Search results

The concept of open innovation has captured the attention of both academics and practitioners alike. However, there is a dearth of research on how innovations can be diffused within open innovation ecosystems, a critical condition for the sustainability of such ecosystems. In this regard, the study advances a research agenda for guiding future inquiries into innovation diffusion within open innovation ecosystems.

Based on a systematic review of the extant literature on open innovation, this article identifies knowledge gaps in innovation diffusion, along with recommendations for bridging these gaps in the future. The study advocates that future research should consider not only innovation generation processes, but also innovation diffusion processes, especially in light of the growing application of open innovation in the context of digital goods and services.

Subscribing to an evolutionary view of innovation diffusion, the article draws on a five-phase framework – knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation – to illustrate the roles played by three distinct yet interconnected parties (i.e. platforms, complementors, and individuals) within open innovation ecosystems as well as the research opportunities it brings.

The article examines the critical, yet underexplored role of innovation diffusion in sustaining open innovation ecosystems and outlines potential research avenues that can contribute to growing the understanding of the innovation diffusion process.

Despite the abundance of research in open innovation, few contributions explore it at inter-organizational level, and particularly with a focus on healthcare ecosystem, characterized by a dense network of relationships among public and private organizations (hospitals, companies and universities) as well as other actors that can be labeled as “untraditional” player, i.e. doctors, nurses and patients. The purpose of this paper is to cover this gap and explore how knowledge is transferred and flows among all the healthcare ecosystems’ players in order to support open innovation processes.

The paper is conceptual in nature and adopts a narrative literature review approach. In particular, insights gathered from open innovation literature at the inter-organizational network level, with a particular attention to healthcare ecosystems, and from the knowledge transfer processes, are analyzed in order to propose an interpretative framework for the understanding of knowledge transfer in open innovation with a focus on healthcare ecosystem.

The paper proposes an original interpretative framework for knowledge transfer to support open innovation in healthcare ecosystems, composed of four main components: healthcare ecosystem’s players’ categories; knowledge flows among different categories of players along the exploration and exploitation stages of innovation development; players’ motivations for open innovation; and players’ positions in the innovation process. In addition, assuming the intermediary network as the suitable organizational model for healthcare ecosystem, four classification scenarios are identified on the basis of the main players’ influence degree and motivations for open innovation.

The paper offers interpretative lenses for managers and policy makers in understanding the most suitable organizational models able to encourage open innovation in healthcare ecosystems, taking into consideration the players’ motivation and the knowledge transfer processes on the basis of the innovation results.

The paper introduces a novel framework that fills a gap in the innovation management literature, by pointing out the key role of external not R&D players, like patients, involved in knowledge transfer for open innovation processes in healthcare ecosystems.

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.

Platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies embrace and enable interactions with external entities. Firms pursuing these approaches conduct business and interact with environments differently than those pursuing traditional closed strategies. This chapter considers these strategies together highlighting similarities and differences between platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies. We focus on managerial and organizational challenges for organizations pursuing these strategies and identify four institutional logic shifts associated with these strategic transitions: (1) increasing external focus, (2) moving to greater openness, (3) focusing on enabling interactions, and (4) adopting interaction-centric metrics. As mature incumbent organizations adopt these strategies, there may be tensions and multiple conflicting institutional logics. Additionally, we consider four strategic leadership topics and how they relate to platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies: (1) executive orientation and experience, (2) top management teams, (3) board-management relations, and (4) executive compensation. We discuss theoretical implications, and consider future directions and research opportunities.

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.

The resource crisis in healthcare can be alleviated by engaging external stakeholders and resources in healthcare delivery. The authors use value and open innovation concepts to understand what motivates the stakeholders to join the healthcare innovation ecosystem and what value such an ecosystem brings to healthcare.

A systematic literature review following the PRISMA framework method was applied to reach the research objective. Out of a total of 509 identified articles published till 2021, 25 were selected as relevant for this review.

Six categories of actors were identified, including innovation intermediaries, which were so far neglected in the healthcare innovation literature. Furthermore, patients, healthcare providers, innovation suppliers, investors and influencers were described. The authors also distinguished internal and external stakeholders. The authors show why and how open innovation projects contribute to involving external stakeholders and resources in healthcare delivery by contributing to patient autonomy, relationship building, knowledge transfer, improving collaborative mindset and culture, advancing know-how and bringing additional finances.

