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.     

Software innovativeness. A comparison between proprietary and Free/Open Source solutions offered by Italian SMEs

Innovation processes taking place in the software sector are already widely debated. The widespread success of Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) raises new research issues, dealing with whether and how the free circulation of ideas championed by the movement and its collective management of intellectual property rights fosters innovation. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the literature by addressing the following research questions: are programs based on FOSS solutions more innovative than proprietary ones, and, if so, which innovation dimensions are typical of the FOSS production mode? Based on a sample of 134 software solutions produced by Italian Small and Medium Enterprises and using a methodology frequently applied in technology management to evaluate innovativeness of products and services, this exploratory study provides initial insights into what happens when alternative metrics are used to observe complex innovation processes in the software market.     

Collaborative Prototyping: Cross‐Fertilization of Knowledge in Prototype‐Driven Problem Solving

This paper presents an inductive study that shows how collaborative prototyping across functional, hierarchical, and organizational boundaries can improve the overall prototyping process. Our combined action research and case study approach provides new insights into how collaborative prototyping can provide a platform for prototype‐driven problem solving in early new product development (NPD). Our findings have important implications for how to facilitate multistakeholder collaboration in prototyping and problem solving, and more generally for how to organize collaborative and open innovation processes. Our analysis reveals two levels of prototyping. Besides the more formal managerial level, we identify the informal designer level, where the actual practice of prototyping takes place. On this level, collaborative prototyping transforms the act of prototyping from an activity belonging exclusively to the domain of design engineers to an activity integral to NPD, with participants from within the organization (different functions and managers) and from outside (consultants and users). In effect, this collapses the discrete steps in the prototyping process (at the managerial level) to an essentially continuous process of iterative problem solving (at the designer level) that is centered around the collaborative prototype, which allows participants to see their suggestions implemented and exposing them to the design constraints. The study, moreover, shows how, at various stages of the prototyping process, the actual prototype was used as a tool for communication or development, thus serving as a platform for the cross‐fertilization of knowledge. In this way, collaborative prototyping leads to a better balance between functionality and usability; it translates usability problems into design changes, and it detects emerging usability problems through active engagement and experimentation. As such, the collaborative prototype acts as a boundary object to represent, understand, and transform knowledge across functional, hierarchical, and organizational boundaries. Our study also identifies some constraints in involving the appropriate stakeholders at the right time. The paper specifically elaborates on the role of users in collaborative prototyping, which is important in order to cover all phases of the problem‐solving cycle but triggers an interesting challenge due to the “reverse empathy” that a user may develop for the design constraints—parallel to the designer empathy for the user context. Finally, our study shows that despite the continuous nature of the (designer) practice of prototyping, there are certain windows of opportunities (at the managerial level) during which the collaborative prototyping approach actually leads to changes in the product design.     

How Firms Develop Capabilities for Crowdsourcing to Increase Open Innovation Performance: The Interplay between Organizational Roles and Knowledge Processes

In recent years, crowdsourcing has emerged as a promising open innovation strategy for firms searching for solutions to technical problems. Previous research has shown that crowdsourcing can provide quick access to distant knowledge at relatively low costs, when compared to other forms of innovation governance such as internal sourcing or contract research. Recent studies, however, indicate that firms differ considerably in their ability to reap the benefits from crowdsourcing. Drawing upon recent work on the microfoundations of capabilities, we hypothesize how three types of lower level organizational elements may affect gains from crowdsourcing: informal organizational roles, formal organizational roles, and knowledge processes. Following a mixed‐method research design and drawing on rich quantitative and qualitative data, we find that informal and formal organizational roles work through processes of knowledge articulation and codification in developing a firm’s crowdsourcing capability. By going beyond the direct effects of the three antecedents, our research sheds light on the process of capability development for open innovation.     

Serial Innovators' processes: How they overcome barriers to creating radical innovations

Formal new product development processes typically are depicted in the literature as linear processes having some number of stages, each of which is completed by a cross-functional team. At the end of each stage a management committee makes a decision as to whether the project will proceed to the next stage, be stopped, or recycle through the previous stage to better complete some of the tasks or steps in the stage. Teams proceed stage by stage, until the product is launched into the market.However, this formal process typically is positioned as occurring after the “fuzzy front end” (FFE), the chaotic, messy up-front part of new product development before there is a solidified concept. Because incremental, evolutionary innovations go through an abbreviated FFE, or even have none at all, these formal processes work quite well for them. However, radical innovations typically have very messy, chaotic and fuzzy front ends, which are not helped by these formal processes. Formal product development processes may actually act as a barrier to radical innovation. Very little research to date has investigated processes that overcome the barriers to radical innovation and allow firms to successfully bring radical innovations to market.This research investigates the product development processes used by 19 Serial Innovators—individuals in large, mature firms who have been associated with one after another radical innovation success. We find that Serial Innovators' processes have four specific features that enable them to overcome organizational barriers and allow them to create and successfully commercialize radical innovations. Serial Innovators' processes:

