A new perspective on open innovation: established and new technology firms in UK bio‐pharmaceuticals

The aim of this paper is to explore open innovation (OI) implementation and its impact on firm innovation performance in sectors experiencing technological discontinuities. The paper employs the framework of inbound, outbound and coupled OI to identify processes reflecting sourcing, externalising and exchanging knowledge across organisational boundaries on upstream and downstream innovation activities and explores their impact on the innovation performance of new and established technology firms. The empirical setting is the UK bio‐pharmaceuticals sector during 1991 and 2001, a paradigmatic era of discontinous change and intensified OI implementation. First, our findings show that new technology firms (NTFs) and established technology firms (ETFs) differ in their extent and patterns of inbound, outbound and coupled OI, reflecting that they implement OI to manage their competences in light of technological change. Second, we identify a complex and multifaceted relationship between OI and patenting performance, with NTFs experiencing enhanced performance from some OI processes while ETFs experiencing challenges. The paper suggests that delineating OI into inbound, outbound and coupled, along upstream and downstream activities, offers a deeper understanding of the role of OI in innovation, guiding selective implementation in pursuing enhanced innovation performance during periods of discontinuous technological change.     

Managing business-to-business open innovation: A project-level approach

Embracing business-to-business open innovation (B2B OI) can enable firms to remain competitive in an increasingly saturated business environment. Whilst B2B OI is generally undertaken to serve the needs of a specific innovation project, previous research has mainly studied it from the firm-level perspective. Accordingly, the number of project-level studies on B2B OI, especially empirical, remains limited, resulting in an incomplete understanding of B2B OI management. In this editorial, we briefly review the B2B OI literature, discuss the importance of studying B2B OI at project level, and describe how each of the six articles included in our special issue contributes to this field. Moreover, we suggest future research opportunities with regard to issues and topics that remain largely under-investigated in project-level B2B OI, but which also open up to a multilevel perspective.     

How to perform collaborative servitization innovation projects: the role of servitization maturity

Although current literature indicates that openness and collaboration are crucial for success in an innovative servitization solution within interorganisational servitization projects, research is limited compared to that on product and technology innovation projects. Moreover, this emerging servitization literature is limited to the traditional lead-firm perspective within larger consortiums. To help redress the balance, our research studied six collaborative servitization projects in mobile information and communication technologies (mICT) to explore why some open innovation efforts succeed in simultaneous service and product innovation with a market application of innovative solution, while others do not. The study provides empirical evidence that only a small number of projects resulted in an effective servitization innovation solution. This conclusion emphasises the complexity of creating service innovation in the mICT sector. By comparing better performing servitization projects with those that were less successful suggests that higher performance, in terms of novel service development, requires more than mere strong intention, adequate leadership and change management competencies. Rather, it also requires real servitization maturity in terms of a shared servitization framework and market-oriented innovation.     

Complementing open innovation in multi-business firms: practices for promoting knowledge flows across internal units

Over the past decades open innovation (OI) practices have gained prominence among both scholars and practitioners as a mean to accelerate time-to-market and reduce development costs of innovations. Thereby scholars have nearly exclusively focused on cross-boundary knowledge flows between the focal firm and (its) external collaborators. This paper argues that such a focus limits our understanding of how multi-business firms with a diverse knowledge base profit from internally applied open innovation practices that in turn provide complementary benefits to OI. We build on the current literature by investigating and describing OI activities that are conducted within the boundaries of the multi-business firm. Based on a multiple case study of 23 collaboration practices conducted across 14 firms, our findings reveal 5 archetypal forms of internally applied open innovation activities. We draw on the literature of cross-divisional innovation and crowdsourcing to highlight how these archetypes differ in terms of their purpose and underlying managerial processes. Multi-business firms regularly rely on internal practices due to lower transaction costs and for stimulating a collaborative culture. We conclude that internally applied OI practices are effectively stimulated by a combination of non-monetary reward systems and purposive integration mechanisms.     

