Different practices for open innovation: a context‐based approach

The concept of open innovation has successfully diffused among academicians and policy makers, framing innovation work in the post-bureaucratic era. Much of its initial theorising is built on single case studies of early adopters, but there is still a lack of quantitative studies in specific industries and geographical contingencies. In this paper, we report the results of a survey on open innovation (N = 114 firms), targeting the Swedish bio-pharmaceutical industry. The purpose is to shed light on how widespread the knowledge and practical utilisation of open innovation activities actually are in a particular industry. We find that very few respondents were aware of the open innovation concept, and also that open innovation related activities are, to a large extent, integrated within the ordinary innovation practices. At the same time, the application of open innovation activities relates to whether the firm has an innovation strategy, an own R&D department and has successfully launched innovations.

Despite there is more than ten years since the Open Innovation concept was presented for the first time, companies still demonstrate some difficulties in its implementation. The main challenge refers to the change process from closed to open model. Understanding how these companies adopt the open innovation in practice, which involves identifying the organizational adjustments necessary for such, is the aim of this project. This goal was achieved with a case study at Butantan Institute, a centenary public institution, one of the leading producers of immunobiological products in Brazil. The organizational adaptations were discussed in four managerial levels (networks, organizational structures, assessment process and knowledge management systems) at different stages of the change process (unfreezing, moving and institutionalization), and in three levels of the Open Innovation - OI (inside-out, outside-in and coupled). In the Open Innovation implementation, the management foundations that were taken into account revealed different speed of development and the institutionalization was started through the establishment of a dedicated organizational structure, the Technology Transfer Office [TTO]. Having a structure dedicated to innovation management has also enabled to advance subsequently in the coupled innovation. Changes in others managerial levels were also identified and discussed at length.

At present, open innovation (OI) practices have gained traction in all industries, particularly in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). However, only a few Malaysian SMEs practice OI and there is limited literature available on OI practices in Malaysian SMEs. To address this issue, the main objective of the current study is to reveal the challenges of OI and the role of financial constraints in Malaysian SMEs. To achieve this objective, this study implemented the quantitative approach and adopted the cross-sectional research design. Questionnaires were used to collect data from three hundred (300) data managerial staff of Malaysian SMEs. Cluster sampling was used to collect the data. It was found that Malaysian SMEs faced various challenges during the implementation of the OI system. These challenges included motivating spillovers, maximizing internal innovation, and incorporation of external knowledge and intellectual property (IP) management. Moreover, it was found that sufficient finance is needed to resolve these challenges. Hence, this study contributes in the body of knowledge by developing a framework for SMEs to facilitate OI and by identifying the constraints in this framework. Therefore, the current study can be used for Malaysian SMEs to improve their OI system.

PURPOSE: This research aims to critically assess two open innovation strategies, the inbound open innovation/inside-out innovation and the outbound open innovation/outside-in innovation, and their application in two world renowned organizations.

In the present paper we make a study on the types of innovations in the last decade in industry and services sector. After a brief review of existing innovation models in the literature, are presented different types of innovators: product innovations, process innovations and product and process innovations in industry and services sector in Romania. It is done a modeling of innovation types between 2000 and 2010 and a forecasting for the next 20 years. It's a new study based on data that were taken in Romania only after 2000.

Open innovation has an essential impact on innovation activities and the competitiveness of MSMEs. Apart from that, it is an exciting topic for academics and practitioners. Open innovation practices and human capital are more frequently discussed in large companies from a developed country perspective and are associated with higher business performance. However, the influence of the open innovation paradigm on human capital and its consequences on business performance in the context of developing countries have yet to be thoroughly explored. This research aims to analyze the influence of human capital and innovation culture in supporting open innovation practices on business performance. This research was conducted on MSMEs in Padang City, West Sumatra, Indonesia. Using quantitative methods, samples were taken using purposive sampling of as many as 200 MSME actors in Padang City. The findings in this research are that there is a positive and significant influence of human capital on open innovation, innovation culture on open innovation, and open innovation on business performance. Open innovation has also successfully mediated the relationship between human capital and business performance and innovation culture with business performance. The results of this research have important theoretical and practical implications for policymakers and MSME actors. These findings underscore the importance of human capital and innovation culture on business performance through open innovation. To improve MSMEs' performance, managers/owners must simultaneously strive to increase human capital and innovation culture through open innovation practices.

