Search results

The Brittelstand are innovative, family-owned firms that offer national and international opportunities in the United Kingdom (UK). These fast-growing businesses are customer-oriented and proud of family ownership and embeddedness of the businesses within communities. While Brittelstand firms are as likely to deploy open innovation models as non-Brittelstand firms, these firms' engagement with customers in regional and national markets and the ability to benefit from this collaboration contrasts with these firms' willingness to engage in open innovation.

Using longitudinal data and regression analysis on 13,876 firms with 24,286 observations over 2004–2020, the authors develop and test a theoretical framework of open innovation in the Brittelstand. The authors' model explains the willingness and ability of the Brittelstand firms to engage in open innovation and benefit from it.

The authors' results show that Brittelstand firms are less willing than non-Brittelstand firms to collaborate with customers and universities, contrasting prior research on family firms, and distinguishing the innovation model of the Brittelstand from a family business model. The Brittelstand firms who are able to engage in collaboration with customers in domestic markets will outperform the firms' non-Brittelstand counterparts in innovation outputs.

In line with other studies, this study is associated with several limitations that open opportunities for further research that replicate and/or extends this study. First, this study is unbalanced panel data and the fact that some firms appear in the model only once from 2004–2020. The longitudinal study will allow to enforce causality of the relationship and examines the dynamics of open innovation in the Brittelstand. Second, the indicator on the extent and mechanisms of collaboration with customers could be better explained and measured, for example, using a scale indicator instead of a binary variable for knowledge collaboration across different types of partners and four geographical dimensions.

First, Brittelstand firms who are less likely to employ open innovation models nationally and with customers. However, those Brittelstand firms who decide to collaborate with customers nationally are more likely to increase the innovation sales compared to those firms that do not engage in such collaborations? This is an interesting and unexpected finding, which means that low willingness of cross-country and cross-regional collaboration for Brittelstand firms is not optimal and engagement in collaboration with customers in domestic markets is beneficial for innovation. Managers and policymakers may use this finding to design and re-design open innovation strategies managers and policymakers with customers within and across regions in the UK. Second, managers may benefit from the integrated view on the two drivers of firm innovation – collaboration with customers and the local embeddedness of such collaboration.

The authors' results show that Brittelstand firms outperform the firms' non-Brittelstand counterparts by adopting an open model of innovation with customers in domestic markets. This means that the most dynamic and fast growing Brittelstand firms are those who collaborate with customers for new ideas and innovation.

This study describes the phenomenon of the Brittelstand and investigates the link between open knowledge sourcing across different geographical proximities and partners and innovation outputs. First, the authors contribute to open innovation and resource-based view (RBV) literature in family firms by theorizing and empirically testing the open innovation model for the Brittelstand firms. The authors also debate that the Brittelstand firms should overcome this inertia of willingness to collaborate across heterogeneous external partners and convert regional/national embeddedness of the firms with customers into strengths for greater product innovation. Second, the authors contribute to family business literature by explaining how and why the Brittelstand firms can achieve greater innovation outputs. In doing so, the authors draw on the concept of familiness and local embeddedness.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the quality of collaboration towards Sustainable Energy Innovation (SEI) in Private Finance Initiative (PFI) projects. While the capacity of PFI to encourage collaboration towards innovation is largely advocated by its proponents; however, it remains to be supported by empirical evidence.

Adopting the Complex Product System (CoPS) innovation management model, the authors assess the quality of collaboration at the interface between the innovation superstructure of public sector clients and users, and the innovation infrastructure of private sector designers, contractors and operators. Two interactional elements are examined upon which the quality of collaboration is assessed: openness of communication and alignment of objectives. The authors apply the model to four new-built PFI school projects within the context of the UK government Building Schools for the Future Programme. Semi-structured interviews with total of 50 key stakeholders were used as the primary data collection method.

PFI has introduced a number of problematic issues weakening collaborative efforts towards innovation in the project environment. Particularly, the study underlines the restricting internal contractual relationships within the integrated Project Company and the misalignment of Design-Construction-Operation sustainability objectives. It also highlights ineffective communication with public sector clients and users brought in by the restricted nature of PFI engagement processes as well as the misalignment of public sector-private sector sustainability objectives.

