Search results

This study aims to define orchestrator roles and related orchestration capabilities in the entrepreneurial ecosystem (EE) to understand how companies (especially small and medium-sized enterprises and startups) could benefit from the surrounding ecosystem to develop their business.

A qualitative case study of the regional ecosystem built around health technology is researched to get an in-depth understanding of the orchestration roles taken by actors in the ecosystem and, likewise, related bundles of orchestrator role-specific capabilities.

Altogether, eight roles and related orchestration capabilities are defined. First, “opinion leaders,” “business facilitators” and “regulation informants” provide resources for participants. Second, “relationship promoters,” “coordinators” and “commanders” create prerequisites for collaboration. Finally, “integrators” and “complementors” help to create concrete offerings. The roles taken can be simultaneous, and they are in constant change as positions and resources of actors change.

Theoretically, this study contributes to the existing EE and orchestration capability research by studying orchestrator roles and related capabilities in the context of an entrepreneurial health tech ecosystem, a phenomenon that has not received sufficient research attention yet.

Managers will be able to use the lessons learned from this study in understanding, using and developing their capabilities, positions and activities in the network. For policymakers, understanding EE reality and dynamics is useful when developing policies for regional growth, likewise in constructing and developing industrial ecosystems to support entrepreneurship in the region.

The study provides novel in-depth knowledge of orchestration in regional, EEs. It complements the currently dominating conceptual research and brings a micro-level perspective that has mostly been lacking in EE studies.

There is a need to understand value co-creation in service ecosystems that engage multiple actors with different goals. This study aims to extend the understanding of value co-creation by considering the orchestration of service ecosystems with reference to resource-integration processes.

An exploratory case study approach is used to analyze actors' roles in resource orchestration within a service ecosystem, gathering data from the macro, meso and micro levels of an Italian hospitality and tourism services ecosystem.

A framework is devised that highlights the intersection between orchestration and resource integration for value co-creation processes across the macro, meso and micro levels in service ecosystems. This extends the understanding of service ecosystem dynamics, especially how new value co-creation structures emerge, by emphasizing the circular causality between system levels. Findings show how orchestrating resource integration activities initiate and institutionalize non-linear value co-creation processes.

Resource integration orchestration within and between ecosystem levels is a possible response to societal challenges and for creating economic, cultural and social value across the community. The study offers policymakers insights into developing new competencies for developing actions according to a logic of socially and sustainable value.

This study advances the understanding of service orchestration by expanding the concept and the feasibility of service ecosystem orchestration. It offers insights into the importance of orchestrating resource integration to the emergence and vitality of service ecosystems themselves. The study responds to the need for empirical studies on value co-creation.

Accessing and sharing dispersed knowledge in ecosystems is neither easy nor automatic. In ecosystems, focal firms should purposely create the right conditions and act to deal with dispersed knowledge. This study aims to investigate how focal firms manage dispersed knowledge in ecosystems characterized by a set of autonomous, heterogeneous, yet interdependent actors involved in experimentation under uncertainty.

Following a conceptual framework based on preceding literature, this study conducted a broad qualitative case study of 6 firms and 12 projects, with 43 semi-structured interviews to identify the patterns of actions associated with dispersed knowledge management (KM) in ecosystems. This paper combines coding and multiple case comparisons to examine the processes and strategies used by the firms to strategically manage dispersed knowledge in ecosystems.

This paper proposes a framework that articulates a new type of orchestration (dispersed knowledge orchestration) and offers a new set of dispersed knowledge strategies (transfer, modularity and circular) for ecosystems.

Innovation and knowledge managers play the roles of dispersed knowledge orchestrators. The study offers guidance on how focal firms should carefully use a particular set of approaches (e.g. integrative theorization) including a portfolio of dispersed knowledge strategies in ecosystems.

Current literature on KM and ecosystem management offers a limited understanding of how organizations manage dispersed knowledge in ecosystems. The research provides three major original contributions. First, the framework contributes to broadening the current understanding of ecosystem orchestration by identifying the micro-foundations of dispersed knowledge orchestration: integrative theorization, nurturing distributed sensemaking and a new chapter for ecosystem governance (i.e. dispersed knowledge governance). Moreover, the framework proposes a new type of strategy, the dispersed knowledge strategy. Finally, by exploring the interplay between the micro-foundations of dispersed knowledge orchestration and dispersed knowledge strategy, the results contribute to a multi-level approach in the field.

