Brand Community Members as a Source of Innovation

Brand community members have a strong interest in the product and in the brand. They usually have extensive product knowledge and engage in product‐related discussions; they support each other in solving problems and generating new product ideas. Therefore, brand communities can be a valuable source of innovation. So far, little is known about the member's ability and willingness to participate in a company's innovation process. How does passion for the brand, affiliation to the brand community, and trust in the brand affect the willingness to engage in a company's innovation process? What is the effect of brand passion on brand knowledge and on domain‐specific skills, which are considered important prerequisites for qualified and creative contributions to new product development? What is the effect of personality traits on the willingness and ability to engage in new product development? This research addresses these questions, which are interesting for managers who are thinking about opening up their innovation process and collaborating with brand communities and for academics exploring the opportunities of online communities for new product development and trying to develop promising new forms of open innovation networks. Drawing on brand community literature, relationship theory, creativity theory, and personality traits research, this paper introduces a comprehensive set of antecedents affecting brand community members' willingness to engage in new product development. It is argued that consumer creativity, identification with the brand community, and brand‐specific emotions and attitudes (passion and trust) as well as brand knowledge are important determinants of consumers' willingness to share their knowledge with producers. The paper also identifies two personality traits (i.e., extraversion and openness) that have significant influence on brand passion, creativity, and identification with the community. The hypotheses are tested on a sample of 550 members of the Volkswagen Golf GTI car community. Structural equation modeling was used to test the relationship among the constructs. Though a positive disposition toward a brand may be advantageous for consumers that are willing to interact with producers during new product development, our results show that it is consumer interest in innovations and the innovative process that drives them to get involved. Further, brand community members with more knowledge and more innovative skills seem to be more willing to contribute than less qualified community members.     

Sustaining the Flow of External Ideas: The Role of Dual Social Identity across Communities and Organizations

Firm‐hosted online communities are increasingly a part of innovation efforts that seek to provide a flow of external ideas into organizations. However, many online communities do not gain traction or die out over time. One possible but underresearched driver of sustained engagement by members of firm‐hosted communities is a social identity that makes community members feel like they are part of the firm. We sought to empirically derive the organizational practices that support community members having a dual social identity with both communities and organizations. We completed extensive field work and over 90 interviews regarding two firms that had a history of sustained engagement by members of their communities: T‐shirt firm Threadless and automotive firm Local Motors. We identified eight organizational practices that supported dual social identity. Four of these practices made members perceive a porous boundary between firm and community, including an “open house” policy and hiring from the community. Another four practices made members feel supported in community efforts, including promoting community projects and having top management active in the community. We describe the practices in detail and the implications for firms using online communities as one component of their portfolio of innovation efforts.     

Perspective: Leveraging Open Innovation through Paradox

In search of fresh ideas, firms increasingly engage with external contributors in open innovation collaborations. However, research has found that such collaborations frequently fail, and has pointed to conflicting demands of control and openness. On the one hand, firms want controlled and selective participation, clarity of purpose, and a choice of ideas based on their own current capacity and value appropriation strategies. On the other, their external contributors tend to want open and unfettered participation, the creative potential of the idea per se, and unrestricted knowledge sharing. This article proposes to shift the conceptual frame from looking at the tensions between control and openness as problems to looking at them as synergies. Drawing on the literature of open innovation and organizational paradox, this article contributes a novel perspective on open innovation that suggests how firms can leverage open innovation collaborations through paradox by combining practices based on differentiation and integration.     

Value Creation and Value Capture in Open Innovation

Open innovation has attracted a significant amount of attention from scholars and practitioners. Prior research on open innovation has mainly focused on collaborative inventing. However, understanding the processes and outcomes of joint inventing is not sufficient for understanding sustained open‐innovation activities and the competitive advantages of the actors involved in open innovation. Instead, an understanding of value creation and value capture is paramount for advancing our understanding of sustained open‐innovation activities. Open innovation requires collaboration among distributed but interdependent actors who rely on each other’s capabilities for value creation and capture. Value in open innovation is driven not only by actors’ value creation but also by their ability to capture value. While value creation and value capture are discussed in the open‐innovation literature, the advancement of this stream of research is hindered by conceptual ambiguity, especially in relation to the concept of value capture. This article adopts a value perspective on open innovation, offers consistent conceptualizations of value creation and value capture, and outlines potential avenues for further research at the interface of open innovation, value creation, and value capture.     

