Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the factors influencing small and medium enterprises’ (SMEs) adoption of innovation approaches.

The methodology involves two steps. First, all the variables relevant to the adoption of innovation in SMEs are identified. Subsequently, primary data are gathered from decision makers of 213 SMEs, and a multinomial logistic regression analysis is performed.

The results indicate that SMEs adopt both open innovation and closed innovation approaches. The firm-level factors such as firm age, firm size, education qualification, work experience and culture, and external factors such as customers, competition, technological advances and ecosystem influence adoption of open innovation approach compared to closed innovation approach. Factors such as culture among firm-level factors and competition among external factors influence the adoption of closed innovation approach.

The study helps the managers or the decision makers of the SMEs to know the suitable factors influencing the firm to adopt innovation which could potentially help the firms in their business strategy.

The study explores the adoption of innovation approaches of SMEs in emerging economies. The outcomes of this research have far-reaching implications for theory and practitioners in emerging economies.

The impact of the e-globalization combined with staggering costs for R & D across industries has resulted in the call for new approach to innovation where openness and interconnectivity is the role. This new approach is designated as “open innovation”. The new paradigm calls for the sharing of knowledge and resources in conducting innovation activities within and among organizations. As such, one needs to re-orient the structure of the organization to meet these new requirements. On the conceptual level, it becomes a significant undertake to try to grasp how our traditional understanding of the organization can be fitted within the requirements of the open innovation when the environment of the e-globalization is taken in consideration. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the question of how organization structure theories can be coupled to the open innovation paradigm. Out of that analysis the authors propose a new theoretical framework of organizational analysis that takes both the classical knowledge and the new economic context of e-globalization.

The contemporary period is recognized by the term “new economy”, as a replacement for the “old economy”. Another term of importance is “globalization”, which is coupled to the issue of economy categorization. Humanity launched the modern age of globalization some decades ago, but we are going through a new type of globalization, e-globalization. In the e-globalization, processes are induced basically by the impact of the new tools of communication and information technologies. These dynamic processes have forced a re-thinking of the traditional innovation practices. In the paper, the authors reflect on the changes in relation to the traditional knowledge about organization structure, using a deductive approach and textual analysis and relate that to the requirements of an open innovation paradigm. In the process, the authors introduce the basics of the “theory of internetisation dynamics” as a new potential organizational theoretical framework.

From the analysis, it was found that some traditional concepts about organization structure and organizing mechanism theories are responsive to the needs of the open paradigm settings while other theories are not. However, each of these is able to contribute to one of the five components of the theory of internetisation dynamics.

The authors argue that by using the correct framework for the analysis of the organizational structure, one can propose a set of strategic steps which would help the companies to re-structure. That would save time and effort for policy-makers and managers of firms, as well as researchers active in this field of organization and organizing processes, who are focused on the open innovation transformation requirements of the firms. Running this analysis would add some input into organizational re-orientation in troubled sectors such as in pharmaceutical industries.

The paper aims to examine the influence of closed and open innovation practices on economic performance. This papert also examines the mediating roles of innovation performance and firm performance. The study uses innovation theory based on knowledge management for theoretical support.

The methodology involves two steps. First, all the variables relevant to the adoption of innovative approaches and performance parameters are identified. Subsequently, primary data are gathered from decision-makers of 200 biotechnological firms and a structural equation modeling analysis is performed.

The study's results showed that the open innovation practice, such as interaction with large research and development (R&D) firms and customers, influences the performance parameters. The findings indicate that closed and open innovation practices positively impact performance measures like innovation, firm and economic performance. The results also indicate the mediating role of firm performance. However, the innovation performance was not found to mediate the relationship.

This examination gives experimental bits of knowledge from any confining influence innovation approaches in India. Analysts and specialists of firms can use the results of the current study to comprehend the effect of various innovation practices on different performance measures.

Many companies claim they are adopting an open approach to innovation, but each of them with its own way. This paper aims to explore the different models for opening up the innovation process adopted in practice.