Antecedents of open innovation at the project level: empirical analysis of Korean firms

The concept of open innovation has recently gained wide academic attention, as it seems to have significant impact for company performance. Most empirical investigations about this emerging concept have been case studies of successful early adopters of open innovation, and their analyses have largely been at the company level. Although case studies at that level provide meaningful implications, the new phenomena merit a more in‐depth examination: that is, we need to collect and analyze data on multiple companies to explore more systematic findings about open innovations across companies. Moreover, analyses may need to go down to the individual project rather than the whole company level because innovation activities are often conducted as part of research and development (R&D) projects. To meet these needs, this study examines companies' open innovation efforts at the level of the individual R&D project. Specifically, the present study focuses on project‐level openness to better understand the mechanisms of open innovation. It explores systematic relationships between various antecedent factors and the degree of openness. Project‐level openness could be affected by team and task characteristics, such as team size, learning distance, strategic importance, technology and market uncertainty, and relevance to the main business. Relevant data collected from 303 companies in Korea were used to identify the antecedents that affect inbound and outbound openness. The research findings are expected to help provide a concrete theoretical framework suited for more generalized application and further practical development of open innovation strategy.     

A note on outbound open innovation and firm performance

The concept of open innovation has attracted a lot of interest over the past decade. In light of a relative emphasis on inbound open innovation (indicating an outside‐in process) in prior research, this brief note addresses the relationship between outbound open innovation (indicating an inside‐out process) and firm performance. In particular, it suggests that outbound open innovation may have positive and negative effects on firm performance based on potential benefits and risks of transferring technology. To what degree these effects materialize depends on internal factors, e.g. desorptive capacity, and external factors, e.g. appropriability. Consequently, a proficient internal management of outbound open innovation is critical to avoid its potential risks and to capture its substantial benefits. In this regard, future research may substantially deepen the insights into the relevance and role of outbound open innovation.     

The (Unknown) Providers to Other Firms' New Product Development: What's in It for Them?

For every inbound activity by a firm in open innovation, a reciprocal outbound activity by another firm must be generated. The reciprocal outbound activities range from transferring of knowledge and ideas to solutions delivered to other firms' new product development projects. This paper names the firms that produce the reciprocal outbound activity for “providers,” and is the first to empirically investigate such providers of ideas, solutions, and technologies for other firms' open innovation activities. The literature review shows a surprising shortage of research on who the providers are, how they engage with other firms, and not least what potential benefits can be achieved from supporting other firms' innovation activities. The paper uses a quantitative survey on Danish small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) carried out in 2010 to identify the providers, the role they take on, and the main benefits the providers gain. This paper finds that firms that are providers are indeed an under‐researched and important phenomenon for firms' innovation activities. Compared to receivers of knowledge, the providers are younger, have a higher R&D intensity, adopt more open innovation practices, have higher absorptive capacity, and fewer barriers toward knowledge sharing as demonstrated by the NIH and NSH syndromes. Finally, although only tentatively, the paper finds that the provider firms are more product innovative compared to nonproviders. The paper further finds that more projects, more embedded relationships, and mutual rather than one‐way exchange relationships significantly raise the probability that a firm experiences a substantial benefit from providing to other firms' new product development projects. The overall ambition of the paper at this point is to inspire other researchers to pursue the agenda on the provider perspective for future research. To support such research, the paper suggests a broadening of the research perspectives from the receiver of knowledge, in the literature on interorganizational relationships and open innovation, to include the provider, and even suggests some preliminary ideas for such research. Hence, the contribution of this paper lies not only in opening a new research topic but also in identifying some first characteristics of the phenomenon adding a substantial perspective to the literature on open innovation and interorganizational relationships. The paper formulates three indicative recommendations for managers that consider becoming a provider to other firms' NPD.     

Investigating the Influence of Technology Inflows on Technology Outflows in Open Innovation Processes: A Longitudinal Analysis

The open innovation (OI) paradigm emphasizes the importance of integrating inbound and outbound flows of technology to increase a firm's innovation performance. While the synergies between technology inflows and outflows have been discussed in conceptual OI articles, the majority of empirical studies have typically focused on either the inward or the outward dimension of OI. According to recent reviews of OI literature, there is a need for further research that takes an integrated perspective on this topic and studies the combination of the inbound and outbound dimensions of OI. This paper follows these calls by focusing on technology licensing as the main contractual form for OI, and by investigating the relationship between technology in‐licensing and out‐licensing activities at the firm level of analysis. In particular, this paper argues that technology in‐licensing positively influences the volume of technology out‐licensing through two mechanisms. The first—resource‐based—occurs because in‐licensing investments expand and enrich the firm's technology base, thus increasing its value and, as a result, creating more opportunities for out‐licensing. The second—capabilities‐based—occurs because, due to commonalities between technology in‐licensing and out‐licensing in terms of performed tasks and required skills, repeated execution of in‐licensing transactions contributes to the development of higher out‐licensing capabilities and, as a result, increase out‐licensing volume. These arguments are tested using a panel dataset of 837 Spanish manufacturing firms over the period 1998–2007. Consistent with the predictions, the empirical analysis shows that higher investments in in‐licensing and more extensive in‐licensing experience lead to superior volumes of technology out‐licensing. These results contribute to research on OI and licensing, by empirically showing the existence of positive interactions between technology inflows and outflows and of synergies in the development of absorptive and desorptive capacities.     