Research on open innovation in firms has grown significantly over the last decade. While scholars have started to address the knowledge gaps around open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), there is still much to be done to develop more systematic evidence on the open innovation practices of SMEs. Given this, and in order to develop a greater understanding of open innovation practices at the SME level, this chapter develops a methodology for capturing, measuring, and benchmarking open innovation practices of SMEs. The theoretical framework proposes and develops six composite indicators to measure the different elements of open innovation within SMEs. These six pillars of open innovation practices are knowledge and technology sourcing activities; innovation expenditure; sources of knowledge; human capital; innovation networks; and intellectual property protection. They allow the examination of this phenomenon across spatial, temporal, and firm-level dimensions. The theoretical framework proposed herein has the potential to provide useful insights on the open innovation activity of SMEs across different size, sectoral, and spatial measures. This has value for policymakers, practitioners, and academic scholars seeking to better understand the differences in open innovation activity at these levels. This can be achieved by utilizing data from Community Innovation Surveys as the main data source for measuring innovation in Europe. The harmonized nature of these surveys provides a unique opportunity for benchmarking and comparative analysis on open innovation activities of different sectors and regions utilizing the proposed framework of open innovation practices. A further impact of the methodology that we propose in this chapter is its potential integration with the annual European Innovation Scoreboard and Regional Innovation Scoreboards. Currently, such an approach is lacking from both these EU-level scoreboards.

Societal concerns on the environmental impact of manufacturing activities in developing economies have intensified over the past decade. Open innovation (OI) has emerged as a promising approach to mitigate these adverse effects without compromising sustainable performance (SP). This primary aim of this study is to examine and evaluate the current state of research on OI and SP practices for further empirical studies in developing economies. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework, we systematically reviewed and analysed 108 articles from Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect databases related to OI and SP practices. Our study highlights significant knowledge gaps in the relationship between OI and SP in manufacturing, noting a predominant focus on developed countries. This research contributes to the existing literature by identifying critical contextual and theoretical gaps, providing valuable insights and theoretical implications for future OI and SP research agendas in developing countries.

Open innovation (OI) involves the deliberate use of external and internal knowledge flows by organisations in order to accelerate their innovations and expand the markets for the external use of innovations. Despite the relevance of OI for firms’ competitiveness, firms’ abilities to leverage and combine internal and external knowledge flows cannot be taken for granted. In this context, innovation policies can play a crucial role in stimulating firms’ OI strategies. The objective of this research is to examine the degree to which existing public innovation policies promote open innovation by companies. In doing so, we review the set of innovation policy instruments developed by governments within the Spanish national and regional innovation systems and examine the extent to which they support open innovation by companies, either by facilitating firms’ open innovation practices or by acting on the external factors that influence them. Our results show that innovation policies in Spanish national and regional settings partially promote firms’ open innovation, since governments base their actions on the interaction between science, industry and government, sometimes with intermediaries that promote it. We propose the development of instruments to encourage firms to implement open innovation practices in such a way that they complement the existing ones and can fully achieve the benefits associated with open innovation.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to clarify the relationship between start-ups and an innovation ecosystem. Start-ups need resources available in the ecosystem to grow, but experience organizational capacity limitations during their open innovation practices. This study frames the “open innovation” interface and discloses ways to accelerate the process of connecting start-ups’ demands to ecosystem’s supplies.Design/methodology/approachA case study was used to describe the development of a conceptual ecosystem model to frame the “open innovation” interface and its subsequent implementation at nine start-up hotspots in the Dutch chemical industry. To develop the ecosystem model, the system of innovation concept was enriched with the perspective of a chemical start-up to pinpoint critical resources for growth.FindingsIt is suggested that the most relevant “open innovation” interface for start-ups looking to grow is an innovation biotope: a well-defined, business-oriented cross-section of an ecosystem. All stakeholders in a biotope are carefully selected based on the entrepreneurial issue at stake: they can only enter the secured marketplace if they are able to provide dedicated solutions to start-ups. The biotope enables “open innovation in a closed system” which results in acceleration of the innovation process.Originality/valueThis is the first study to report on the definition and implementation of an innovation biotope as the “open innovation” interface between an ecosystem and start-ups. In addition, it provides a powerful tool, the ecosystem canvas, that can help both regional and national innovation systems to visualize their ecosystem and identify blind spots.

