have indeed influenced the overall innovation strategy of the organization, and that three coevolutionary phases may be identified in the interactive development of the two functions. Research limitations/implications Our investigation into how new technology development and intellectual property (IP) management capabilities coevolve within complex technological organizations, exemplified by Airbus, provides significant theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, it enhances understanding of capability co-development dynamics in complex organizations, particularly in strategic IP management. Practically, it suggests aligning IP strategy with overall corporate objectives and optimizing organizational structures to promote collaboration and efficiency across IP and technology teams. This alignment may foster innovation, maximize the value of intellectual assets and strengthen collaborations, positioning organizations for long-term success in competitive landscapes. Originality/value This study makes a fresh contribution to the innovation studies literature by showing how if intellectual property management is treated as a core function of a complex technological organization – rather than simply as a vehicle for protecting new inventions and products after the fact or simply as a constituent part of the organization's legal function – it may contribute proactively to the organization's technological innovation performance. We also address the current gap in the academic literature for a clear understanding of the processes by which different function-specific dynamic capabilities may coevolve in a complex organization operating as part of a dynamic and complex adaptive system.

Innovation-focused co-creation between companies and individual external contributors is accompanied by the challenge of managing intellectual property (IP). The existing literature presents scattered evidence of various elements of the arrangements adopted by companies to manage their IP (such as a high or low degree of IP control, monetary or non-monetary compensation, non-disclosure agreements, additional agreements and the waiver option) in different co-creation settings (including crowdsourcing contests, virtual communities, single expert sessions and lead user workshops). However, the existing literature exhibits little understanding of how particular IP arrangements influence co-creation project performance in specific settings. Drawing upon contingency theory and configurational theory, we provide a framework that explains both the effectiveness of different IP configurations and the moderating role that co-creation settings may have on the relationship between IP arrangements and project performance. By the means of fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) on a sample of 116 co-creation projects, we determine the impact of various IP arrangements on project performance in different co-creation settings, and we show how this effect differs across those settings. Our study also demonstrates that IP matters for success in co-creation, while highlighting the interdependence of multiple elements of IP arrangements and their joint influence on co-creation project performance. Our study thus fills the gap in the literature where previous research failed to embrace the context-dependent and multidimensional effect of IP arrangements on co-creation project performance. Additionally, this study offers best-practice guidelines for managers for designing IP arrangements to meet the specific characteristics of their co-creation projects and to ensure their success.

“Technological innovation” has become a catch phrase of contemporary policy making for governments, corporations and academic organizations. For many it has become an article of faith that technological innovation is the key to solving energy transition and environmental problems, but the formula for success is not obvious. The phrase “science and technology” rolls off the tongues of energy related policymakers, managers and researchers spontaneously, as if this is the natural order of things, but why is the converse phrase “technology and science” so rarely encountered? The popular view appears to be that energy technology is applied energy science, or that technological change in the field of energy technologies flows naturally from scientific progress. However, what if popular preconceptions about the relationship between science and technology in the energy field are misplaced? This paper addresses the question of the fundamental relationship between technology and science by first analyzing historical cases of two representative energy-conversion technologies, then reviewing pertinent literature from the field of science, technology and society (STS) studies, and finally investigating empirically the nature of the relationship using statistical data analysis. It draws policy-making implications for investment in energy technology and science. We propose the hypothesis of technology-conditioned science as a plausible and credible counterweight to extant commonplace presumptions that science is the precursor of low-carbon energy-conversion technologies.