Interorganizational collaboration strategies and innovation abandonment: The more the merrier?

Investments in innovation activities involve uncertainty. Abandonments of innovative projects are frequent and can entail great losses. Interorganizational collaboration can help a firm to leverage and complement its own competencies and technologies, contrasting the factors that may cause the abandonment of innovation activities. This article shows that firms collaborating with a wider network of external partners to conduct their innovation activities are less likely to abandon them. The article also analyses how different categories of partners among customers & suppliers, competitors, consultants & private R&D institutions, universities & public R&D institutions are associated with the risk of innovation abandonment. Finally, the results show that international collaborations are more likely associated with innovation abandonment than domestic ones. Strategic and theoretical implications are drawn.     

Toward an optimal degree of openness in IT innovation projects

In spite of substantial interest in open innovation (OI), both research and practice lack methods that support companies in managing their IT innovation projects (ITIPs) relative to OI. We contribute to the closure of this gap by providing an approach for an ex ante financial evaluation of OI application, which involves developing a theoretical model that determines the optimal degree of openness in ITIPs. Based on our model, we examine relevant causal relationships by analyzing the influence of a company's ability to manage OI and the probability of success in OI application on the theoretical optimum. We find that the optimal openness level is linked with the company's ability to manage OI, which can incorporate organizational, cultural, and technological maturity. To increase the value contribution of OI, companies should focus on a steady improvement in managing OI. The results provide both an indicator for practical decision‐making and a starting point for future research.     

Crowdsourcing without profit: the role of the seeker in open social innovation

Crowdsourcing has increasingly been studied as an open innovation (OI) mechanism by which organizations (seekers) engage with an external crowd of potential solvers. Previous crowdsourcing research has focused on solvers and their individual motivations, providing few insights as to why and how seekers use crowdsourcing, and how these choices affect the value that might be realized from these efforts. Prior research has also emphasized profit‐seeking firms, despite the use of OI practices by public sector organizations to achieve societal benefits. This paper examines the organizational and project‐level choices of government agencies that crowdsource from citizens to drive open social innovation, and thus develop new ways to address societal problems, a process sometimes termed ‘citizensourcing.’ Using rich data from 18 local government seekers that use the same intermediary, we develop a model of seeker crowdsourcing implementation that links a previously unstudied variance in seeker intent and engagement strategies to differences in project team motivation and capabilities, in turn leading to varying online engagement behaviors and ultimately project outcomes. Our study compares and contrasts governmental and corporate crowdsourcing to reveal that the non‐pecuniary orientation of both seekers and solvers means that the motives of government crowdsourcing are fundamentally different from corporate crowdsourcing, but the process in our sample more closely resembles that of a firm‐sponsored community rather than government sponsored contests. More generally, we show how seeker organizational factors and choices shape project‐level implementation and success of crowdsourcing efforts, as well as provide insights for OI activities of other smaller, geographically bound organizations.     

The microfoundations of open innovation: CEO overconfidence and innovation choices

How to successfully drive open innovation (OI) has been an important issue. However, the existing literature on the determinants of OI mainly focuses on organizational and contingent factors, and the “human side” of it is still not well understood, which also motivates us to explore it more deeply. This paper attempts to link upper echelon theory with OI research using data from a large sample of Chinese listed companies to investigate how the overconfident tendency of the CEO affects his or her preference for different OI modes. At the same time, what role do other top management team (TMT) members play in this process. The results show that overconfident CEOs favor market and organization-oriented OI over technology-oriented OI, and TMT governance can moderate such relationship, that is, as the level of TMT governance increases, the preference of overconfident CEOs for market and organization-oriented OI will be weakened, avoiding the negative effect of excessive adoption of such activities on firm performance. By focusing on the human side of OI, this paper adds to the literature on the impact of strategic leadership, namely the influence of key individual CEO and other executives within the organization on OI management, which is also a response to the emphasis that more attention should be paid to the microfoundations of OI in the future.     

