It has been a while since Henry Chesbrough coined the term Open Innovation and formulated it’s definition: “combining internal and external ideas as well as internal and external paths to market to advance the development of new technologies.” (Chesbrough, 2003). In the course of time, the terminology surrounding Open Innovation has evolved alongside developments in management literature and practises. Open Innovation as a paradigm on itself is on its quest to touch base. Rather than taking a (technical) process-oriented approach, Open Innovation is now also about Open Business Models (Chesbrough, 2006), Open Services (Chesbrough, 2010) – both from a more strategic perspective – and practical tools (Vanhaverbeeke, 2017) – more from a tactical or operational point-of-view.Read more
2015’s Innovation Management conference (ISPIM) was all about Open Innovation. In fact, it was one of the most keywords – and definitely the most specific one – used amongst all 233 papers presented during the conference. Although the articles are not completely available yet (if you’re not a member), I have used it to draw up a list of the 15 best articles presented on the conference on Open Innovation of 2015 so far. I have added elements of the abstracts here, but following the links you can download the full papers from the ISPIM website.Read more
– Intra-organizational Individual : Group/Team , Project , Functional area , Business unit
– Organizational Firm : Other (non-firm) organization, Strategy , Business model
– Extra-organizational: External stakeholders, individual, community, organization
– Inter-organizational: Alliance , Network , Ecosystem
– Industry: Industry development , Inter-industry differences
– Regional innovation systems: Local region, Nation , Supra-national institution
– Society: Citizens, Public policy
Read full article: 10 Years of Open Innovation Research
Source: Bogers & Chesbrough, 2014
Source: Bogers & Chesbrough, 2014
Interest in open innovation has risen dramatically in recent years. However, much of that interest has centred on large-scale enterprises. The focus of this paper is to explore open innovation from an SME perspective and in particular the under-researched perspective of a born global firm. We seek firstly, to explore the viability of open innovation as a start-up strategy for two Irish born global firms within the ICT industry. Secondly, we examine the impact of certain contextual factors on the adoption of particular forms and modes of open innovation.
Read full article: Open innovation as a start-up strategy
Since the beginning of an open innovation era back in 2003, the
research of the phenomenon keeps spiking the interest and the publications
with the keyword open innovation grow exponentially every year. The
multitude of research focused on many details of open innovation, at the same
time literature reviews of this research aimed at classifying and structuring this
enormous amount of information. Nevertheless, there has been no interest so
far in understanding how we should study open innovation to stop going in
circles. In order to do so, the analysis of the methods and measures of open
innovation to date had to be analysed. This paper represents a structured review
of quantitative publications of open innovation and analyses the indicators
applied by different researchers in different contexts. By doing so, we
contribute to the theory of open innovation and add to the understanding of
how it is measured.
Read full article: Towards an Open Innovation Measurement System
The paper tackles an interplay of two theoretical approaches
concerning innovation management understood as a collective process of at
least a few interacting entities. The first approach is anchored in management
and covers Chesbrough’s Open Innovation concept and its followers. The other
refers to regional science with focus on Regional Innovation Systems. Both
approaches use quite a similar toolkit to support their relevant objectives:
business models enhancement for OI and regional business dynamics for RIS.
Correlations and interactions between business involvement in RIS processes
and OI processes were scrutinized in Southern Poland, where 3 regions selected
ICT to be their technological specialization. 200 companies were interviewed
to find out whether territory plays a significant role in OI management.
Altogether the paper answers a question whether theoretically not so distant
concepts of OI and RSI co-exist in business routines of Polish companies.
