Search results

The purpose of this paper is to address the role of intermediaries in open innovation networks in achieving ICT-enabled innovations. The ultimate goal of open innovation networks is to create value for endusers and providers, and to share the risks and rewards. The aim of this paper is to analyse the competences that intermediaries in open innovation networks need to master and exploit during the exploration and exploitation phases of an innovation process.

Based on 14 cases, all of which are examples of collaborative multi-party projects with a focus on ICT-enabled innovations, the paper inductively develops a competence model for intermediaries that can be applied at different stages in the innovation.

The research shows that intermediaries can play an effective role in open innovation, provided they have the right set of competences. It can be concluded that the role of innovation intermediary is most relevant in the creation and development phases.

This study certainly has its limitations. The researchers were involved in several cases, which may have biased their views, even though an external expert who was familiar with the case and the work of the intermediary was involved to minimize the risk. Most importantly, the cases all involved of a single intermediary, albeit with many different private and public partners. The cases were primarily located in the Netherlands. It would be interesting to complement this study with results from other innovation intermediaries.

The paper identified which competences of organizations in innovation are required, and how to balance the competences between the different partners, including the innovation intermediary. The study allows to link the type of goal of the collaboration to a number of best practices, including the competences and roles that are required at different stages.

The paper combines the core innovation competences with the innovation value chain concept developed, and evaluate the resulting model in 14 different cases. The model is new and relevant in practice.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to identify strategic and tactical factors that are crucial to explore, in future, to get insight into the open innovation spectrum.

The study is based on literature review. To explore progress and future needs of open innovation studies, various contributory papers have been consulted and analyzed.

Definition of open innovation is yet to be clear‐cut. What open innovation is and what it is not, is still being debated. Moreover, open innovation overlaps other concepts such as user generation, crowdsourcing, and distributed innovation. Even though research on open innovation has significantly grown, there are still many issues that need to be addressed to get insight about open innovation in various contexts. Studies are mostly performed in the context of large firms and in developed countries. Research in the context of developing countries is still almost an untouched area. Open innovation in the small to medium‐sized enterprises’ (SMEs’) context has gained a foothold just recently. It is crucial to explore some managerial challenges, such as technology transfer, inbound and outbound process, absorptive and desorptive capacity development, particularly in the global open innovation context and it is essential to investigate how open innovation can be implemented for sustainable development.

This study is one of the few, if not only one, that has reviewed the trend of open innovation research and its practical implementation. Both researchers and practitioners will get a snapshot of open innovation and its growing necessity in the business world. Some issues have been highlighted, so that future study can be focused in those directions.

This research paper aims to examine how open innovation (OI) intermediaries facilitate knowledge collaboration between organizations and online user communities. Drawing on a Community of Practice (CoP) perspective on knowledge, the study lays out a framework of the knowledge boundary management mechanisms (and associated practices) that intermediaries deploy in enabling client organizations to engage in online community-based OI.

This research is based on an exploratory case study of an OI intermediary and 18 client organizations that engage with online user communities on the intermediary’s platform. Results incorporate both the intermediary and clients’ perspective, based on analysis of intermediary and client interviews, clients’ online community projects and other archival data.

Results reveal that OI intermediaries deploy three knowledge boundary management mechanisms – syntactic, semantic and pragmatic – each underpinned by a set of practices. Together, these mechanisms enable knowledge transfer, translation and transformation, respectively, and thus lead to cumulatively richer knowledge collaboration outcomes at the organization–community boundary. The findings show that the pragmatic mechanism reinforces both semantic and syntactic mechanisms, and is hence the most critical to achieving effective knowledge collaboration in community-based OI settings.

The findings suggest that OI intermediaries have to implement all three boundary management mechanisms to successfully enable knowledge collaboration for community-based OI. More specifically, intermediaries need to expand their focus beyond the development of digital platforms, to include nuanced efforts at building organizational commitment to community engagement.

