The Effect of Research & Development Activities and Open Innovation Activities: A Key to Low/ Medium Technology Industries and Firms in Catalonia

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 225-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abd El salam El Rayyes ◽  
Jaume Valls-Pasola
Keyword(s):  
Open Innovation ◽  
Current Issue ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Industrial Sector ◽  
University Research ◽  
Research Development ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Statistical Institute ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Technology Industries

Research and Development (R&D) activities and Open Innovation activities (OI) have been of crucial importance in Low/Medium Technology (LMT) sectors that are based on the innovation abilities of LMT firms. This article analyzes the links between OI activities and R&D activities in Catalan (Spain) LMT firms. First, we develop a model of how innovation is developed within LMT Catalan firms. By analyzing R&D and OI activities in LMT firms, we measure both internal and external activities of these firms. Secondly, we explore the effects of R&D activities and OI activities in the industrial sector, and then the effects of both in the market of the Catalonia region. Catalan LMT firms have unique opportunities in the innovation process, yet face some obstacles. The objective of this article is to advocate for bridges to be built between university research and public centers, and LMT firms in Catalonia. To define the current issue within the field of Catalan LMT firms, we sample 2008 to 2010 data from the Spanish National Statistical Institute (INE), Statistical Institute of Catalonia (IDESCAT), and the Organization for Economic, Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Understanding the relationship between organizational culture and inbound open innovation

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Franz Barjak ◽  
Fabian Heimsch
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Culture ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
External Pressure ◽  
External Control ◽  
Specific Situation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Process Innovations ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
The Relationship

PurposeThe relationship between corporate culture and inbound open innovation (OI) has been limited to two sub-constructs: a culture for openness and an innovation culture, but until now a richer conceptualization of corporate culture is missing.Design/methodology/approachThe authors apply Quinn and Rohrbaugh's (1983) competing values framework and regress these together with company internal and external control variables on five measures of inbound OI, reflecting product innovation, process innovation and the sourcing of innovation activities. The authors use data from a survey of more than 250 Swiss companies, primarily SMEs.FindingsThe importance of the firms' market environments suggests that the results are affected by the specific situation in which the firms found themselves at the time of the survey: after a strong currency shock, inbound OI activities seem to be a reaction to external pressure that favored planning and rule-oriented (formal) cultures to implement cost-cutting process innovations.Practical implicationsCompanies should develop a vision and a strategy, ensure open and transparent communication, have suitable reward and support mechanisms in place, adjust structures and processes, and institutionalize and formalize any change whenever they are confronted with a situation that requires a quick reaction and an adjustment to their degree of openness.Originality/valueThe paper clarifies the relationship between cultural traits and inbound OI, using a well-established understanding of corporate culture and differentiating between innovation types. It points to the importance of the external environment in order to understand the role of culture.

MAPPING THE PERCEPTION AND REALITY OF OPEN INNOVATION

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (06) ◽  
pp. 1340016 ◽  
Author(s):  
JUSTYNA DĄBROWSKA ◽  
IRINA FIEGENBAUM ◽  
ANTERO KUTVONEN
Keyword(s):  
Open Innovation ◽  
Innovation Management ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Innovation Research ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Current State ◽  
Business Practitioners ◽  
The Right ◽  
Innovation Practices ◽  
Innovation Processes

Open innovation holds great potential for improving the efficiency of companies' innovation processes, but also presents substantial risks. A key issue in innovation management is finding the right balance of openness, i.e., determining how open companies should be in their innovation activities. However, academics and business practitioners hold conflicting notions of what constitutes open innovation practice and of how "open innovation companies" are defined. In this paper, we present three in-depth case studies of global R&D-intensive companies, where we find that the firms' perception of their openness differs from their actual situation (as determined by the innovation practices that they apply), and that each company has a different view as to what constitutes open innovation. We claim that resolving conceptual ambiguity and differentiating between openness (as a philosophical aspect) and open innovation (as a way of structuring the innovation process) in research is critical in order to clarify the current state of open innovation research and enable the communication of results to practitioners.