The relationship of industry structure to open innovation: cooperative value creation in pharmaceutical consortia

With its focus on value creation and value capture, open innovation research explicitly or implicitly examines the competitive impacts of collaboration. However, to date such research has not considered the effects of a blockbuster industry structure upon open innovation. Here, we examine a particular form of multilateral collaboration, the open R&D consortium, in which the results from collaboration are allowed to spill over to members and nonmembers alike. We do so in the context of the pharmaceutical industry, a stable but fragmented industry defined by the ongoing search for blockbuster hits protected by strong appropriability. Using a novel data set, we identify 141 such consortia that involve two or more of the 30 largest pharma firms. We show that firms financially support such consortia, in part, because their value creation activities benefit members without disrupting the value capture or other aspects of the incumbent industry structure. We discuss the implications of these findings for research on multilateral collaboration in blockbuster industries, and open innovation more generally.     

Project Suspensions and Failures in New Product Development: Returns for Entrepreneurial Firms in Co‐Development Alliances

Entrepreneurial biotech and large pharmaceutical firms often form alliances to co‐develop new products. Yet, new product development (NPD) is fraught with challenges that often result in project suspensions and failures. Considering this, how can firms increase the chances that their co‐development alliances will create value? To answer this question, the authors build on insights from signaling theory to argue that prior project suspensions provide positive signals leading to an increase in value creation, while project failures have the opposite effect. In addition, drawing on insights from temporal construal theory, this research predicts that the strength of these effects is contingent on the stage along the exploration–exploitation continuum at which the alliance is formed. The authors undertook event study analyses of 248 alliances formed by 104 biotechnology firms from the United States and Europe listed on eight stock exchanges over an 8‐year period between 1996 and 2003. The results confirm that prior NPD project suspensions have a stronger value creation effect (or prior failures have a weaker value destruction effect) in the case of exploration alliances in the upstream of NPD processes than in the case of moderate‐scale exploitation alliances in the downstream of NPD. This study is among the first to examine how both prior NPD project suspensions and failures of firms affect the abnormal returns achieved from co‐development alliances. This research therefore contributes to the innovation literature by honing a better understanding of setbacks and failures in NPD. Moreover, the findings contribute to the literature on strategic alliances by identifying new conditions under which firms can create or preserve value. This research also contributes to signaling theory by providing evidence of the moderation effect caused by the signaling environment. Finally, this study contributes to the entrepreneurial literature on value creation for entrepreneurial firms in alliances following adverse events.     

Leveraging External Sources of Innovation: A Review of Research on Open Innovation

This paper reviews research on open innovation that considers how and why firms commercialize external sources of innovations. It examines both the “outside‐in” and “coupled” modes of open innovation. From an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation, it suggests a four‐phase model in which a linear process—(1) obtaining, (2) integrating, and (3) commercializing external innovations—is combined with (4) interaction between the firm and its collaborators. This model is used to classify papers taken from the top 25 innovation journals, complemented by highly cited work beyond those journals. A review of 291 open innovation‐related publications from these sources shows that the majority of these articles indeed address elements of this inbound open innovation process model. Specifically, it finds that researchers have front‐loaded their examination of the leveraging process, with an emphasis on obtaining innovations from external sources. However, there is a relative dearth of research related to integrating and commercializing these innovations. Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring—each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including “not invented here”). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as cocreation, network collaboration, and community innovation. This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on interorganizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The paper concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end‐to‐end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation.     

Geographic scope,isolating mechanisms,and value appropriation

Extending extant literature on geographic scope that has primarily focused on its role in value creation, I investigate the value appropriation aspect of geographic scope of knowledge acquisition. I maintain that isolating mechanisms created via geographic scope of knowledge acquisition can help firms prevent competitors from accessing their innovative knowledge and, by doing so, can help firms capture a larger proportion of economic returns from innovation, thus helping them enjoy better financial performance. Mediating and moderating effect analyses with patent‐ and firm‐level data of the semiconductor industry corroborate the value appropriation aspect of geographic scope. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software

Open innovation is a powerful framework encompassing the generation, capture, and employment of intellectual property at the firm level. We identify three fundamental challenges for firms in applying the concept of open innovation: finding creative ways to exploit internal innovation, incorporating external innovation into internal development, and motivating outsiders to supply an ongoing stream of external innovations. This latter challenge involves a paradox, why would firms spend money on R&D efforts if the results of these efforts are available to rival firms? To explore these challenges, we examine the activity of firms in open‐source software to support their innovation strategies. Firms involved in open‐source software often make investments that will be shared with real and potential rivals. We identify four strategies firms employ – pooled R&D/product development, spinouts, selling complements and attracting donated complements – and discuss how they address the three key challenges of open innovation. We conclude with suggestions for how similar strategies may apply in other industries and offer some possible avenues for future research on open innovation.     