Drawing on the CoP view, this study integrates the knowledge management literature into the OI literature to conceptualize the role of OI intermediaries in shaping knowledge collaboration between organizations and communities. In engaging with the interactive nature of knowledge exchange in such multi-actor settings, this research extends the firm-centric theorization of knowledge that currently dominates the existing OI research.

In the realm of innovation systems and technology transfer (TT), the emergence of open innovation and complex market dynamics has amplified innovation intermediaries’ prominence of their role and involvement in TT projects. This study delves into private consultants’ involvement in TT projects, namely in what got them involved by the project’s key stakeholders.

An iterative two-phased research approach was followed, including exploratory interviews and a quantitative case study of a consultancy firm engaged in 219 TT projects.

Five main key motivators were found to lead TT stakeholders to involve private consultants in their TT projects, being the most relevant, the proactivity of private consultants.

The case study and results provide an alternative perspective of TT endeavours, emphasising the importance given by TT stakeholders (mostly recipient companies) to private consultants’ involvement as innovation intermediaries.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how Open Innovation Digital Platforms (OIDPs) can facilitate and support knowledge co-creation in Open Innovation (OI) processes. Specifically, it intends to investigate the contribution of OIDPs-oriented to successfully implement all the phases of interactive coupled OI processes.

The paper carries out an exploratory qualitative analysis, adopting the single case study method. The case here investigated is Open Innovation Platform Regione Lombardia (OIPRL).

The case study sheds light on how OIPRL supports knowledge co-creation through its processes, tools and services as a co-creator intermediary. In its launch stage, the platform simply aimed at giving firms a tool to “find partners” and financial resources to achieve innovative projects. Now, however, the platform has developed into an engagement platform for knowledge co-creation.

One limitation lies in the particular perspective used to perform the case study: the perspective of the digital platform itself. Future research should focus on the individuals engaged in the platform to better investigate the processes, tools and services used to implement the OI approach.

The paper suggests ways in which OIDPs could be used by firms for effective exploration, acquisition, integration and development of valuable knowledge.

The study conceptualizes the role of OIDPs in shaping knowledge co-creation, assuming that the platforms act as Open Innovation Intermediaries (OIIs). Specifically, OIDPs can be observed to function as “co-creator intermediaries” that define, develop and implement dedicated processes, specific tools and appropriate services for supporting knowledge co-creation activities.

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), typically with limited resources, strive hard to obtain the trust of ecosystem participants as an orchestrator. Accordingly, the firms do not have sufficient legitimacy to persuade other parties to join their networks. This study aims to investigate how an SME operating in the publishing industry orchestrates ecosystem participants. In particular, the study analyzes how the orchestrating firm stimulates interactions among ecosystem participants.

Case study research with a qualitative approach has been documented as a well-accepted method for investigating complex phenomena and for theory building. Collected data from various informants and different collection techniques are triangulated to ensure validity. Cross-case analysis to identify common patterns is undertaken as the basis for developing a sound conclusion.

The study demonstrated what orchestrating firms should do to foster innovations and how they benefit from other participants in the ecosystem. The analysis identified the orchestrator's four roles: entrepreneurship networks, knowledge activation, innovation intermediary and network leadership. Among the four roles, there are interrelationships, and to some degree, these overlap. The orchestrating firm must emerge into the ecosystem and work together with all members of the ecosystem. Managers of the orchestrating firm and network members should collaborate to find the most beneficial configuration for all ecosystem participants.

This research is limited to the knowledge-intensive publishing industry. The use of specific industries closely related to innovation provides an advantage in the way that enables researchers to conduct depth analysis, but at the expense of generalizability, and therefore, future research can analyze different industries.

This study focuses on networks as the unit of analysis. Previous studies assumed individual firms as the unit of analysis and ignored the fact that companies interact with other companies when pursuing open innovation. The study focuses on the interactions between actors as the unit of analysis and on the role of orchestrators undertaken by an SME.

Over recent years, few industries have seen such dramatic changes as the healthcare industry. The potential connectivity of digital technologies is completely transforming the healthcare ecosystem. This has resulted in companies increasingly investing in digital transformations to exploit data across channels, operations and patient outreach, by building on a practice approach and actor-network theory and being informed by service-dominant logic, this study aims to contribute by advancing the agential role of third-party actors to prompt innovation and shape service ecosystems.