This article is the first one to systematically describe the value of open innovation in healthcare. The authors challenge the positivist approach in value presented by value-based healthcare. The authors show how openness contributes to addressing the resource crisis by involving new stakeholders and resources in the care delivery process.

This paper aims to explore the evolutionary dynamics of innovation ecosystems in the food industry by adopting both open innovation and convergence approaches to derive practical policy implications to develop impactful innovation ecosystems to promote food production sustainably.

Starting from the cutting-edge case of Foodvalley in the Netherlands, the study adopts a backcasting approach to reach a future vision of food ecosystems from a sustainable food production perspective. The authors set the backcasting analysis in four steps: (1) description of the present and trends analysis, (2) selection of trustworthy criteria and goals, (3) development of future images and (4) analysis of how to reach the images.

The trends analysis has identified three existing innovation fields – protein shift, circular agrifood and food and health – and two strategic directions – convergence and localness decrease. The study reports how a long-term commitment may lead the valley toward a best future scenario.

The study suggests that policymakers and stakeholders can promote innovation strategies in sustainable food production ecosystems by encouraging collaboration between different sectors, reducing regulatory barriers, attracting innovative actors, and investing in education and training programs. To achieve measurable environmental and social impact outcomes, policies should promote entrepreneurship and create an enabling environment that encourages innovation and risk-taking.

The originality of this paper concerns the backcasting perspective applied to the analysis of the food ecosystem. This approach facilitates the identification of a path direction for successfully managing open innovation and industry convergence toward a desirable future of sustainable food production.

This study aims to map and assess the conceptual development of the innovation ecosystem literature.

A bibliometric analysis was performed using the VOSviewer, RStudio software, Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny packages. To accomplish this, 367 publications published between 2006 and 2020 and indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases were assessed.

The results demonstrate a rise in research during 2016, with almost 30% of publications concentrated in only six journals. The co-citation analysis presented four clusters: case studies, business and innovation ecosystems (platform approach), open innovation and national and regional innovation systems (territorial approach). We proposed a theoretical framework based on two approaches in the innovation ecosystem literature based on co-citation analysis: platform, which has its roots in the literature on strategy, and territory, grounded in research on economic geography literature.

One of the limitations of the study is that only articles published in journals were analyzed, leaving out of the sample those published in congresses, books and other sources.

This paper contributes to the literature by presenting and clarifying the different conceptual trajectories of research in innovation ecosystems. We also proposed an analytical framework based on the two main approaches to innovation ecosystems – platform and territory. This framework presents the critical elements of managing innovation ecosystems from both perspectives.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how an open innovation strategy of public management in the energy sector enables the creation of innovation ecosystems and how it reduces the cost of wind energy projects in energy-poor countries.

This research study reflects on seven wind energy startups (WESs) in Pakistan using quantitative and qualitative data following a sequential mixed-methods approach. First, it draws from growing literature on innovation and renewable energy management to conceptualize an open innovation ecosystem model around WESs. It then tests this model using cost analyses of wind projects and identifies possible cost-saving strategies. Finally, follow-up interviews with managers in investigated projects cross check study findings and validate the model.

Three noteworthy findings can help policymakers in developing countries to effectively meet the future energy challenges and get benefit from international funding opportunities: by protecting lenders on approved terms rather than offering sovereign guarantee to operating firms; by letting the government take control of the initial development phase; and by giving off-take guarantees to the manufacturers.

It offers policy recommendations to energy sector managers about guarantees, financing, regulators, governmental control, tariffs and transfer of technology that can significantly curtail outlays.

Results suggest that adopting an open innovation ecosystem model can potentially save around 6 per cent ($4-$7m) in the overall cost of a 50 MW wind energy project.

The more recent emergence of advanced digital technologies and the acceleration of process digitization, combined with rising stakeholder expectations, have created an urgent imperative for organizations to embrace open innovation.

The analysis in this paper is based on a survey 2,379 executives representing 24 industries and 26 countries conducted by the IBM Institute for Business Value. IBV researchers used descriptive statistics to understand innovation trends. To understand the role of open innovation for business performance IBV researchers segmented the sample based on two criteria: extent to which the organization sees open innovation as important for their growth strategy and the extent to which they are effective in advancing open innovation.

Ecosystems are key to success with open innovation, creating value opportunities within and across the value chains. 10;

Open and interoperable technologies like hybrid cloud, APIs, blockchain and AI allow for many more ways to create value by unlocking hidden potential in existing relationships.

Open innovation drives growth; new research found that 84 percent of executives think open innovation is important for their future growth strategy.