• •are not at all linear in nature;
• •focus significant time and effort on the fuzzy front end;
• •explicitly manage the transition from the fuzzy front end tasks and outputs (a proposed solution to a problem) to the more formal and institutionalized development process; and
• •proactively work to create market acceptance.

     

Exploring interorganizational conflict in complex projects

This article focuses on how the phenomenon of conflict between buyer and seller in complex projects can be approached from a theoretical and a methodological angle. Two paradigms for approaching conflict are discussed: conflict as a problem to be removed and conflict as a resource and tool for improvement. Constructs to be used include conflict events that indicate traces of conflict. It is further argued that the conflict events should be related to formal and informal governance mechanisms in order to understand how conflict can be used to strengthen the business relationship between the parties.     

Looking for a Needle in a Haystack: How to Search for Bottom‐Up Social Innovations that Solve Complex Humanitarian Problems

The worldwide increase in societal challenges is putting pressure on humanitarian organizations to develop sophisticated approaches to leverage social innovations in the humanitarian sector. Since humanitarian problems are complex problems, with the relevant knowledge being hidden, organizational search theory advocates the application of bottom‐up and theory‐guided search processes to identify the social innovations that solve these. Unfortunately, there has been no theoretical attention to understanding which approaches apply in this context. Further, established theory‐guided bottom‐up search processes, such as the lead user method, are unsuitable to the humanitarian sector, and we lack practice examples of adequate search processes. To start addressing this gap in theory and practice, procedural action research was done with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to develop a theory‐guided bottom‐up innovation search process for the real‐life humanitarian problem of recurring floods in Indonesia. It revealed that an innovation search process for this context must differ significantly concerning its objectives and the steps to be taken from the lead user method, which was used as a starting point. Further, a comparison of the technical quality and the social impacts of the identified social innovations with social innovations identified through a non‐theory‐guided bottom‐up search process (i.e., an innovation contest) suggests the superiority of this theory‐guided search process. With this conclusion and the insights derived throughout the development of the search process, this study makes important contributions to theory development in the social and open innovation literatures and delivers important recommendations for social innovation practice in the humanitarian sector.     

Product Development as Core Competence: How Formal Product Development Practices Differ for Radical,More Innovative,and Incremental Product Innovations

Although universally recognized as an important consideration in building product development (PD) competency, the effect of a firm's ability to vary its PD practices to develop winning products has been given scant attention in large‐scale, multiorganizational, quantitative studies. This research explores differences in formal new PD practices among three project types—incremental, more innovative, and radical. Using a sample of 380 business units, this research investigates how development practices differ across these three classes of innovation with respect to the formal PD process, project organization, PD strategy, organizational culture, and senior management commitment. Our results diverge from several commonly held beliefs about formal PD processes and the management of radical versus incremental innovations. Our results indicate that radical projects are managed less flexibly than incremental projects. Instead of being an offshoot of less strategic planning, radical projects are just as strategically aligned as incremental projects. Instead of being informally introduced entrepreneurial adventures, radical projects are often the result of more formal ideation methods. While these results may be counterintuitive to suppositional models of how to radical innovation happens, it is the central theme of this research to show how radical innovation actually happens. Our findings also provide a foundation for reexamining the role of control in the management of innovation. As the level of innovativeness increased, so too did the amount of controls imposed—e.g., less flexibility in the development process, more professional, full‐time project leadership, centralized executive oversight for new products, and formal financial assessments of expected NP performance.     