The paper employs an extended survey among Italian manufacturing companies; cluster analysis; and ANOVA.

The study distinguishes four different open innovation models with respect to two variables, representing the degree of openness: the number and type of partners with whom the company collaborates (partner variety) and the number and type of phases of the innovation process actually open to external collaborations (innovation phase variety). They are: open innovators, closed innovators, integrated collaborators and specialised collaborators. The paper describes each cluster in terms of firm‐specific variables that characterize and support open innovation choices; finally, it tries to draw some tentative explanation of the influence of openness on the innovative performance of companies.

The number of respondents is still limited (i.e. about 100). Moreover, only the relationship between some firm‐specific factors and the degree of openness (defined specifically in terms of partner variety and phase variety) is studied: a wider investigation is recommended to include more contextual factors, i.e. external/environmental ones, or more variables that can help to define the openness degree.

The paper provides managerial implications because it suggests that open innovation is not an “on/off” choice, but it can be interpreted and adopted with different degrees, consistently with the company's specific context.

The paper introduces a new perspective that integrates both the number/typology of partners and the number/typology of phases, in order to understand if such a perspective can confirm the existence of different open innovation models.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse different organisational tools of business development used in practice. This analysis seeks to address the question of how an organisation can achieve the recurring shift from exploration to exploitation and at the same time manage to balance its open and closed innovation tools.

The empirical basis for analysing the organisational implications of open vs closed innovation is built by Creavis, the business venturing arm of Degussa AG, a specialty chemicals company headquartered in Germany.

Companies face the ambiguity of creating new business options and exploiting these at a later stage. Since exploitative and explorative units require a different organisational set‐up, it is difficult for a company to shift its exploratory endeavours to exploitative means. The presented case study offers an answer to this dilemma by showing how organisations manage to combine both by a unique organisational set‐up allowing for an evolutionary approach of shifting exploratory work into exploitative results.

The insights derived from the case study clearly present a way of dealing with ambidexterity in new business development. The in‐depth analysis advances the understanding of how organisations may successfully conduct business development and, in particular, which organisational tools they may use.

This paper is based on an original case study by the authors. It integrates management theory with a real life example to foster management research in new business development and the particular question of how to deal with the need of organisations to combine both exploratory and exploitative units and support their interaction as well as employing different approaches to innovation, i.e. open vs closed innovation.

This paper seeks to explore how market orientation facilitates the strategic flexibility of business models grounded in open innovation. The authors suggest that the new paradigm of open innovation may impact a firm's adaptability and responsiveness under conditions of environmental flux. However, extending innovation capacity by opening the innovation process poses major challenges for firms. The aims of this study are to explore the characteristics of open innovation activity and to contemplate the role of strategic flexibility in the design of business models based upon open innovation.

The study draws upon a qualitative research approach through a longitudinal case study in the field of open source software (OSS). The empirical case illustrates how an OSS firm utilizes signals in its environment to flexibly alter its business model.

A business model that embodies open innovation raises dilemmas between open and closed innovation paradigms. However, the authors' case highlights that an ambidextrous approach that combines market orientation with the principles of open innovation increases profitability, shortens time to market through effective market access, and enhances innovation capability.

The results have profound implications for industrial marketers, managers, management consultants and business educators. They can use the insights gleaned from this research to guide the development of business models that involve open innovation. The results indicate that firms involved in open innovation need reactive strategic flexibility to cope with the environmental diversity and variability. However, this study analyzes a single case in the field of OSS and one should be cautious when generalizing the findings.

This paper improves the understanding of the relationship between flexibility and market orientation. It combines two areas that have previously been discussed separately, i.e. market orientation and open innovation.

The purpose of this study is to figure out the factors for sustainable growth of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

In all, 27 SMEs in the area of IT (Information Technology) in Korea were analysed through interview method basically.

It is found that sustainable development of SMEs requires two kinds of open innovation which are knowledge strategy and business model. According to developing process, SMEs change their open innovation strategy in knowledge strategy and business model. The highest growth limit of SMEs depends on open innovation in knowledge strategy and business model in sequence from closed innovation in both, through open innovation in both, to open innovation in knowledge strategy and closed innovation in business model and to closed innovation in knowledge strategy and open innovation in business model.