Outbound open innovation and its effect on firm performance: examining environmental influences

Firms may open up their innovation processes on two dimensions. While inbound open innovation refers to the acquisition of external technology in open exploration processes, outbound open innovation describes the outward transfer of technology in open exploitation processes. Prior open innovation research has focused on the inbound dimension, whereas the outbound dimension has been relatively neglected. Therefore, this article addresses the relationship between outbound open R&D strategies and firm performance. We use data from 136 industrial firms to test four hypotheses on the moderating effects of environmental factors in the relationship between open innovation strategies and firm performance. The results show that the degree of technological turbulence, the transaction rate in technology markets, and the competitive intensity in technology markets strengthen the positive effects of outbound open innovation on firm performance. By contrast, the degree of patent protection does not facilitate successful open innovation. The results are crucially important to managers because they show under what environmental conditions open innovation strategies enhance performance.     

Subjective Performance Assessment of Innovation Projects*

Performance assessment of innovation projects is a central issue in innovation management research. Using existing literature, a model is developed to assess the performance of new product and new service development projects. In this model, project performance is defined as a combination of a formatively indicated operational performance construct and a reflectively indicated product performance construct. The validity of this model is tested based on a sample of 219 innovation projects assessed by innovation managers. Using only the innovation managers' responses, it is, however, not possible to distinguish between operational and product performance. The impact of common method bias and informant bias is subsequently assessed using a subsample of 128 of these 219 innovation projects that are assessed by the innovation manager and the project leader. These latter results show that operational and product performance are two distinct constructs. In addition, the multitrait–multimethod analyses show that especially the more abstract items of performance, such as the perceptions of quality, captured knowledge, competitive advantage, gained reputation, and customer satisfaction, suffer from random error and informant bias. Project leaders appear to be better informed to assess operational performance, while innovation managers are better in assessing product performance. The paper concludes with a qualitative comparison of several alternative performance models: the project performance model as derived from the literature, a similar (misspecified) reflective performance model, two stand‐alone models in which operational and product performance are assessed separately, and a mixed model that uses a combination of innovation managers' and project managers' data. Based on this comparison, it is advised to use either the stand‐alone models for operational performance and product performance or the mixed model whereby the project leader assesses operational performance and the innovation manager the product performance of an innovation project.     

Open data for open innovation: managing absorptive capacity in SMEs

Open Data (OD) utilisation has been encouraged by governments because of its potential to fuel digital innovation. Despite this, there is a paucity of study into the role of OD for SMEs, in contrast to the growing literature that has focused on the collection and sharing of OD by the public sector. As such, our study contributes to open innovation research by analysing the main capabilities needed to overcome existing barriers to successfully manage OD in SMEs. Building upon the recent SME-oriented OI literature and adopting an interpretative absorptive capacity framework, we analyse the data collected from 30 semi-structured interviews with experts working in UK organisations adopting OD-based OI strategies. We find a number of core factors that shape OD acquisition, assimilation, transformation and exploitation by SMEs. Results show that without the specific OD capabilities identified in our study, it will be difficult for SMEs to successfully use OD, which may explain why the uptake of OD by SMEs more broadly has so far been limited. These unique OD capabilities need to be better developed by OD using SMEs, if this ‘raw material’ for the digital economy is to be fully exploited.     

Managing Innovation Champions: The Impact of Project Characteristics on the Direct Manager Role*

A key challenge for organizations seeking to improve the management of innovation lies in determining when to lend direct managerial support, and how much support, to those championing such projects. This research provides insights into the connection between project characteristics and the type and frequency of direct manager involvement. As such, it addresses the following research question: how does the level of project innovativeness, strategic relatedness, and resource requirements impact the level of empowerment of innovation champions and the sponsor or supervisor role played by managers? The research method involves a survey of 89 project champions from four divisions of large, multinational Korean companies. The results show that when innovativeness was high but projects were strategically related, there was greater project champion empowerment but also a more frequent managerial sponsor role. This suggests it may be best to allow innovators, who are close to the project's markets, technologies, and industry conditions, to have greater freedom over objectives and decisions. Yet they may also need the advice and support of their managers to function optimally under the highly uncertain conditions that characterize innovative projects. This combination of empowerment and a sponsor role, though appropriate for highly innovative projects, may also require high strategic relatedness, however. On the other hand, when projects are less strategically related and when resource requirements are high, the analysis suggests managers are more likely to exert control. Managers may therefore need to become more closely involved in decision making for costly ventures representing new strategic directions for their organizations. Overall, this research suggests that both empowerment and manager roles are relevant to the management of innovation. These results offer academic value in recognizing the nature of the direct manager role under different innovation project conditions. It further reveals a need for academics to recognize both the supervisor and sponsor roles in the management of innovation. For managers, the findings suggest that for organizations to effectively develop and commercialize innovations managers need to recognize when certain projects call for different levels and types of involvement.     