The qualitative nature of the chosen research methodology limits the ability to generalise. The research findings need to be confirmed or rejected by means of quantitative research as representative of all PFI projects.

The study emphasizes the public authority’s role in relation to providing the necessary conditions for the creation of a collaborative environment conducive to SEI in PFI projects.

The study was able to expand the understanding of innovation and collaboration management processes in PFI projects in three respects: First, addressing the limited attention to innovation in PFI research, the study is the first to examine the quality of collaboration in PFI projects towards the implementation SEI. Second, examining the quality of collaboration in PFI projects through the lens of CoPS provides a new understanding of sustainability innovation and strongly indicates that the CoPS model should be expanded to account for the dynamics of innovation processes in the procurement of sustainable CoPS. Third, the explorative nature of the study was useful in generating research hypotheses that can form the basis for future research on SEI in PFI projects.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the actual usage of online methods for collaboration with customers and firms’ innovation performance. Drawing on theories of knowledge flows and knowledge creation, this study analyses the results of customer collaboration in the online mode in comparison to the offline mode.

The data for the econometric analysis comes from managers of 102 so-called “gazelles”, knowledge-intensive service firms that were characterized by exceptionally stable growth rates in Sweden during 2010 and 2011.

This study confirms the significance of information and communication technology (ICT)-supported collaboration with customers for a firm’s innovation performance. Interacting with customers using online methods has a positive effect on companies’ innovation output. Besides, knowledge-intensive service companies demonstrate more extensive though less intensive use of online channels for collaborating with customers compared to offline methods.

The data for this study has typical limitations resulting from the collection method of web-surveying. Future research should refine the findings of this study using various measures of firms’ innovation performance.

Firms should be more receptive towards online methods of collaboration with customers because using such strategy can increase their probability to introduce service innovations. The insights from this study are especially valuable for companies in knowledge-intensive service industries because the sample consist of companies that can be regarded as successful cases.

This study is one of the first that addresses the issue of the impact of collaborative technologies on innovation performance. The sample of steady-growing gazelle companies adds value to the results.

This paper aims to reveal how larger enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can enable innovation collaboration for enhanced competitiveness of the offshore wind energy sector.

The research is based on a longitudinal qualitative study starting in 2011 with a project-based network learning course with 15 SME wind farm suppliers and follow-up interviews with 10 SMEs and continued with interviews conducted with 20 individual enterprises within operation and maintenance conducted in 2014-2015.

The findings reveal challenges as well as opportunities for innovation collaboration between larger enterprises and SMEs to contribute to the innovation and competitiveness of the offshore wind farm sector. A glass ceiling is revealed for demand-driven positions if the SME does not possess rare and specific valuable knowledge. There are opportunities revealed in general for supplier-driven positions if SME suppliers can collaborate and develop interesting solutions for larger enterprises. If SMEs succeed in either of these aims, the SMEs have an opportunity to attain partner-driven collaboration. However, challenges are present according to the understanding of the different organisational approaches in SMEs and larger enterprises and in the different business approaches.

The research is limited to the offshore wind energy sector. Further research is needed for verification of the findings in other energy sectors.

A fourfold contribution is made to enhance the understanding of innovation collaboration and to enable competitiveness for the offshore wind energy sector. SMEs, larger enterprises, academic researchers and policy bodies are provided with a model for action within the four positions for innovation collaboration.

This paper aims to examine the collaboration of livestock farming business with other three groups of actors and explore the gap between expectations and reality concerning biogas production as collaborative innovation for the socially responsible development of rural regions in Lithuania.

This paper is based on the concept of the Quadruple Helix, which focusses on innovation, viewed as a process involving increasingly closer interactions and coordination among the following four groups of actors of the helix: government, academia, industry and civil society. Scientific literature analysis and generalization, expert interview and focus group methods were used to generate data for analysis. Data were collected during the period of July-November 2018 in Lithuania.