DIFFERENT MODES OF OPEN INNOVATION: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (04) ◽  
pp. 615-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
VALENTINA LAZZAROTTI ◽  
RAFFAELLA MANZINI
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Study ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Innovation Modes ◽  
A Company

Starting from the several conceptual and empirical studies about open innovation modes, this paper attempts to integrate them by suggesting a framework which reveals four basic ways to collaborate. Two variables are considered that represent the degree of openness for a company: (i) the number/type of partners with which the company collaborates, briefly labelled as "partner variety"; (ii) the number/type of phases of the innovation process that the company opens to external contributions, briefly labelled as "innovation funnel openness". By crossing these two variables, four basic modes of open innovation are identified: closed innovators, open innovators, specialized collaborators and integrated collaborators. The framework shows its practical validity in an empirical study that is conducted in Italy with the specific aim at verifying whether companies can really be mapped using this framework, i.e. whether the four modes of open innovation can be found in real companies (framework applicability); whether different modes correspond to different companies' strategies, capabilities, organisational and managerial processes (framework explicative power and usefulness). The framework shows that, in some cases, being totally open in innovation activities is not the only and most suitable option, but that different degrees and ways of "openness" can be implemented successfully, as well as the totally closed option.

scholarly journals Strategies of innovation and appropriation. Sectoral analysis of Argentine manufacturing firms

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Petelski ◽  
Darío Milesi ◽  
Vladimiro Verre
Keyword(s):  
Innovation Process ◽  
Industrial Sector ◽  
Manufacturing Firms ◽  
Innovative Activity ◽  
Structural Factors ◽  
Employment Dynamics ◽  
Sectoral Analysis ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Complementary Assets ◽  
First Mover

Following the evolutionary and neoshumpeterian theoretical framework, this research studies how the appropriation strategy of firms is formed in different industrial sector and what factors explain the use of the mechanisms that firms use to protect their innovations. The analysis is based on evidence from Argentine manufacturing firms surveyed by the National Survey of Employment Dynamics and Innovation (ENDEI) for 2010-2012. The results of the statistical analysis allow to identify three clusters at the sectoral level with differentiated characteristics in terms of their innovation activities and business conformation. The cluster of high innovative activity shows a greater incidence of the use of secrecy and patents, while the cluster of low innovative activity presents a greater use of complementary assets and first mover. The econometric analysis (Probit models) shows different effects of the factors considered (type of effort and innovative results, capabilities, linkages, structural factors) on the mechanism used, showing that the appropriation strategy is an emerging of innovation process and differs according to the sectoral cluster considered. The type of innovative effort affects only the appropriation strategy of the high and low innovative activity clusters; while the structural factors of firms explain only the appropriation strategy of sectors of high and medium innovative activity.

Governance in Digital Open Innovation Platforms

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Likoebe Maruping ◽  
Yukun Yang
Keyword(s):  
Open Innovation ◽  
Scale Up ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
Government Organizations ◽  
Platform Governance ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Innovation Output ◽  
Pass Through ◽  
Innovation Platform

Open innovation is defined as an approach to innovation that encourages a broad range of participants to engage in the process of identifying, creating, and deploying novel products or services. It is open in the sense that there is little to no restriction on who can participate in the innovation process. Open innovation has attracted a substantial amount of research and widespread adoption by individuals and commercial, nonprofit, and government organizations. This is attributable to three main factors. First, open innovation does not restrict who can participate in the innovation process, which broadens the access to participants and expertise. Second, to realize participants’ ideas, open innovation harnesses the power of crowds who are normally users of the product or service, which enhances the quality of innovative output. Third, open innovation often leverages digital platforms as a supporting technology, which helps entities scale up their business. Recent years have witnessed a rise in the emergence of a number of digital platforms to support various open innovation activities. Some platforms achieve notable success in continuously generating innovations (e.g., InnoCentive.com, GitHub), while others fail or experience a mass exodus of participants (e.g., MyStarbucksIdea.com, Sidecar). Prior commentaries have conducted postmortems to diagnose the failures, identifying possible reasons, such as overcharging one side of the market, failing to develop trust with users, and inappropriate timing of market entry. At the root of these and other challenges that digital platforms face in open innovation is the issue of governance. In the article, governance is conceptualized as the structures determining how rigidly authority is exerted and who has authority to make decisions and craft rules for orchestrating key activities. Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive framework for understanding governance as applied to open innovation that takes place on digital platforms. A governance perspective can lend insight on the structure of how open innovation activities on digital platforms are governed in creating and capturing value from these activities, attracting and matching participants with problems or solutions, and monitoring and controlling the innovation process. To unpack the mystery of open innovation governance, we propose a framework by synthesizing and integrating accreted knowledge from the platform governance literature that has been published in prominent journals over the past 10 years. Our framework is built around four key considerations for governance in open innovation: platform model (firm-owned, market, or community), innovation output ownership (platform-owned, pass-through, or shared), innovation engagement model (transactional, collaborative, or embedded), and nature of innovation output (idea or artifact). Further, we reveal promising research avenues on the governance of digital open innovation platforms.

FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF INFORMATION AND METHODOLOGICAL TOOLS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND MANAGERIAL INNOVATIONS BASED ON THE ENGINEERING CENTER

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (35) ◽  
pp. 30-36
Author(s):  
O.I Zhityaeva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Industrial Sector ◽  
Innovative Activity ◽  
Industrial Complex ◽  
Distributed Information ◽  
Industrial Enterprises ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Rules Of The Game

In the article, the author proposes the creation of information and methodological support for organizational and managerial innovations for industrial enterprises, which is a set of standards, methods, norms and regulations for the implementation of innovative activities, regulated by the relevant institutions and determining the «rules of the game». Organizational and managerial innovations were chosen by the author due to the fact that recently, the main attention is paid to product and technological innovations, and organizational and managerial innovations are either not paid at all, or are not given enough, although these are significant reserves for increasing the volume of innovation. Methodological tools for the development of information and methodological support for organizational and managerial innovations in the industrial sector are especially relevant for detailing the main operations of the innovation process, monitoring and managing the parameters of logical connections between the elements of control of this process. Based on this, the author concludes that the information and methodological support of organizational and managerial innovations at the present time in a modern industrial enterprise a priori formulates the need for the use of automated informatization systems for managing innovative processes, taking into account their constant analysis, assessment, monitoring and updating, according to the required changes in the innovative activity of the enterprise. The article studies a new direction of innovative processes in the industrial complex of the Russian Federation – the use and unification of engineering innovations in order to increase their efficiency. The author proposes to form a model of an information and innovation engineering center, based on "unified routes for designing engineering innovations", with direct linking of the design processes of organizational and managerial innovations to the phases of the life cycle of engineering innovations, within the boundaries of which the results are exchanged between the performers of different phases of the innovation activities. The author highlights the unique features used in the formation of an information and innovation engineering center, consisting in the spatial distribution of technological and information and resources for different subjects of innovation, through the organization and use of distributed information networks. The model proposed by the author of the information and innovation engineering center is aimed at the development of innovative activity of industrial enterprises.

How to Integrate Suppliers into the Innovation Process? An Explorative Case of Champion Formalization in the Purchasing Department in Times of Open Innovation

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (06) ◽  
pp. 1750036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilian A. Maier ◽  
Peter Rück ◽  
Alexander Brem
Keyword(s):  
Open Innovation ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Innovation Management ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Success Stories ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Purchasing Department ◽  
Development Teams

Literature on the champion theory proposes the informal character of the champion’s role and also notes difficulties in institutionalizing it. Nevertheless, formally institutionalized roles that seem to fit the description of a champion can be recognized in organizations, especially as enablers of open innovation activities. However, research cannot answer how this institutionalization occurs and which factors influence it. To answer these questions, we investigate a unique single case in which a champion role was institutionalized in the purchasing department of a multinational company. The new role’s task is to identify, select, and integrate supplier innovations. Our results indicate that the informal role of the champion can be successfully institutionalized when certain success factors are considered, which are management commitment, use of success stories, and matching of champions with research and development teams. We contribute to innovation management literature by using the well-established champion theory to explain how and why large multinational companies formally establish the role of the innovation champion. Our research offers pathways for further research about both, the antecedents and the consequences of role formalization. Practitioners can build on the success factors derived in this study when formally implementing innovation champions as enablers of open innovation activities.