Learning from openness: The dynamics of breadth in external innovation linkages

We explore how openness in terms of external linkages generates learning effects, which enable firms to generate more innovation outputs from any given breadth of external linkages. Openness to external knowledge sources, whether through search activity or linkages to external partners in new product development, involves a process of interaction and information processing. Such activities are likely to be subject to a learning process, as firms learn which knowledge sources and collaborative linkages are most useful to their particular needs, and which partnerships are most effective in delivering innovation performance. Using panel data from Irish manufacturing plants, we find evidence of such learning effects: establishments with substantial experience of external collaborations in previous periods derive more innovation output from openness in the current period. © 2013 The Authors. Strategic Management Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.     

The Paradox of Openness: How Product and Patenting Experience Affect R&D Sourcing in China?

External R&D sourcing may help firms compete in an environment characterized by rapid technological changes. Yet, prior studies have produced conflicting findings on how a firm's technological experience affects the extent to which the firm engages in external R&D sourcing. Although many highlight that firms with extensive technological experience are equipped with more technological knowledge, collaborative skills, and absorptive capacity, encouraging greater levels of external R&D, others suggest the opposite due to potential exchange hazards and partnership conflicts. Adopting an external partner's perspective, the current study reconsiders this “paradox of openness” by analyzing how a focal firm's product experience and patenting experience affect an external partner's tendency to provide external R&D services to the focal firm. Specifically, this study explore how a focal firm's knowledge protectiveness and tacitness embedded in its product and patenting experience influences the external partners' motivation for knowledge transfer. This study predicts that a firm's product experience increases the focal firm's external R&D sourcing because it provides high levels of knowledge tacitness and external openness and can encourage external partners to share and exchange knowledge with the focal firm. In contrast, a firm's patenting experience decreases the focal firm's external R&D sourcing because it denotes knowledge explicitness and protectiveness and may discourage external partners to share and exchange knowledge with the focal firm. This study further predicts that patenting experience has a negative moderating effect on the relationship between product experience and external R&D sourcing. Using a data set of 575 high‐tech firms in China, this study finds support for our predictions. Our findings contribute to the growing literature on the knowledge‐based view and technology entrepreneurship in emerging markets.     

Pricing process as a capability: a resource‐based perspective

Strategists following the resource‐based view argue that firms can generate rents through value creation. To create value, firms develop and use resources and capabilities that other firms cannot imitate, trade for, or substitute other assets for. Even a firm that has created value, however, may not capture the potential rents associated with that value. To capture rents, a firm must set the right prices for what it sells. Most views of pricing assume that a firm can readily set appropriate prices. In contrast, we argue that pricing is a capability. To develop the ability to set the right prices, a firm must invest in resources and routines. We base our argument on a study of the pricing process of a large Midwestern manufacturing firm. We show that pricing resources, routines, and skills may help or inhibit a firm in setting the right price—and hence in appropriating value created. Our view of pricing as a capability contributes to the resource‐based view because it suggests that strategists should consider the portfolio of value creation and value appropriation capabilities a firm uses to create competitive advantage. Our view also contributes to economics because it suggests that strategic decisions about pricing capabilities have important implications for a fundamental economic action, determining prices. Managers in firms without effective pricing processes may be unable to set prices that reflect the wishes of its customers, so the customers may misuse their resources. As a result, resources may be used ineffectively. Our view of pricing as a capability therefore takes the resource‐based‐view straight to the heart of what is perhaps the central economic question: the best use of resources. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Biotechnology Commercialization Strategies: Risk and Return in Interfirm Cooperation

The management and exploitation of biotechnological product innovation have proven to be more difficult than initially expected because the number of currently marketed biotechnological products is far from sufficient to counter deficits in pharmaceutical innovation. This study provides insight into the role of governance structures in interfirm cooperation and their effects on biotechnological product innovation and company success. Most of the existing literature regarding alliances and mergers and acquisitions (M&A) examines their effects on technology recipients' innovation performance. Here, the effects of alliances and M&A on both the innovation success and financial performance of technology suppliers (i.e., sources) are examined. Drawing from a sample of 220 human therapeutic biotechnology and biopharmaceutical firms over a period of 32 years (1980–2011), an analysis of the effects of biotechnology clusters, strategic alliances, and acquisitions is provided. This study reveals the existence of a risk‐return trade‐off for strategic alliances between biotech companies and larger, more established firms. Increased biotech company involvement in product development alliances decreases risk by increasing the likelihood of future product introductions. The trade‐off, however, is that biotech companies earn lower returns when their products are developed through such alliances. A similar risk‐return trade‐off effect is found for clusters. However, acquisitions generally affect both product introductions and product returns in a negative way. These findings have strategic implications not only for managing the development of biotechnological product innovations and technology platforms but also for commercialization strategies with respect to interfirm cooperation and risk reduction.     

