The research began with the question of the identity of things (objects or phenomena). There are two ways of approaching it, corresponding to the so-called primal and dual phases, depending on whether the objective is to preserve this identity (of a technical object, an entity, a system, a representation, a phenomenon, etc.) over time and space, or on the contrary to transform it (i.e. renewal, potential innovation, etc.). This is followed by the phases of refoundation and origins. Innovation proceeds through symbiosis and emergence, introducing bio-inspiration into decision science (“invisible hand” of Nature and free will) and into the theory of the firm (common utility and value sharing as initial conditions for emergence and innovation).
– Primal phase: preserving the identity of things (search for invariants)
Preserving the identity of things concerns all human activities, particularly industries (aeronautics, defense, space, software, biotechnology, chemistry, etc.) subject to frequent or even permanent endogenous (internal environment) or exogenous (external environment) changes. The stakes are considerable: bioequivalence, aviation or software safety, cloning, transplantation, etc.
The scientific and semantic foundations that make it possible to address this question of identity (i.e. interchangeability, equivalence, equality, substitutability, indiscernibility, etc.) and to make plausible predictions (reproducibility, behavior, etc.) are still being studied through research-interventions (Giacomoni 2002, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2022, 2024; Giacomoni & Sardas 2011).
This issue lies at the heart of knowledge management and information systems research, as the identity of things is neither absolute nor permanent, but relative and provisional. No international standard, software package, AI, or data science approach can provide a fully satisfactory managerial solution.
Formally, increasing generality also links the question of identity to mathematical theories concerning complexity, ZFC set theory, models (semantics), and forcing (extension of a reference universe), which are used in decision science.
– Dual phase: changing the identity of things (reverse search = innovation)
If endogenous (e.g. new interactions) or exogenous (e.g. new interacting elements) changes alter the identity of things, there is potentially innovation (in the etymological sense of entering into the new: in-nova-tio). Innovation remains potential as long as its acceptance and application are not generalized.
The identification and incorporation of novel elements, originating externally, generate identities capable of creating new value systems, new technical frameworks, or new knowledge bases. Such a process is strategic for building new economies and expanding activities.
It requires proceeding like a geneticist, with the difficulty of “finding” novelty elements that are histocompatible, and then technically grafting them onto the existing system. This issue can therefore be reformulated as a grafting of donor and recipient universes of novelty elements satisfying histocompatibility conditions in order to solve an unresolved problem, an incompleteness, or an epistemic dilemma.
Exploratory research into histocompatible universes requires working outside a given reference universe (principle of inventiveness or abstraction), within “a universe of all possible universes” (i.e. a multiverse), if it pre-exists. Hence the choice of a constructivist approach (such a multiverse of possibilities is not given in advance but is constructed), inspired by symbioses shaped by over 4 billion years of evolution.
The scientific foundations are still under study (Giacomoni 2012, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2021, 2024; Giacomoni & Jardat 2014) and have numerous applications (entrepreneurship, chairs, projects).
Operations research, as a discipline of scientific methods for better decision-making, does not proceed in this way. It proposes conceptual simulation models to analyze complex situations (network organization, banking portfolios, DNA sequencing, satellite coverage, etc.) and help decision-makers make informed choices (better understanding, complete vision, solution space, risk evaluation, optimization, etc.).
It assumes the pre-existence of a reference universe of possibilities and operates within it, never in a multiverse. It generally relies on artificial and adaptive learning (metaheuristics, hybrid metaheuristics, hyperheuristics, etc.) with an objective function, empirically with or without prior assumptions.
Similarly, AI, data science, intelligent algorithms, statistical decision theory, Bayesian processes, economic theories, and management sciences follow this logic.
– Refoundation phase: bio-inspiration (symbiosis, emergence) in decision science and firm theory
Symbiosis encompasses all forms of co-evolution (mutualism, commensalism, antagonism), from individuals to ecosystems. Nature operates through symbiosis (“living together”) to preserve biodiversity between extinction and divergence.
Like the living world, innovation processes through hybridization must be conceived according to this evolutionary law. The properties of symbiosis emerge from self-organized interaction dynamics, with infinitely many unpredictable possibilities.
They are governed by the “invisible hand” of Nature (or its author), not by human control. They do not result from a sum of individually selected and controlled decisions or actions aimed at achieving predefined outcomes.
In the face of major contemporary transitions (ecological, digital, etc.), once described as VUCA and now as FANI (Fragile, Anxious, Nonlinear, Incomprehensible), decision sciences must become bio-inspired.
This implies a paradigm shift, particularly regarding free will. All artificiality and rationality are limited. Attempting to control symbioses and emergence without Nature’s invisible hand would be futile.
Research therefore seeks to infer and experiment with the initial conditions for the emergence of symbioses (e.g. industrial and territorial symbioses) to generate sufficient momentum (Giacomoni et al. 2022, 2025).
The implications concern human societies, the economy, and the foundations of firms, especially social and solidarity-based enterprises (cooperatives, etc.), characterized by hybridization (market–redistribution–reciprocity), democratic governance, and value sharing.
– Origins phase: initial conditions of emergence and innovation (common utility and value sharing)
In economics, utility refers to the satisfaction or well-being derived from goods or services, assumed to be measurable and linked to decisions (utility function). In the Anglo-Saxon world, it overlaps with the notion of the common good.
Collective utility aggregates individual utilities, while common utility refers to the well-being derived when individuals act for the collective interest, including social interactions and recognition mechanisms.
This notion aligns with Article 1 of the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man: social distinctions may only be based on common utility. It also characterizes social enterprises as accountable to both members and the broader community.
Common utility reflects early human societies (hunter-gatherers), whereas modern utility reflects post-Neolithic individual appropriation. A “meta-utility” combining both could reconcile these models.
Future desirable systems require this paradigm of common utility and value sharing, fostering a form of homophily based on shared purpose. However, this paradigm is rarely considered a driver of innovation, which typically focuses on products, models, processes, or markets—not ownership structures.
Research projects
- Horizon 2020 (European research and innovation framework programme), Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action – RISE (MSCA-RISE), EU Agreement 823744 (Managlobal – 2018 – Europe, Africa, Middle East), 2019–2024 (66 months): missions with Ghana (University of Ghana Business School & AGI), Senegal (Cheikh Anta Diop University & CNES), Cameroon (University of Yaoundé & GICAM), United Arab Emirates (Zayed University).
- European University Alliance for Global Health (EUGLOH) – Paris-Saclay University, Co-creating Training Opportunities program: Joint Innovation & Entrepreneurship course with Lund University School of Economics and Management & Sten K. Johnson Centre for Entrepreneurship (Sweden). Supported by ANR-19-GURE-0006 / France 2030.
- Joint supervision of a PhD student: “Unlocking funding for University ventures: a comparative study of university innovation ecosystems, investor preferences and startup characteristics in Kenya and France”, in partnership with the University of Nairobi (Engineering and Science Complex), Agence Française de Développement, AgroParisTech/Paris-Saclay University, and other institutions.