This article identifies a new transactional system–the business ecosystem. It describes the characteristics and drivers of these complex webs of interdependent enterprises and other participants which create unique value through synergistic relationships.

The article explains how innovative organizations can seek new opportunities and develop new competencies in business ecosystems they will explicitly create or participate in.

Ecosystems provide stimulus for, and a path to organizational and industry transformation – connecting people and organizations in new and different ways, and providing access to skills and expertise often unavailable outside the ecosystem.

The authors have identified a spectrum of ecosystem archetypes that they call the Shark Tank, the Hornet’s Nest, the Wolf Pack and the Lion’s Pride. They analyze the success strategies for each.

This article methodically diagrams the strategies for success in the emerging ecosystem economy. It identifies the key drivers of value in these new kinds of networks and offers corporate leaders actionable advice on how to position their firms in specific types of ecosystems.

Sharing resources with stakeholders is the key for keystones to govern business ecosystems successfully. However, existing research has not paid further attention to how keystones share resources under the condition of resource sufficiency and how keystones balance resource sharing with complementors when they lack resources. Therefore, this paper aims to explore how keystones govern their business ecosystems under the conditions of resource sufficiency and resource insufficiency.

This paper adopts the single case study method. First, by adopting Gioia coding to analyze the relevant data of the case sample, this paper obtains the key concepts of the business ecosystem governance process. Then, it establishes the relationship between the concepts by analyzing the governance process of the case sample.

Under the condition of resource sufficiency, keystones under the condition of resource sufficiency, should make full use of resources to incubate more complementors, and further integrate the resources of the business ecosystem, to create more value for their business ecosystems. Under the condition of resource insufficiency, keystones should break the boundaries of business ecosystems and acquire external resources, to meet the resource needs of complementors. Subsequently, keystones should redeploy idle resources according to the actual needs of complementors, to meet the changing resource needs of complementors.

This study subdivides business ecosystem governance conditions and further constructs the business ecosystem governance process model, which provides a theoretical and practical reference for business ecosystem governance.

Competence-based theory provides valuable insights in a business context characterized by global ecosystems, co-specialization, and asset orchestration. As the unit of analysis shifts from the individual enterprise to the ecosystem, pursuing proper competence building and competence leveraging activities considering both firm-specific and firm-addressable resources becomes a key issue in strategy development.

Based on the original concepts of the competence-based theory, this paper suggests that the competence space can be a useful framework when considering alternative ecosystem strategies. Competence-based theory, emphasizing the simultaneous pursuit of competence leveraging and competence building, provides an important complement to other dynamic perspectives on strategy, such as dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity. The paper also suggests considering the inclusion of aesthetic properties as an important part of competence-based theory.

Network orchestration has received widespread attention from scholars engaged in network-relationship governance research. This study aims to explore progress in network orchestration research and future prospects.

In this study, 105 articles related to network orchestration from the Web of Science Core Collection Database for the period 2006–2022 are collected as sample data, and bibliometric relationship maps of network orchestration research are visually presented using the CiteSpace software.

First, this study presents distributions of articles, methods, journals, authors, institutions and countries/regions in network orchestration research. Second, based on a reference co-citation analysis, three articles are identified as the key literature in network orchestration research. Based on a keyword co-occurrence analysis, the hotspots are found to include studies related to overall network and individual levels. A cluster analysis reveals six themes: innovation ecosystem, sustainable development, product development, sourcing, hub firm and innovation network. From a burst detection analysis, three frontiers emerge: organisation, collaboration and governance. Finally, some future research directions are proposed and important issues are raised.

This study is the first to reveal the progress of network orchestration research using quantitative bibliometric methods, and it provides insights to scholars and offers practitioners with a better understanding of network orchestration.

Rapid advancements in blockchain technology transform various sectors, attracting the attention of industrialists, practitioners, policymakers and academics, and profoundly affect construction businesses through smart contracts and crypto-economics. This paper explores the blockchain innovation ecosystem in construction.

Through a qualitative study of 23 diverse interviewees, the study explores how open or closed the blockchain innovation ecosystem in construction is and who its emerging orchestrators are.