Read full article: Open Innovation cooperation strategies in Regional Innovation System
Open Innovation as an Enabler to Inclusivity, Frugality and Agility
May 13-15, 2014 | Boston, MA
Featuring Unilever, Singularity University, Clorox, Roche, General Mills, Pfizer, Pitney Bowes, and more
Open is a foundational concept– it’s not new, and it’s not going away. How to strategically use and ADAPT open is where real innovation is happening and new ideas can be shared. FEI: OPEN focuses on the next generation of open innovation uses- deploying open innovation to innovate faster, better, and cheaper. The event covers three core tenants, OPEN as an enabler to inclusivity (changing the mindset to be even more inclusive), frugality (doing more with less, also known as Jugaad innovation.. innovation with constraints), and agility (accomplishing even more in even less time).
Special rate for OpenInnovation.eu subscribers: Register with code FEI14OPEN & save 20% off the standard rates.
Recently, the Open Innovation Research Forum – part of the University of Cambridge – released a paper that shows results of a study among almost 1200 German innovation companies. The paper provides the hypothesis that several different innovation-enabling factors would generate more revenue within companies that embrace Open Innovation than within companies that don’t.
To be precise: the authors refer to Open Innovation as the use of “search openness”, i.e. the use of external ideas and developments as an influx for internal research and development. According to research findings, almost 70% of these companies indicated they absorbed external knowledge from one or more source. Because it is near-to-impossible to gather information on all these sources, the authors focused on gathering data on the influx of ideas from 5 sources: customers, suppliers, competitors, research institutions and government.
Most importantly, they defined four “moderating factors”: factors that could distinguish organization that absorb from the above-mentioned 5 sources from those that are not. Explanation of these four can be found in this table:
|Factors distinguishing Open Innovation companies||Characteristics used in study|
Table 1: four factors that are studied.
The authors gathered information from 1170 different organization, mainly from Germany. They are based upon a larger survey of which only a certain percentage was led to useful information regarding this study. The sample group spreaded out across several sectors:
For more information about the methodology used, please see the attached document.
Results: what factors are more present in Open Innovation organizations?
The study reveiled that 3 out of 4 hypotheses showed different results for companies that act on Open Innovation compared with companies that do not act on Open Innovation.
- The Incentive System: having a high Incentive Design, companies that use Open Innovation generate much more revenue from New Products.
- Research Capacity: having more research capacity, companies that use Open Innovation generate more revenue from New Products.
- Cross-Functional Collaboration: having higher cross-functional internal collaboration, companies that use Open Innovation generate more revenue from New Products.
The study also showed that Technology Leadership, although, like the rest, is generating more revenue when more present, doesn’t show significant differences between companies that use Open Innovation and those that don’t. In other words: Open Innovation companies with great system of Technology Leadership don’t necesseraly generate more revenues from new products, then Closed Innovation companies with a great system of Technology Leadership.
This figure shows the results:
Download the paper:
Click here to download the full paper.
Together with InnoPass and ideaken, DSM has launched an open innovation contest to get new and creative ideas on the applications of Arnitel® Eco, an environmental friendly elastomer. The prize? Tickets to the 2012 London Olympics. For more information, visit the ideaken website. To participate, submit your idea by March 1, 2012!
Last month, we released a Poll on linkedin and dropped the question “What is the greatest advantage of Open Innovation”. Quite some people voted and a good discussion started off. The results were as following:
What is the greatest advantage of Open Innovation?
The result was not completely unexpected. Obviously, on the first hand, Open Innovation is meant to innovate faster and better. To my opinion, and some of the comments support this, gaining and sharing knowledge, building a network and having close insights in customer needs, are just the means to get there.
According to Vincent Toepoel: “In my experience, the financial plan will be easily accepted. But rolling it out within the organisation and the social aspect that comes with that, is more often than not a great barrier to managers. [There is no reason for that, because] the execution of an Open Innovation project is something that gives a lot of satisfaction to all participants.”
Jan Mölls dropped the interesting question: “I would like to specify “faster” and “better”. They both have strategic as well as operational aspects.” He then provides some intesting aspects to keep in mind. And Toepoel reacted: “Besides being faster and better, Open Innovation can be potentially be much cheaper.”
Herm Verbeek summes it all up: “Sometimes Open Innovation is not only a faster or better way, it is the only way.”