Synergies among Producer Firms,Lead Users,and User Communities: The Case of the LEGO Producer–User Ecosystem

While many firms today proactively involve users in their new product development efforts using a wide variety of methods such as the lead user method, firm‐hosted user communities, or mass customization toolkits, some pioneering firms are experimenting with the creation of sustainable producer–user ecosystems designed for the continuous exploration and exploitation of business opportunities. In this paper, the functioning of such ecosystems is studied with particular emphasis on the synergies they can yield. Based on an explorative and longitudinal multiple case study design, the producer–user ecosystem of the firm LEGO is analyzed, and three main actors in the ecosystem are identified: entrepreneurial lead users who aim to start their own businesses, a vibrant user community, and the LEGO company as the focal producer firm and facilitator for multiple user‐to‐user and user‐to‐producer interactions. Our study reveals three kinds of synergies: (1) reduced risk for entrepreneurial lead users and the focal producer firm, (2) the extension of the design space of the focal producer firm's products, and (3) the creation of buzz within the user community. Finally, the theoretical and managerial implications of our findings for innovation researchers and practitioners are discussed.     

Complements or Substitutes? Internal Technological Strength,Competitor Alliance Participation,and Innovation Development

While a firm can choose to develop an innovation internally or externally, the internal knowledge development and external knowledge acquisition tend to interact with each other in the innovation process. The present study examines whether internal technological strength and external competitor alliance participation serve as complements or substitutes in innovation development. Built on the knowledge‐based view, this study offers a contingency perspective on the nature of knowledge integration between internal technological strength and external alliance relationships, and how they jointly influence radical and incremental innovation differently. Adopting a random effect negative binomial model specification, a panel data set of 64 pharmaceutical firms over a 15‐year period were used to test the hypothesized effects. The findings indicate that internal technological knowledge strength has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with radical and incremental innovation. More importantly, the findings also demonstrate that the combined effect of internal and external sources of innovation can have differential effects on radical and incremental innovation development. Specifically, competitor alliance participation strengthens the effect of internal technological strength on incremental product innovation while it weakens the above effect on radical product innovation. This suggests that internal and external sources of innovation may complement each other for incremental innovation while they may represent trade‐offs for radical innovation development. The above findings provide empirical evidence for the complexity of pursuing organizational ambidexterity in innovation generation and highlight the importance of balancing the internal and external knowledge sources in pursuing innovation.     

Where to search for process innovations? The mediating role of absorptive capacity and its impact on process innovation

While the potential of open innovation to develop product-related improvements through the use of external knowledge sources is undeniable, our understanding of how firms become process innovators remains limited. Distinguishing between product and process innovation is important, as insights gleaned from investigating product innovation may not relate directly to the study of process innovation. This study provides new insight into open innovation and absorptive capacity by proposing the mediating role of absorptive capacity – potential and realized – on the relationship between knowledge search from external sources and process-related innovation activities. We test our model using a sample of 171 auto component suppliers in Iran, and find evidence that the learning effects of external scanning increase when a firm learns how to better manage external searches in terms of external absorptive capacity routines. Our results indicate that, while knowledge search from value chain partners is related to process innovation, knowledge search from universities and other research organizations is not, and that potential absorptive capacity mediates the relationship between external knowledge search and process innovation. These findings shed further light on the relationship between a firm’s openness and its process innovation.     

Exploring How Peer Communities Enable Lead User Innovations to Become Standard Equipment in the Industry: Community Pull Effects