The data showed that construction aims towards an open innovation blockchain ecosystem, although there are elements of hybridisation and closedness, each system pointing out to different orchestrators.

The study has implications for governments and large companies in construction, showing that open innovation initiatives need to be encouraged by policymakers through rules, regulations and government-sponsored demonstrator projects.

The data showed that there is lack of readiness for business model change to support open innovation blockchain ecosystems in construction.

This is the first study applying the open innovation theory in the construction industry and sheds light into the phenomenon of blockchain, suggesting routes for further democratisation of the technology for policymakers and practitioners.

Innovation ecosystems have not been defined univocally. The authors compare the different approaches to innovation ecosystems in the literature, the link with open innovation, the value creating and value capturing processes in innovation ecosystems, and the need to orchestrate them properly. In this way, the purpose of this paper is to provide a highly needed, concise overview of the state of the art in innovation ecosystem thinking.

A systematic screening of the literature searching for publications focusing on innovation ecosystems is carried out in the paper. The authors found 30 publications and compared the different approaches to innovation ecosystems: the authors classify them according to industries, the level of analysis, their central focus on innovation ecosystems, whether frameworks are developed in the publications, the main actors, focus on SMEs or large companies, the success of innovation ecosystems and the role of the orchestrator.

The authors found different approaches to innovation ecosystems in the literature. Some papers look at the link with open innovation, and others at the value creating and value capturing processes in innovation ecosystems, the role of orchestrators, etc. The authors also provide an overview about the industries, the level of analysis, the central focus of the research, the main actors in the networks and the success factors. The authors observe that most publications have been written in Europe and apply to European ecosystems. The approach in Europe is, to some extent, also different from the main focus of leading American scholars.

The authors compare different approaches to innovation ecosystems. This provides a highly needed understanding of the state of the art in innovation ecosystem thinking. There are some limitations as well: the paper only does a literature review, and the authors are not developing a new framework to study innovation ecosystems.

The literature overview is not primarily focused on practitioners, but the tables in the paper provide a quick overview of good management practices for setting up and managing innovation ecosystems.

Innovations ecosystems are, in some cases, established to solve major societal problems such as changes in healthcare, energy systems, etc. Therefore, they require the interaction between different types of partners including universities, research institutes and governmental agencies. Studying innovation ecosystems is crucial to facilitate social or societal changes.

The paper presents a highly needed overview of the literature about innovation ecosystems and a concise examination of the different aspects that are studied so far.

This article aims to examine how users' involvement in value co-creation influences the development and orchestration of well-being ecosystems to help tackle complex societal challenges. This research contributes to the public management literature and answers recent calls to investigate novel public service governances by discussing users' involvement and value co-creation for novel well-being solutions.

The authors empirically explore this phenomenon through a case study of a complex ecosystem addressing increased well-being, focussing on the formative evaluation stage of a longitudinal evaluation of Sweden's first support centre for people affected by cancer. Following an abductive reasoning and action research approach, the authors critically discuss the potential of user involvement for the development of well-being ecosystems and outline preconditions for the success of such approaches.

The empirical results indicate that resource reconfiguration of multi-actor collaborations provides a platform for value co-creation, innovative health services and availability of resources. Common themes include the need for multi-actor collaborations to reconfigure heterogeneous resources; actors' adaptive change capabilities; the role of governance mechanisms to align the diverse well-being ecosystem components, and the engagement of essential actors.

Although using a longitudinal case study approach has revealed stimulating insights, additional data collection, multiple cases and quantitative studies are prompted. Also, the authors focus on one country but the characteristics of users' involvement for value co-creation in innovative well-being ecosystems might vary between countries.

The findings of this study demonstrate the value of cancer-affected individuals, with “lived experiences”, acting as sources for social innovation, and drivers of well-being ecosystem development. The findings also suggest that participating actors in the ecosystem should utilise wider knowledge and experience to tackle complex societal challenges associated with well-being.

Policymakers should encourage the formation of well-being ecosystems with diverse actors and resources that can help patients navigate health challenges. The findings especially show the potential of starting from the user's needs and life situation when the ambition is to integrate and innovate in fragmented systems.

The proposed model proposes that having a user-led focus on innovating new solutions can play an important role in the development of well-being ecosystems.