This research is grounded in an epistemological contextualism. To gain situated knowledge and address the role of context in knowledge, understanding and meaning the authors adopted a qualitative methodology to study actors in their different contexts. The empirical research was based on case theory. The authors also took guidance from practice scholars about how to investigate actors’ practices. The unit of analysis moves from dyadic relationships to focus on practices across different networks of actors.

This study expands on the conceptualization of triad as proposed by Siltaloppi and Vargo (2017) by moving from the form of triadic relationships – brokerage, mediation and coalition – to the agency of e-health third-parties; and their practices to innovate in the healthcare ecosystem. This study focuses on the actors and the performativity of actions and grounding the conceptual view on an empirical base.

Third-party actors bring about innovative ways of doing business in the healthcare ecosystem. Their actions challenge the status quo and run counter to long-time practices. Third-parties support the complex set of interconnections between different healthcare actors for the provision of new service co-creation opportunities. Considering how these e-health third-parties performs has implications for health managers, patients and other actors.

This study focuses on the actors and the performativity of actions and grounding the conceptual view on an empirical base. The agency of third-party actors is their ability to act among others and to connect multiple social and material structures to boost innovation. They prompt innovation and shape service ecosystems by brokering, mediating and coalescing among a great variety of resources, practices and institutions.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a better understanding of what Open Innovation means within university context. Focus is also put on the role universities believe they should play in Open Innovation, as well as the changes that might have arisen as a consequence of universities’ greater awareness of this concept.

The research methodology used is an exploratory study based on in-depth semi-structured interviews of Pro-Vice-Chancellors (or equivalent level) of a variety of British universities. The study was designed around five main research themes: discourse, change, strategy, management, Open Innovation success.

In addition to the traditional teaching, research and knowledge transfer roles of university, this study has uncovered a new role of universities: trusted intermediary (or “Open Innovation Hub”). Another key finding of this study is that it highlights the diversity that prevails in the UK with regard to Open Innovation.

The number of the interviews conducted for this study is probably not large enough to allow a solid generalisation. Data saturation, however, was achieved in this study. The insight provided by this study is particularly significant as interviewees were amongst the highest-ranking executives in their respective universities. Hence the views reported in this study are what “drives” Open Innovation policies in the universities that participated in this study.

This new role of a trusted intermediary played by universities is very likely to change the existing Open Innovation landscape and re-shape policies.

The changing role of universities within Open Innovation context may potentially change the respective role of other stakeholders in the Open Innovation ecosystem.

This is the first study aimed at investigating how British universities understand Open Innovation and what opportunities and challenges they associate with this process.

Based on farm diversification's conventional and unconventional nature, the study intends to discriminate different profiles of farm diversification businesses. Furthermore, this study analyses the links between farm diversification efforts, (open) innovation networks as well as the environmental performance (EP) and financial performance (FP) of farms.

A questionnaire was administered through personal interviews with 160 fresh fruit farmers in an inland Portuguese region. Linear regression, latent class analysis (LCA) and multinomial logistic regression were used.

There are significant differences between the levels of diversification, performance and participation in (open) innovation networks of the three classes of farmers discriminated. Different types of diversification efforts and (open) innovation networks influence EP and FP, while FP and R&D projects are associated with the likelihood of being part of a farm diversification class. Moreover, this study shows that innovation networks, promoted by specialized agricultural advisors and R&D projects, are important forms of open innovation in the agricultural sector.

The study contributes to understanding the agricultural sector's diversification efforts and (open) innovation networks and their association with EP and FP. The conventional or unconventional nature of farm diversification was self-reported.

European and local institutions are advised to develop more R&D programs directed to farmers, including environmental and financial issues, besides comprising agricultural and non-agricultural diversification.

This study provides new insights to understand the association between diversification efforts, (open) innovation networks and agricultural businesses' performance.