IP and open innovation: theory and practice

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaella Manzini ◽  
Valentina Lazzarotti ◽  
Luisa Pellegrini
2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (06) ◽  
pp. 1540013 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALLEN T. ALEXANDER ◽  
KRISTEL MILLER ◽  
SEAN FIELDING

The emergence of open innovation theory and practice, alongside the evolution to a quadruple helix system of innovation, has led to a need for universities to rethink their models of engagement with industry and wider society. One important element in this system is the entrepreneurial academics; however, there is a lack of research considering the motivations of entrepreneurial academics, who differ from academic entrepreneurs, to engage in knowledge transfer in line with open innovation policy. This research offers practical insights on whether new models of engagement, increasingly offered by universities, really address the policy drivers for open innovation. Furthermore, this research explores whether these activities might motivate entrepreneurial academics to participate. Preliminary findings identify that many supposedly new collaboration activities do not really motivate entrepreneurial academics. This may have important implications on the ability of universities to become truly open and to encourage their academics to become engaged in collaboration and impact.


Author(s):  
Eric von Hippel

This chapter suggests several ways to make progress in free innovation research, policymaking, and practice. It sets expectations for the role the free innovation paradigm might play in these efforts; compares and contrasts the research lenses offered by free innovation, user innovation, peer production, and open innovation; and proposes steps to improve the measurement of free innovation. Next the chapter suggests research steps for incorporating free innovation into innovation theory and policymaking. Finally, this chapter looks at how the free innovation paradigm can help us to understand the economics of household sector creative activities even beyond innovation, such as “user-generated content” ranging from fan fiction to contributions to Wikipedia.


Organizations globally must expect severe competition for at least the next decade, and there is unanimous agreement that sustainable innovation is the quintessential challenge for all organizations – without it organizations must flounder and perish. In this chapter, theory and practice are explored to specify the vital underpinnings of successful innovation, including the critically important organizational property of absorptive capacity which is largely based on leadership, participative and open culture, and knowledge management. Strategic topics such as the knowledge based view, open innovation, and the pros and cons of ‘innovation’ orientation and ‘imitation’ orientation are discussed, together with the importance of supply chain innovation. Details of the practical role Communities of Innovation (CoInv) serve are clarified, together with explanations of why identifying and leveraging the influence of innovation champions and opinion leaders is essential to success. The concepts of Learning-to-Innovate and Innovating-to-Learn are also discussed.


2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (03) ◽  
pp. 471-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
KRISTINA RISOM JESPERSEN

The promise of customers as an external resource for new-product development (NPD) has been recognized in theory and practice for a long time. Technological progress has increased the interaction between companies and users. Yet the involvement of users in NPD depends on the ability of decision-makers to act as boundary spanners. There is a cognitive distance between NPD decision-makers and users. The larger this distance is, the more novel information is contained in user inputs. True open innovation requires that these cognitive distant inputs are treated in NPD. We find that decision-maker openness is significant for NPD openness to be true. Successful collaboration in form of innovations builds on involvement of launching and lead users in NPD. Our analyses show that decision-maker openness facilitates the involvement process. Further, low decision-maker openness traps the implementation of open innovation.


1975 ◽  
Vol 75 (5) ◽  
pp. 316-322
Author(s):  
Henry R. Weinstock ◽  
Marjorie V. Phelps ◽  
Dick D. Miller

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document