The research results reveal that the greatest gap among expectations and the actual situation in collaboration for socially responsible innovation, biogas production – is observed among non‐governmental organizations as representatives of civil society and all other questioned Quadruple Helix actors, whereas the government had been recognized as a most isolated part of the collaboration for innovation in biogas in Lithuania.

This paper presents empirical findings, based on qualitative data, collected in one EU new member state, i.e. Lithuania. International comparative perspectives are given in other related papers. Research findings are promising for further research in the field of socially responsible development of rural regions using the Quadruple Helix approach to foster collaboration for modern circular economy innovation both from theoretical and empirical points of view.

The methodology might be used for practitioners to research collaboration excellence/gaps in any field of activity.

The research takes into account the public interest from a very broad point of view – how to develop rural regions in a socially responsible way by using already established innovations in biogas in livestock farms by giving another dimension of socially responsible collaboration for innovation.

The paper proposes using the original Quadruple Helix approach to foster the socially responsible development of rural regions, thus enlarging the scope of the theory of corporate social responsibility (CSR) with the newly emerged discourse in the field. Socially responsible development of rural regions with the use of collaboration for circular innovations has been absent from theoretical to empirical CSR research.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the relationships among collaboration competency, partner match, knowledge integration mechanisms (KIMs), and e‐service product innovation.

Data were collected from 118 financial firms in Taiwan. IT managers were chosen as the source for data collection. Furthermore, partial least squares (PLS) was used to address sophisticated data analysis issues.

Collaboration competency and partner match relate positively to KIMs, which in turn relate positively to e‐service innovation. In addition, partner match relates positively to collaboration competency. Also, the findings show support for the mediating effect of KIMs on the relationship between collaboration competency and e‐service product innovation.

First, KIMs are the central mechanism through which collaboration competency enhances e‐service product innovation is novel and noteworthy. Second, the study can help researchers to better comprehend partner match and analyze it as a partner‐led enabling mechanism. Third, this study extends an important direction for service product innovation research that lies in adopting an e‐service innovation perspective.

IT managers should mobilize collaboration competency in conjunction with KIMs and should highlight the centrality of KIMs in e‐service product innovation. Managers should examine whether the firm has the necessary technologies to develop particular levels of new e‐service products and to determine which technologies need to be developed. They would also need to consistently and synergistically align their strategic innovation choices.

The findings of this study fill the gap in the service management literature that currently fails in examining these determinants that affect e‐service product innovation. First, the paper helps to clarify the nature of e‐service product innovation. By studying de Brentani's classification of innovations, the paper views e‐service product innovation as two types of radical and incremental innovations that affect the ability of a firm to deliver desirable new services/products to customers via the internet. Second, based on Gallouj and Weinstein's work, the paper addresses the visibility (i.e., tangible or intangible of technical characteristics) and the degree of standardization (i.e., specifying service characteristics, making service characteristics less hazy and more concrete, and giving service characteristics a shape), which constitute innovations in e‐service products.

This paper aims to explore the how, why, who and what of collaborations in green innovation.

The study is based on 11 case studies conducted at high-technological firms where 30 top management representatives were interviewed.

The study shows that firms share knowledge on green innovation across industries through horizontal collaborations and their extended network, such as their suppliers’ and customer’s networks in other industries. The results also show that digitalization, connectivity and big data are considered important vessels to improve environmental sustainability, as firms believe that these technologies will result in large gains related to resource utilization. Finally, the firms in this study engaged to a wide extent in green innovation activities, which resulted in a variety of improved resource utilization related to energy efficiency, new materials, new technologies, limiting emissions and recycle management.

The paper contributes to the literature by showing that firms share knowledge on green innovation not only within their network but also across industries through horizontal collaborations and their extended network.

The study points to the complexity of collaborating on green innovation. The authors show the importance of digitalization to improving environmental sustainability, with managers needing to develop business models and finding collaboration partners that can facilitate the transformation towards more connected products and services.

The study contributes to the field of supply network collaboration by studying how firms collaborate to improve environmental sustainability.

