Search results

This chapter aims to investigate the driving forces in the creation of knowledge and in the process of innovation and the relevance of the governance model with respect to the free market model or the government model in the regulation of the knowledge and innovation networks.

According to a cognitive approach, a conflict is the result of a closer spatial distance between two actors or firms, leading to a contact stimulus and a reciprocal stimulus, which is perceived as a threat for the respective security or identity. This occurs when the two considered parties are characterised by a too large cognitive distance or a too different mindset or culture, which hinders collaboration.

This chapter highlights that the fragmentation of a modern knowledge economy and the pervasive conflicts between various interest groups, conflicts of interests in the roles of the same actors, bottlenecks, rents and income and power disparity in society require a new form of regulation, that is, multi-level governance and new instruments in innovation policies.

The governance or partnership model is based on the principles of negotiation, exchange and consensus, which are different from the principle of authority as in the planning model and from the principle of competition and survival of the fittest as in the free market model. Governance is an approach to the industrial policy that is more suitable to steer or manage a modern capitalist system and the knowledge and innovation networks that characterise this system.

An emerging stream of literature has observed that project-based organizations rely increasingly on a network of collaborations originating from the ongoing process of creating and dissolving relationships that bring new project opportunities. Project-based networks are widespread in knowledge-intensive and creative industries, such as life-science and biotechnology, nanotechnology, and software, film, and music industry. This chapter examines the structural characteristics of project-based network-ties in German biotech. We focus on the consequences of local versus international network ties for the innovative success of German biotechnology firms. The findings of our longitudinal event history analysis indicate that the most valuable learning drivers are international research alliances and centrality within the international research network. Surprisingly, we do not find any local effects: neither the density of a local research cluster, nor its diversity or age is of significance. Our results shed new light on the relevance of international linkages for firms that are engaged in project-based learning networks.

This chapter describes the transition from single-helix roadmap innovation to Open Innovation 2.0 (OI 2.0), based on Quadruple Helix innovation processes. Innovation is intended to make things happen in new and better ways, but actual take-up is always an essential aspect of successful innovation. A change of mindset to be in accord with the behaviour and processes in innovation ecosystems is crucial for an understanding of the interdependencies and complexity management that lead to impact. OI 2.0 is a ‘mash-up’ parallel process in which the public policy maker needs to create a safe framework for this interaction (mash-up) to take place. OI 2.0 is genuinely intersectional, as innovation increasingly happens at the crossroads of technologies and applications – it is not the linear extrapolation of the past. To speed up scalability, all stakeholders need to co-create solutions and find innovations together in real-world settings. Only then do we have a strong driver to create new markets and services and scale up successes rapidly: There is inherent buy-in in this kind of innovation environment. At the same time, by involving end users as co-creators up front and seamlessly, less successful experiments and failing prototypes are rapidly revealed as such: ‘failing fast, scaling fast’ is one of the strongest advantages of OI 2.0. All this leads to the Quadruple Helix innovation model, which supplements the Triple Helix model (research, industry, public sector) with the additional component of the people. In the Quadruple Helix, citizens are not the passive objects of new products or services but active agents contributing to the whole innovation process.

The purpose of this research is to review empirical research on customer involvement in innovation and identify future research directions that can better connect this research with marketing strategy literatures and offer opportunities for further theoretical development.

We conduct a review of empirical articles published in eight leading marketing and innovation journals between 2001 and 2017.

The review shows that the literature on customer involvement in innovation is highly diverse and fragmented, lacking a common understanding of what constitutes customer involvement in innovation and its theoretical underpinnings. There exists a multitude of conceptualizations of customer involvement in innovation, which limits effective accumulation of domain knowledge. A large number of studies have taken the customer’s perspective to examine their motivation to participate and ability to contribute, whereas less research has been done from the firm’s perspective to understand how firms may effectively manage the well-recognized challenges of customer involvement as well as the implications of customer involvement for long-term innovation strategy and overall performance. Based on the review, we offer recommendations for future research.

We identify important questions for future research that are highly relevant for the practice of customer involvement in innovation.

We provide a systematic review of the rapidly growing empirical research on customer involvement in innovation. We evaluate key points of differences in the literature and offer a synthesis that helps identify opportunities for future research.

Purpose – The main aim of this chapter is to analyse the implications of innovation and, directly and indirectly, of cooperation on the internationalisation of knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS). Specifically, we analyse the potential impact of innovation capability on the propensity of KIBS to internationalise. We also look at whether cooperation has any influence on the international growth of these firms or on their innovation results.

Methodology/approach – This is an empirical research. Empirical analyses are based on information provided by the Spanish Technological Innovation Panel data for the period 2003–2005. Tobit and probit models are estimated to test our hypotheses.

Findings – The empirical findings support all our theoretical hypotheses. A positive relationship between cooperation, innovation and internationalisation of KIBS is also found. Thus, the results confirm the relevance of innovation for internationalisation. KIBS that establish collaborative relationships find access to international markets easier and improve their innovation capability. In these terms, cooperation is found to be directly and indirectly related with internationalisation in KIBS.

Originality/value of paper – The services sector is the most important sector in Spain and Europe nowadays, and it is the sector that has experienced the fastest growth in recent years. However, the research efforts it has received have not been commensurate with its size and role in international commerce. In general, the literature has paid scant attention to the relationships between innovation and internationalisation in services sectors, and more specifically, among KIBS. This chapter sheds light on this topic.

Recognizing the impact of innovation on organizational performance, scholars from a number of disciplines have sought to identify the conditions that make innovation possible. Although these studies have served to identify a number of key variables, the relationship between these variables and innovation is complex. In this chapter, we argue that the apparent complexity of these relationships may be attributed to cross-level differences in the requirements for innovation and the existence of complex interactions among the phenomena operating at a given level of analysis. The implications of this multi-level perspective for understanding how innovation occurs in organizational settings are discussed.

This study deals with the processes of innovation in the medium technology industrial sectors. First, it illustrates the differences between the linear model of innovation and the systemic and cognitive model of knowledge creation. Then, it focuses on the concepts of connectivity, creativity, and speed of change, which characterize the processes of interactive learning in the industrial clusters. Finally, it illustrates a typology of regions, where problems and policy fields are different, and it indicates the guidelines of a governance of interregional knowledge and innovation networks.

We live in the Age of Knowledge, which is impelling us towards the Age of Imagination. The technological wave rises and with it rises a wave of change that will affect both the economy and society. When these two waves will reach the coast where knowledge meets ignorance, and how to ride them, are questions that require us to imagine the future. We must, therefore, embark on the vessel of imagination, leaving behind us the baggage of what we know and understand. Imagination is not just the springboard for ideas; it also acts to connect ideas in different ways that may blossom in the garden of an entrepreneurial renaissance. Symbols, metaphors and concepts that belong to our tacit knowledge come to light in our memory. It is from here that the imagination draws its lifeblood, broadening our horizons, inducing us to interact with others who may be the bearers of other cultures. Are we ready to engage in an imaginative learning process to join business with innovation and art? Are we prepared to design a wide-open white space where the actors of entrepreneurship, innovation and art can generate a constructive tension that will sweep away what appears to be mutual antagonism or incompatibility?