Formal Rules in Product Development: Sensemaking of Structured Approaches*

Many scholars consider the use of formal structured approaches to manage product development as very significant for successful product innovation. Others consider them a predictor of the likely outcome of the processes. Structured approaches can be considered management technologies for product development. Prior research has addressed the design of structured approaches and has measured how different types or generations of these are related to different processes and outcomes in different ways. However, only limited research has addressed how managers and employees actually understand and makes sense of these methods. This paper investigates how structured approaches are translated through a number of interpretations into daily practices. The research draws on research in sociology and management accounting to analyze structured approaches for product development as a managerial technology that consists of rules that individuals must understand (i.e., make sense of). The paper presents arguments for building a model of factors that influence the sensemaking of structured approaches for product development based on Scandinavian cases. First, structured approaches are presented as a type of managerial technology that consists of rules. Second, a framework to classify structured approaches for product development according to their degree of elaborateness and exhaustiveness is derived. This helps to identify the types of rule systems in companies—and how these influence everyday practices. The sensemaking from rules to practice is implemented through a number of translations, based on the context, the history, and the authorized statements and feedback processes. Empirical findings show that structured approaches differ both with respect to their degree of elaborateness and exhaustiveness. Additionally, firms differ greatly in terms of how rigorously they enforce the rules. Furthermore, the importance assigned to them by functional managers and project managers differ greatly. Even companies with extensive and elaborate rule regimes enforce the rules in a flexible manner, and rules are often applied at the discretion of project managers. Practices are influenced by the interpretation, use, and feedback from senior managers. Observations make it possible to develop a model for the sensemaking processes that influences how a specific structured approach through sensemaking is altered, modified, and sometimes even cut off from influencing innovation processes. The sensemaking of rules might reverse elaborate and exhaustive rules into quite flexible systems in practice. One implication of this is that individual sensemaking of structured approaches for product development thus needs to be analyzed to understand managerial practices. Another implication is that it cannot be assumed, a priori that formal approaches are the same as exercised practices.     

The Transformation of the Innovation Process: How Digital Tools are Changing Work,Collaboration, and Organizations in New Product Development*

Over the past several decades, digitization has invaded all areas of human activity, including innovation. The result of digitization of existing tools for design and collaboration, and the introduction of entirely new digital tools, is a far more substantive change of innovation than previous generations of tools enabled. It affects not only the quality of the output and speed of its generation, but it affects the innovation work itself, changes work content, collaboration patterns, decision authority, organizational set‐ups, governance structures, firm boundaries, and ultimately entire ecosystems. In this paper, the digitization of New Product Development (NPD), a subset of innovation, is studied to pursue two research questions: (1) How has the digital tool landscape in NPD changed over the past 15 years, and (2) how have these changes affected how firms innovate? This research uses a longitudinal multi‐method, qualitative approach to deep dive into actual use cases of digital design tools such as computer‐aided design CAD and new tools such as collaborative information technology (CIT). The changes in these tools and observations into how these tools are transforming the very nature of how things are designed is the research focus of this study. These tools have become increasingly more sophisticated while being easier to use and are integrated earlier in the design process. As a result, digital tools have a far broader reaching impact than previous generation of tools. Not only do they affect output and process efficiency, but they also increase depth and breadth of the work of individual innovators, they lead to rearrangement of the entire innovation processes, enable new configurations of people, teams, and firms, and rewrite the rules on how knowledge management acts as a critical competitive capability. The progression of digitization is laying the groundwork for changes to what firms are and do and points to different ways of organizing, specializing, and training for NPD professionals.     

Resource orchestration for team‐based innovation: a case study of the interplay between teams,customers, and top management

The resource orchestration concept has attracted considerable interest in contemporary innovation research. However, resource orchestration is a manager‐centric framework and not all of its components necessarily reflect the value‐creation processes of organizations focusing on team‐based innovation. Drawing on a single‐case study of an innovative Swedish software company, we illustrate the roles of autonomous teams, customers, and top managers in orchestrating resources for team‐based innovation. Moreover, we introduce the concept of resource flocculation to describe how key actors co‐orchestrate various resource orchestration processes. The study contributes to research on resource orchestration by adapting the model to the conditions characterizing team‐based innovation, and to research on team‐based innovation by addressing how innovative teams are related to overall resource orchestration processes and, ultimately, organizational innovation outcomes.     