Despite the keen interest in radical and incremental innovation, few studies have tested the varying impact of firm-level factors in service sectors. This paper analyses how collaboration with existing and prospective users and investments in knowledge management (KM) practices can be adapted to maximise the outputs of radical and incremental process innovation in a knowledge-intensive business service industry.

Original survey data from 166 information technology service firms and interviews with 13 executives provide the empirical evidence. Partial least squares-structural equation modelling is used to analyse the data.

Collaboration with different types of users, and investments in KM practices affect radical versus incremental process innovation differently. Collaboration with existing users influences incremental process innovation directly, but not radical innovation; and prospective user collaboration matters for radical, but not incremental innovation. Furthermore, for radical innovation, investments in KM practices mediate the impact of prospective user collaboration on innovation.

While collaboration with existing users for incremental process innovations does not appear to generate significant managerial challenges, to pursue radical innovations firms must engage in intensive collaboration with prospective users. Higher involvement with prospective users requires higher investment in KM practices to promote efficient intra- and inter-firm knowledge flows.

This study is based on a large-scale survey, together with management interviews. Radical and incremental innovations in the service industry require engagements with different kinds of users, and the use of KM tools.

Universities, when collaborating with industry, are generally assumed to be the motors for innovation. Inspired by a case on a university’s collaboration with small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in a regional strategic network (RSN), this paper aims to put forth how the university makes important contributions through transferring knowledge on innovation processes that is a teaching role, rather than sees itself as the party producing innovations. This paper describes and discusses the university’s teaching role and its consequences in university-industry collaborations for innovation.

Empirically, the paper departs from a mid-Swedish RSN where nine SMEs started to work with a university. Interviews with representatives of the nine SMEs participating in the innovation project, along with university and RSN representatives, comprise the main data source. The paper analyzes the university’s teaching role and the consequences of it.

Findings point at how the SMEs developed structured innovation processes, improved their market intelligence and increased their efficiency in providing new solutions. The university facilitated knowledge, while the SMEs responded through creating knowledge both on how to innovate and in terms of innovations.

The teaching role, which would mean that the university stays with one of its core functions, indicates a need to rethink university-industry collaboration related to expectations and role division. Moving from producing innovations to facilitating knowledge on how to innovate, would, for universities, mean that they minimize those conflicts emerging from their various roles and indicate that the production of innovation is placed at those devoted to run and grow businesses.

The purpose of the study is to investigate how small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can effectively collaborate for eco-innovation using the business modes of innovation framework to emphasise three types of collaboration: “science, technology, and innovation” (STI), “learning by doing, using, and interacting” (DUI)-Vertical and DUI-Horizontal.

This analysis uses data from 838 SMEs in the Basque Country (2018–2020) to evaluate the effects of the three types of collaboration on eco-innovation. The authors employ a propensity score-based method to address potential bias associated with endogeneity in innovation studies.

The findings suggest that DUI-Vertical collaboration has a positive relationship with the development of product, process and marketing eco-innovation. Furthermore, DUI-horizontal collaboration is the most effective collaboration mode for SMEs, positively impacting their overall eco-innovation portfolio. Finally, STI collaboration is positively associated with product eco-innovation.

Policymakers should support SMEs by designing programmes that facilitate collaboration between competing firms to stimulate eco-innovation, but potential challenges of coopetition must be addressed. Rather than a generic, one-size-fit-all approach, SMEs' managers should identify the most appropriate partners corresponding to their specific eco-innovation goal, ensuring a more effective and targeted. Collaboration between science partners and SMEs should be reinforced by approximating the SMEs' needs more effectively.

This study contributes twofold. Firstly, the authors investigate whether the STI and DUI modes of innovation are determinant factors in the introduction of various types of eco-innovation. Secondly, the authors contribute to the literature on business modes of innovation by differentiating between DUI-Vertical (i.e. suppliers, customers and consultancy) and DUI-Horizontal (i.e. competitors) collaboration, thus highlighting the complexity of DUI collaboration forms.