OVERVIEW:Is it necessary or even possible to apply the management technology of open innovation to all projects in the same way? An analysis of the practices used in different product development projects in the same European medical company shows that commercially successful projects did apply many of the best practices for open innovation. However, projects were not equally successful. The outcome seems to be highly influenced by the type of collaborative arrangements used and their application. In particular, the analysis indicates that organizational factors seem to be indicative but not sufficient for success, and some open innovation practices were more successful than others. The most open and exploratory practices were not so successful in this company. This might be due to the nature of innovation, which develops in unpredictable and nonlinear ways. These observations suggest that those involved in open innovation need both a broad knowledge of the various potential elements of an open innovation effort and a flexible attitude toward their application.

We pursue what it means to be an 'open innovator' and what conditions this choice. Using the UK Innovation Survey Database 2005, we test different measures of 'openness' across a large data set and find that open innovation practices vary across firms and sectors, giving support to the view that openness is not strictly a choice for the firm but an outcome of capabilities, industrial organisation and wider innovation systems. Within the firm, design is revealed as a core capability that shapes open innovation practice, reflecting its role in innovation task partitioning. We confirm this in our robust findings that design is accorded higher importance by firms which have open innovation practices.

Innovative technologies hold the promise of a sustainable future. There is tremendous need for innovations that not only create new technologies, but also solve grand challenges this planet faces. The urgent demand for technologies spilling over sustainable values requires innovation that is open and collaborative. However, uncertainty remains whether open innovation actually promotes sustainability. We thus examine a novel perspective on the relationship between open innovation and sustainable value creation at a firm level. We ask whether inbound innovation practices such as university–industry collaboration and intellectual property in‐licensing in alignment with firm internal R&D foster sustainability.By applying a multilinear regression model on a sample of Danish firms, we found a positive effect on sustainability when firms innovate based on in‐license IP from other firms. But we did not find any correlation between university–industry collaboration and sustainability; however, it turned into a significant negative moderation effect when the firm size was added. Therefore, we conclude that smaller firms are more prompt to develop sustainable technologies, and university entrepreneurship could be a very important impetus for sustainable innovations. We also proved that firm internal R&D activities and development of radical innovations are significant predictors for sustainability. Thus, we conclude that inbound open innovation practices only partly contribute to sustainable value creation. Therefore, we suggest that combination of internal R&D with IP in‐licensing and streaming for radical innovation, whether internally developed or in‐licensed, should become embedded in the firms'' efforts for sustainability.

While the concept of open innovation has drawn the attention of scholars and practitioners alike, it still remains difficult to capture it particularly in a quantitative, longitudinal setting where data about open innovation activities is largely absent. This impedes an adequate assessment of open innovations’ long-term implications for firms’ innovation and financial performance. While researchers have extensively examined the former link, the latter is controversially discussed against the backdrop of the costs and benefits of open innovation but remains largely unexplored. In this study, we develop and validate a longitudinal, text-based measure for firms’ open innovation activities, and probe related performance implications in a longitudinal, cross-industry setting. Combining machine-learning content analysis to create an open innovation dictionary, we analyze the 10-K annual reports of 8,491 publicly listed firms in the U.S. between 1994 and 2016. Our results support our theorizing that curvilinear relationships that take an inverted U-shape exist both between open innovation and innovation performance, and open innovation and financial performance.

The objective of this study is to examine the role of open innovation practices to promote globalization. For this purpose, this study considered two open innovation practices: external knowledge and supplier involvement. A survey was carried out to collect primary data from the respondents. This study preferred Chinese small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to examine the role of open innovation in globalization. Data were collected from the employees of SMEs in China. By employing Structural Equation Modeling, this study addressed the important insights for academicians and practitioners. It is concluded that; open innovation practices have key role to promote globalization. The promotion of open innovation practices among the Chinese SMEs can increase the globalization potential. The strategies of open innovation led to increase in business collaboration across the border business organizations. The business collaboration between the SMEs of various countries is the best way to enhance globalization by increasing the level of social capital. Therefore, those institutions who want to promote globalization should promote open innovation practices among the business organizations.