We discuss ICT for Open Innovation (OI) from a capabilities perspective. We distinguish two types of capabilities for OI: strategic, which need to be developed so that the organization can take ...advantage of an OI strategy proactively, and operational for the efficient implementation of OI processes. ICT at the strategic level supports dynamic capabilities and related cognitive processes of managerial staff for developing and using the appropriate level of absorptive capacity and active transparency, whereas ICT as part of operational capabilities aims at enhancing the day-to-day performance of OI activities. Through analysis of capabilities, we associate specific ICT with the functionalities required in the entire OI process. Paying particular attention to the issues of collaboration and sophisticated data analysis, we also comment on the seamless integration of these technologies and their embedment in OI-related organizational processes.
Open Innovation (OI) is an increasingly popular approach that companies adopt to remain competitive. However, the challenges and complexities entailed by the OI should not be underestimated. These ...could lead to OI failures and strong negative repercussions for the company. Despite this, literature on the causes of failure of OI is still in its infancy, and results are scattered and fragmented. In this study we perform a systematic bibliometric review of the literature on the causes of failure of OI, to analyse its evolution and to provide a framework to help managers understand and prevent OI failures. We identify ten categories of causes of OI failure to be included in a seven-components framework. This adopts the perspective of the firm and investigates both internal and external causes of failure. Internal components include strategy, business organization, knowledge and Intellectual Property (IP) management, management, and resources. External components discuss the causes of failure related to inter-firm collaboration and the influence of environmental factors. Finally, by leveraging the results of the review activity, we provide some interesting suggestions for future research.
•Open Innovation (OI) entails challenges and managerial complexities that is necessary to understand to prevent OI failures.•We perform a systematic review of the literature on the causes of failure of OI.•We develop a comprehensive framework to help executives understand and prevent OI failures.•We analyse the main causes of OI failure related to the seven components of the framework.•We investigate OI failures in relation to the organizational and the environmental contexts.
Open Science is a disruptive phenomenon that is emerging around the world and especially in Europe. Open Science brings about socio-cultural and technological change, based on openness and ...connectivity, on how research is designed, performed, captured, and assessed. Several studies show that there is a lack of awareness about what Open Science is, mainly due to the fact that there is no formal definition of Open Science. The purpose of this paper is to build a rigorous, integrated, and up-to-date definition of the Open Science phenomenon through a systematic literature review. The resulting definition “Open Science is transparent and accessible knowledge that is shared and developed through collaborative networks” helps the scientific community, the business world, political actors, and citizens to have a common and clear understanding about what Open Science is, and stimulates an open debate about the social, economic, and human added value of this phenomenon.
In spite of increasing interest in open innovation, discussion about the concept and its potential application to the SME sector has been excluded from mainstream literature. However, given that the ...argument about the effect of firm size on the effectiveness of innovation is still ongoing, it is worth addressing the issue from an SME perspective. That is the focus of this article, which seeks, firstly, to place the concept of open innovation in the context of SMEs; secondly to suggest the input of an intermediary in facilitating innovation; and finally to report accounts of Korean SMEs’ success in working with an intermediary. The research results support the potential of open innovation for SMEs, and indicate networking as one effective way to facilitate open innovation among SMEs.
AbstractThe main purpose of research is to design and validate the open innovation model in the university. To achieve this goal, a sequential combined exploratory method has been used. The research ...methodology is the use of a mixed approach. In the qualitative stage, using the data theory of the foundation and through semi-structured interviews and interviews with ten experts and researchers of open innovation who were selected theoretically. Data were collected and using the Strauss and Corbin systematic design of open innovation components in the form of a conceptual data model of the foundation. A questionnaire and a preliminary model were designed based on the findings of the qualitative stage. After assessing the validity (Lavache) and Cronbach's alpha reliability of 0/85, a questionnaire was designed to 364 professors of mother universities using the proportional stratified sampling method. Findings show that the components of open innovation presented in the systematic design using Amos24 software The first and second order confirmatory factor analysis methods were validated Factor loads of all components are greater than 0/4 and t values are greater than 1/96 The results indicate an acceptable fit for all components presented in the systematic design.IntroductionCurrently, the use of open innovation in business and academia has been introduced as a necessity. Innovative open university wants to be a stimulus for economic and social development, in which resources and knowledge exchange have expanded beyond the borders of the organization And has been introduced as one of the main actors of open innovation. The formation of the concept of open innovation ecosystem promises to play the role of universities as a stimulus and create opportunities for achieving broader results that are not possible through traditional models of university-industry interactions. The need for an open innovative university in the open innovation ecosystem follows the need for a knowledge-based economy system Because knowledge-based economy in addition to knowledge-based enterprise needs a knowledge-based university to be able to use intellectual capital in knowledge-based economy to create and increase organizational value And also be able to achieve one of its important capabilities, which is advantage and sustainable development. One of the features of knowledge-based economy is the application of knowledge and knowledge-based sectors in increasing the productivity of all economic sectors through innovation This explains the need for open innovation in universities. This article seeks to provide a model and model validation by asking the main categories of open innovation from university professors and researchers.Case study In the present study, in the qualitative section, with the interview of 10 open innovation experts to the components of the open innovation university, according to the systematic plan was formed. In the quantitative part, the number of samples was 364 university professors, among whom a textbook was distributed.Materials and methods The method of this research is mixed, which has been done according to a sequential exploratory approach. In the qualitative part, the data method of the foundation and in the quantitative part, the analysis of the first and second order confirmatory factor has been done.Discussion and Results Causal factors influencing open university innovation include: communication, needs assessment, management and leadership, empowerment, culture, human resources, government, the importance of industry-university relationship, university structure. Underlying conditions influencing academic open innovation include bedrock conditions, support conditions, and intermediary conditions. Interfering factors in academic open innovation include barriers and challenges, weaknesses and threats. Strategies and actions in open university innovation include internal strategies and external strategies. Consequences and achievements in open university innovation are at three levels: institution, university, and individual. Conclusion The components of open innovation presented in the systematic design were validated using Amos24 software and first and second order confirmatory factor analysis. Factor loads of all components are greater than 0.4 and t values are greater than 96.1. These results indicate an acceptable fit for all components presented in the systematic design.