Mapping the Open Innovation Ecosystem: An Analysis of the Technical and Strategic Level

2014 ◽  
Vol 945-949 ◽  
pp. 450-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murilo Agio Nerone ◽  
Osíris Canciglieri ◽  
Maria Teresinha Arns Steiner ◽  
Robert I.M. Young
Keyword(s):  
Open Innovation ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Current View ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
To Come ◽  
New Variables ◽  
Type Classification

The scope of this paper is to further extend the classification of the open innovation activities in order to provide a template to the case studies and theories, in the field, to come. Also, it serves as guidance to practitioners deploy supportive capabilities to their exact needs. A review of the literature, indexed by ISI Web of Knowledge and Scopus, of the studies that could respond the why’s and how’s of the open innovation process was done. Based on this review, we propose an extension of the current view (inbound, outbound and coupled) encompassing two other variables, called levels (technical level and strategy level). These two new variables crossed against the current archetype (inbound, outbound and coupled) provide a six type classification. We further analyze each of these types, examining their usefulness and exemplifying how it has been applied by companies.

scholarly journals Search Strategies in Innovation Networks: The Case of the Hungarian Food Industry

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1752 ◽  
Author(s):  
József Tóth ◽  
Giuseppina Rizzo
Keyword(s):  
Information Search ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
World Market ◽  
Search Strategies ◽  
Continuous Innovation ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Specific Source

In the food sector, open innovation has become of particular interest. This paper considers open innovation search strategies in the food and beverages industry and examines the probability of using different innovation sources with respect to the type of innovation. Although the information search for new ideas, tools and solutions in the innovation process regarding the scope and depth is well explored and interpreted in the literature, the probability of using the different sources with respect to type of innovation is rarely investigated. To answer these questions, first a probit, then OLS regression model is adopted, in order to understand the chance of a specific source of information being chosen, and then, to verify how much of these sources are selected in different types of innovation. Findings show that food companies use several kinds of information sources during their product, process, organization and market innovation development processes and apply different sourcing strategies based on innovation type. The study concludes that managers have to take into consideration the type of innovation when they formulate their innovation search strategies. Moreover, if they would like to strive on the European, or even more on the world market, they necessarily have to cooperate with universities and research institutes. Our recommendation for policymakers is that they should encourage the food companies in creation of a viable information network with their business, scientific and professional partners. It is also important that they help the food producers in their continuous innovation activities as well as in expanding their business to European, or even more, to world level.

Managing knowledge in open innovation processes: an intellectual property perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 1384-1405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Bican ◽  
Carsten C. Guderian ◽  
Anne Ringbeck
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Modus Operandi ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Innovation Processes

Purpose As firms turn their innovation activities toward collaborating with external partners, they face additional challenges in managing their knowledge. While different modes of intellectual property right regimes are applied in closed innovation systems, there seems to be tension between the concepts of “open innovation” and “intellectual property rights”. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how firms best manage knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Design/methodology/approach Following a mixed methods approach, the authors review relevant literature at the intersection of knowledge management, intellectual property rights, strategic management of intellectual property rights and the open innovation process. The authors identify success drivers through the lenses of – but not limited to – intellectual property rights and classify them in five distinct groups. Expending the view on open innovation beyond its modus operandi, the authors develop the Open Innovation Life Cycle, covering three stages and three levels of the open innovation process. The authors apply their findings to a case study in the pharmaceutical industry. Findings The authors provide four key contributions. First, existing literature yields inconclusive results concerning the enabling or disabling function of intellectual property rights in open innovation processes, but the majority of scholars detect an ambivalent relation. Second, they identify and classify success drivers of successful knowledge management via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Third, they advance literature on open innovation beyond its modus operandi to include three stages and three levels. Fourth, they test their findings to a case study and show how management leverages knowledge by properly using intellectual property rights in open innovation. Practical implications The findings support firms in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Management should account for the peculiarities of open innovation preparation and open innovation termination to prevent unintentional knowledge drain. Originality/value This is one of the first studies to view open innovation as a process beyond its modus operandi by considering the preparations for and termination of open innovation activities. It also addresses the levels involved in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation from individual (personal) to project and firm level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document