First, the present study was conducted with IT sector SMEs in Korea. It is true that the IT sector is one of the most rapidly changing industrial sectors and is one of representative business types of SMEs in which manufacturing and service industries coexist and diverse sizes of SMEs exist (Malerba, 2002). Second, the present study relies on case study methods. It is true that case study is a method that gives excellent qualitative analysis in firm studies (Yin, 2008).

SMEs cannot survive if they do not accept open innovation in knowledge strategy and business model. SMEs that show absolute limitations in resources and manpower should absolutely implement open innovation strategies to secure more diverse resources from markets and external knowledge bases rather than preparing all resources and capabilities by themselves (Van de Vrande et al., 2009; Yun and Mohan, 2012a, 2012b).

SMEs should bear in mind the two different levels of open innovation, such as knowledge strategies and business models (Chesbrough, 2007; Chesbrough and Appleyard, 2007).

SMEs should not confuse between temporally sustainable development and infinite sustainable development. Firms that take closed innovation strategies in both knowledge strategies and business models can also grow for some time. However, because of the deepening of knowledge-based economy, not only the amount of knowledge existing in the world and the speed of knowledge distribution increased but also the customers’ demands and expectations have been observed to increase in the market immediately through social networking sites (SNS), etc. (Yun and Ryu, 2012).

Innovation is an increasingly distributed process, involving networks of geographically dispersed players with a variety of possible, and dynamic, value chain configurations (Fraser, Minshall, & Probert, 2005). ‘Open innovation’ is one term that has emerged to describe ‘[…] the use of purposive inflows and outflows of knowledge to accelerate internal innovation, and expand the markets for external use of innovation, respectively’ (Chesbrough, Vanhaverbeke, & West, 2006). This is contrasted with the ‘closed’ model of innovation where firms typically generate their own ideas which they then develop, produce, market, distribute and support.

The purpose of this study is to pursue a comprehensive review of the progress of open innovation literature.

Using a wide range of literature sources, altogether 293 articles relevant to the study’s objective were identified for statistical analysis. Moreover, contributory articles published from 2003 to June 2015 were included for content analysis.

The study contributes in two ways. First, based on content analysis of the selected contributory articles, the authors shed light on the overall development of the open innovation literature and highlight the findings of significant studies. Second, the authors provide a detailed picture of the progress of open innovation literature by analyzing the comprehensive set of articles. Total yearly publication activity was calculated, and publication activity in different disciplines was addressed. The study unveils most influential articles, authors and journals that have discussed open innovation. The geographical locations of influential articles and authors are revealed. Additionally, frequently used keywords are listed.

The authors present a new framework of open innovation research, highlight the progress of existing research and suggest avenues for future research.

The paper, covering the actual argument of open innovation, aims to answer two main research questions, namely: “Which open innovation approach is adopted by the companies belonging to the ICTs industry?” and “Which types of collaborations are carried out by the companies and which are the dynamics that characterize it?”.

In order to answer the research questions a multiple case study methodology is adopted. The research framework was structured in three main phases: first, a literature review on the matter of open innovation in general and within the ICTs industry in particular, as well as of the specific features of the industry investigated, was carried out. Second, a list of questions containing the main issues that arose from the previous step has been designed for the case study protocol, to be used in the following structured interviews. Finally, structured direct interviews were conducted on three important Italian companies active in the telecommunications area.

Results highlighted different ways to manage the open innovation processes, based on teamwork or task forces, and the different roles, more or less proactive, that an information communication technology (ICT) company may undertake within this process. Moreover, they show that ICT companies acquire external knowledge and skills mainly from universities and research centers, as well as from value chain's actors (suppliers in primis).

Still little attention has been paid to the understanding of the open innovation approach of Italian firms belonging to the ICT industry, thus the authors believe that this paper may represent a valuable basis for future research on the open innovation issues in the field of ICT.