Open Innovation becomes one of the most important concepts very discussed in these 16 years. This paradigm introduced in 2003 by Chesbrough has been applied in various fields, principally the ...different size firms. It has become one of the interesting topics in innovation management. The principle of this concept is based on sharing and collaboration.
In this work, we analyze the state of the art of the Open Innovation concept and we present a bibliometric study and analysis from 2003 to 2019. The information for analysis in this research was obtained from the SCOPUS database that contains the information developed by Elsevier
Based on the evolutionary theory of the firm, this paper examines how traditional variables that describe a firm’s organizational structure—formalization, specialization, and centralization—affect ...the adoption of inbound and outbound open innovation. Using a cross-sectional survey of Chinese small and medium enterprises, our study shows that organizational structure matters for open innovation and that formalization, specialization, and centralization have diverse effects on the OI practices implemented by SMEs. Results indicate that specialization and centralization have a critical role in open innovation practices as they both foster the use of inbound and outbound open innovation. Formalization negatively affects outbound, but it is positively associated with inbound open innovation.
Being a grand challenge of global scale, the COVID‐19 pandemic requires collective and collaborative efforts from a variety of actors to enable the expected scientific advancement and technological ...progress. To achieve such an open innovation approach, several initiatives have been launched in order to leverage potential distributed knowledge sources that go beyond those available to any single organization. A particular tool that has gained some momentum during COVID‐19 times is hackathons, which have been used to unleash the innovation potential of individuals who voluntarily came together, for a relatively short period of time, with the aim to solve specific problems. In this paper, we describe and analyze the case of the hackathon EUvsVirus, led by the European Innovation Council. EUvs Virus was a 3‐day online hackathon to connect civil society, innovators, partners, and investors across Europe and beyond in order to develop innovative solutions to coronavirus‐related challenges. We have identified four dimensions to explore hackathons as a crowdsourcing tool for practicing effective open innovation in the face of COVID‐19: broad scope, participatory architecture, online setting, and community creation. We discuss how these four elements can play a strategic role in the face of grand challenges, which require, as in the case of the COVID‐19 pandemic, both urgent action and long‐term thinking. Our case analysis also suggests the need to look beyond the ‘usual suspects’, through knowledge recombination with atypical resources (e.g., retired experts, graduate students, and the general public). On this basis, we call for a broader perspective on open innovation, to be extended beyond openness across organizational boundaries, and to explore the role of openness at societal level.
The main purpose of research was to design and validate the open innovation model in the university. To achieve this goal, a sequential combined exploratory method was used. The mixed method was used ...a methodology. In the qualitative stage, using the data theory of the foundation and through semi-structured interviews and interviews with ten experts and researchers of open innovation who were selected theoretically. Data were collected and using the Strauss and Corbin systematic design of open innovation components in the form of a conceptual data model of the foundation. A questionnaire and a preliminary model were designed based on the findings of the qualitative stage. After assessing the validity (Lavache) and Cronbach's alpha reliability of 0.85, a questionnaire was designed to 364 professors of mother universities using the proportional stratified sampling method. Findings show that the components of open innovation presented in the systematic design using Amos24 software. The first and second order confirmatory factor analysis methods were validated Factor loads of all components are greater than 0.4 and t values are greater than 1.96 The results indicate an acceptable fit for all components presented in the systematic design. The components of open innovation presented in the systematic design were validated using Amos24 software and first and second order confirmatory factor analysis. Factor loads of all components are greater than 0.4 and t values are greater than 96.1. These results indicate an acceptable fit for all components presented in the systematic design.
With the increasing need for firms to implement innovation in their pursuit of competitive advantage, open innovation has attracted the growing attention of academics and practitioners. However, the ...current literature has been lopsided, focussing predominantly on the myriad benefits of open innovation. We argue that eulogising only the positive aspects of open innovation is insufficient to help firms and motivate future research. Therefore, we recommend increased attention to the dark side of open innovation, which includes failures that can occur at various stages of the open innovation process. A review of the existing literature reveals that although researchers have, time and again, attempted to document failure in open innovation, this literature is comparatively sparse and fragmented. The extant literature also exhibits an apparent lack of effort to encourage future research, as evidenced by the absence of a comprehensive literature review. We aim to address this research gap by reviewing 76 studies identified by applying a stringent search protocol consistent with the systematic literature review (SLR) methodology. The contributions of this SLR include (a) development of a research profile of the relevant literature, (b) identification of five thematic areas, (c) elucidation of research gaps and suggestion of potential research questions as an agenda for future research on failures in open innovation, (d) formulation of a conceptual framework comprising the antecedents and outcomes of open innovation failure and (e) presentation of the various theoretical and managerial implications for scholars and practitioners.
PDF