Literature on new product development indicates that on average around 40% of new products fail across different industries (e.g., Crawford, 1977 ; Crawford and Di Benedetto, 2008 ). Out of those that survive only few become widely accepted standard equipment in the industry (Utterback, 1996 ). Literature on entrepreneurship (e.g., Baron and Shane, 2008 ) and on innovation (e.g., Christensen, 1997 ) shows that such innovations often originate outside the boundaries of established firms. However, it is difficult to understand and analyze the exact source of such innovations and the entrepreneurial processes by which they are developed. It is therefore the aim of this study to shed light on how innovations become widely accepted by large segments of the market and specifically which demand‐side forces are at work. An approach suitable for pursuing this objective is to focus on those individuals who are on the leading edge with respect to an important market trend (lead users) and their respective peer communities. As little knowledge is available, an explorative case study design is applied, working with cases from two different industries, specifically the medical equipment and sporting equipment industry. A longitudinal research design is used, extracting data from multiple respondents and various other sources such as reports, publications, databases, or community web pages. The research framework takes a process perspective by following the entrepreneurial processes from invention to commercialization and diffusion. In this process, micro‐level variables at the individual and group level are analyzed as well as the barriers to be overcome by the individual innovator and the community. The findings show that communities play a central and active role in the entrepreneurial process. Community members provide valuable feedback on the overall potential of the lead users' ideas, participate by making concrete development contributions, acting as testers of the new products, and finally helping to diffuse the innovations inside and outside the community. We identify two pull effects on the part of the community: first, community members demand and facilitate the development of prototypes; and second, community members help to cross the chasm between first adopters and the early majority. This paper has various implications for entrepreneurship and innovation research. For entrepreneurship, this article points out peer communities as a specific kind of social network that plays a crucial role in entrepreneurial processes. For innovation research, this article emphasizes the interaction between lead users and their peer communities in the process of developing the next dominant product design.     

Organizing Continuous Product Development and Commercialization: The Collaborative Community of Firms Model

The increased importance of knowledge creation and use to firms' global competitiveness has spawned considerable experimentation with organizational designs for product development and commercialization over the last three decades. This paper discusses innovation‐related organizational design developments during this period, showing how firms have moved from stand‐alone organizations to multifirm network organizations to community‐based organizational designs. The collaborative community of firms model, the most recent organizational design in this evolutionary process, is described in detail. Blade.org, a purposefully designed collaborative community of firms dedicated to the continuous development and commercialization of blade servers, a computer technology with large but unforeseeable market potential, is used as an illustrative case. Blade.org's organizational design combines a community “commons” for the collective development and sharing of knowledge among member firms with explicit institutional mechanisms for the support of direct intermember collaboration. These design elements are used to overcome the challenges associated with (1) concurrent technological and market experimentation and (2) the dynamic coordination of a complex emergent system of hardware, software, and services provided by otherwise independent firms. To date, Blade.org has developed more than 60 new products, providing strong evidence of the innovation prowess of the collaborative community of firms organizational model. Based on an analysis of the evolution of organizational designs and the case of Blade.org, implications for innovation management theory and practice are derived.     

The paradox of tie strength in customer relationships for innovation: a longitudinal case study in the sports industry

Current literature argues that firms should have strong ties to customers to benefit from increased customer retention and loyalty. Strong ties, however, have also shown to prevent innovation, suggesting that firms should also develop weak ties to other customer groups. This paper focuses on the potential for strong ties to facilitate, rather than prohibit, innovation. It is based in a 7‐year longitudinal research project with Adidas, a global sporting goods company. From the case, we find that the paradox of tie strength results from an overly simplified view of the nature of company–customer relationships. Contrary to the established literature, we find that strong ties in the Adidas case supported significant innovation. In fact, the involvement resulted in the development of a new product with a radically different product architecture and led to one of the most successful product launches in the company's history. To explain these findings, we introduce the nature of customer participation in a firm's value creation processes as a new dimension of the constitution of firm–customer ties and discuss how such a kind of relationship can develop.     

Sustaining Complement Quality for Digital Product Platforms: A Case Study of the Philips Hue Ecosystem

Innovation in a digital world increasingly revolves around open platforms that consist of a core technology and a large variety of complementary products developed by an ecosystem of independent complementors. The platform ecosystem literature has mainly focused on indirect network effects arising from the quantity of complements, with little attention to the quality of complements, despite the importance of quality for the complementary value that drives platform ecosystems. Because digital products are malleable and dependent on the ever‐evolving ecosystem, we advance a relational and dynamic conceptualization of complement quality. Drawing on a systematic, in‐depth qualitative case study of the Philips Hue connected lighting platform and its complementary third‐party apps, we study how and why complement quality is sustained over time. By analyzing apps and their updates, we developed a process model that explains pathways through which complement quality is enhanced, maintained, or deteriorates. Changes in the platform core, changes in other ecosystem elements, and idiosyncratic connections by users result in expanding affordances, materializing glitches, and emerging obsolescence. Without further action, glitches and obsolescence lead to deteriorating quality. Joint action of complementors, platform owners, and users is needed to act upon affordances, glitches, and obsolescence, in order to maintain integrity and enhance functionality. This paper contributes to the literature on innovation in platform ecosystems by explaining the dynamic and relational nature of complement quality in a digital platform ecosystem and showing the interdependence of ecosystem members (the triad between platform owner, complementors, and users) in sustained development efforts.