What factors of early-stage innovative projects are likely to drive projects’ success? A longitudinal analysis of Korean entrepreneurial firms

Previous studies have identified the factors affecting successful technology commercialization as outcomes of R&D projects. However, most of them have used cross-sectional data, whereas there is a dearth of literature using longitudinal data analysis. Longitudinal analysis is essential for investigating the characteristics of early-stage innovative projects due to the inherent time lag between project evaluation and commercialization. Therefore, this study examines the early-stage project characteristics that can be used as meaningful evaluation criteria for predicting success, particularly in technology commercialization. We collected data on the ex-ante evaluation results and ex-post commercialization results of R&D projects pursued by entrepreneurial firms. We then conducted a logistic regression analysis and identified three market-related factors as significant in driving technology commercialization success in the early stages of technology development: market potential, commercialization plan, and market condition.     

How to leverage the impact of R&D on product innovation? The moderating effect of management innovation

Although research and development (R&D) is a key indicator of (technological) innovation, scholars have found mixed results regarding its effect on product innovation and firm performance. In this paper, we claim that variations in R&D effectiveness can be explained by changes in a firm’s social system, in particular in its management innovation. It is still unclear how management innovation influences R&D effectiveness in terms of product innovation. In this study, we address this theoretical and empirical gap in the innovation literature. Our theoretical arguments and findings from a large-scale survey among Dutch firms show that R&D has a decreasingly positive relationship with product innovation, particularly for firms with low levels of management innovation. However, in firms with high levels of management innovation, this relationship becomes more J-shaped, especially in small and medium-sized firms. Our findings also appear to indicate that management innovation may be more important for competitive advantage than just R&D. Overall, our insights reveal that management innovation is a key moderator in explaining firms’ effectiveness in transforming R&D into successful product innovation.     

Making Virtue of Necessity: The Role of Team Climate for Innovation in Resource‐Constrained Innovation Projects

The effect of financial resource constraints on innovation team performance is ambiguous. On the one hand, the majority of scholars have argued that financial resource constraints have an inhibiting effect on innovation, whereas budgetary slack supports creativity and innovation. Consistent with this notion, in most conceptual models on the management of innovation projects, the availability of slack, or at least adequate (rather than constrained) resources represents an important success factor supporting innovation. On the other hand, popular parlance has it that sometimes “necessity is the mother of innovation,” and literature in cognitive psychology suggests that resource constraints stimulate creativity and innovative behavior. Recent innovation literature indeed provides evidence that remarkable innovation outcomes can be achieved with constrained financial resources. Despite the rapidly growing research on success factors of innovation projects, and the high managerial relevance of budget questions, the influence of financial resource constraints has only very recently started to attract interest. The objective of the present study is to contribute to that research by investigating under what conditions financial resource constraints lead to innovation outcomes. Specifically, team climate for innovation is examined as a potentially important contingency variable of the relationship between financial resource constraints and innovation project performance. By explicitly focusing on team climate for innovation, factors of the work environment in innovation projects are addressed as influential boundary conditions for successfully innovating under financial resource constraints. The hypotheses are tested on a sample of 94 innovation project teams from a variety of industries. To ensure content validity and to avoid a possible common source bias, data from different respondents, i.e., team leaders, team members, and team external managers of the innovation projects, are used. Results of regression analyses show that there is no significant relationship between financial resource constraints and innovation project outcomes in terms of product quality and project efficiency. However, results show a significant interaction term of financial resource constraints and team climate for innovation in that team climate for innovation positively moderates the relationship between financial resource constraints and product quality as well as project efficiency. Thus, the findings of the present study contradict the widespread notion in innovation literature that financial resource constraints have a wholesale inhibiting effect on innovation, thereby providing a differentiated perspective on the relationship between financial resource constraints and innovation. On a practical level, the results of this study highlight a specific condition under which product developers can come up with more innovative solutions despite, or even because of, financial resource constraints.