Development of a Technical Innovation Audit

Measuring performance is helpful, but it's only part of the story. To learn from our past successes and failures, we need to understand how they came about. To continually improve, we must examine not only our innovation performance, but the processes with which we develop and exploit these innovations. Vittorio Chiesa, Paul Coughlan, and Chris Voss present a framework for auditing technical innovation management. Their auditing methodology goes beyond performance measurement by highlighting problems and needs, and providing information that can be used in developing action plans for improving performance. The foundation of their audit methodology is a process model of technical innovation. The model addresses the managerial processes and the organizational mechanisms through which innovation is performed. Underlying this method is the notion that success in innovation is related to good practice in the relevant management processes. The model identifies four core processes: concept generation, product development, process innovation, and technology acquisition. Supporting these core processes are three enabling processes: the deployment of human and financial resources, the effective use of appropriate systems and tools, and senior management leadership and direction. The outcome from these core and enabling processes is performance in terms of innovation and the resulting competitiveness in the marketplace. This model provides the basis for a detailed audit of current innovation practice and performance. The audit has two dimensions: the process audit assesses whether the processes necessary for innovation are in place and the degree to which best practice is used; and the performance audit focuses on the outcomes of each core and enabling process and of the overall process of technological innovation and its effect on competitiveness. The performance audit helps identify needs and problems, but it doesn't explain why gaps exist between current and required performance and it doesn't provide an action plan for closing these gaps. The process audit meets these needs. The audit methodology uses a two-level approach: a rapid assessment based on innovation scorecards and an in-depth audit. These scorecards provide an overview of the company's strengths and weaknesses with regard to technical innovation management, highlighting those areas that require in-depth examination. The in-depth audit identifies not only the processes, but the areas within each requiring attention.     

Friends or Foes? Mobile money interaction with formal and informal finance

Access to formal financial services is a key determinant of financial inclusion and yet, informal mechanisms still dominate the financial system in developing countries. In this context, the purpose of our article is to investigate how the growing effort to harness mobile money designed for unbanked individuals may help to overcome barriers to access formal financial services. Using a unique dataset obtained from an individual-level survey conducted in Burkina Faso, we explore the interplay between mobile money innovation and pre-existing formal and informal financial instruments. Our main findings show that, overall there are no differences in the inclination of mobile money users and non-users to make deposits in formal or informal deposit instruments. However, a closer investigation reveals suggestive evidence that it may increase the probability of participants in informal mechanisms to make deposits in formal financial instruments, especially using a bank account. Moreover, considering disadvantaged groups, we find for women, irregular income and less educated individuals that mobile money may increase their probability to make deposits in a bank and/or credit union accounts. Our results are robust to using instrumental variables and propensity score matching techniques that mitigate the endogeneity problem. They also pass a number of robustness checks as well as considering an alternative dataset. Given the low access to formal financial services in developing countries, our findings taken together indicate how the increasing adoption of mobile money may act as a stepping-stone towards financial inclusion. (JEL Classification C83, D14, G21)     

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.     

The role of digital technologies in open innovation processes: an exploratory multiple case study analysis

Digital transformation has undoubtedly become a key enabler of innovation as evidenced by the numerous firms that use digital technologies to manage their innovation processes. This issue is even more relevant today when innovation processes have become more open and require greater resources in the different implementation phases to capture and transfer knowledge within and outside the firm's boundaries. This implies additional challenges in managing the increasing amount of knowledge and information flows. Accordingly, digital technologies can be used and implemented to manage open innovation processes through easier access and sharing the knowledge created and transferred. Nevertheless, literature in these fields does not provide a structured view of how and why digital technologies are used to manage innovation processes in an open perspective. This paper aims to bridge this gap by adopting the theoretical lenses of change management to identify the managerial actions at organizational and process level that companies perform to implement digital technologies in their open innovation processes. Accordingly, the paper investigates how and why these managerial actions required for and enabled by digital technologies help firms to develop and nurture open innovation. From an empirical point of view, the exploratory multiple case study analyzes nine firms operating in different industries and varying in size, market share, and organizational structure.     

The structure and organization of Chinese industrial R&D activities

The paper is an account of the authors visit to the Peoples Republic of China in 1981. It shows how a highly centralised state deals with innovation, in this context innovation being equated with R&D. The first part of the paper deals with the way the responsibility for planning and execution of scientific and technical effort is distributed through the state and industry. The second looks at the manpower and organisational problems resulting from the economic backwardness of the country and past mistakes in trying to overcome it.     

A service design perspective on the stakeholder engagement journey during B2B innovation: Challenges and future research agenda

Innovation in business-to-business (B2B) contexts deals with highly dynamic, complex, and heterogeneous constellations of stakeholders with a diversity of goals, motives, and capabilities that further challenge successful management of B2B innovation processes and outcomes. Complex challenges, such as sustainability and digitization trends, push these B2B firms to embrace new innovation methods that help them manage disruptive change. Service design thinking has emerged as an innovation management practice emphasizing a human-centered innovation process of user interactions, creativity, and learning mindsets. In this article, we aim to evaluate the challenges and develop a research agenda on how service design can effectively enable stakeholders' engagement during the B2B innovation process. We argue that to advance service design opportunities for stakeholder engagement, we need to address the unique complexities and challenges of stakeholder engagement during innovation from a systemic and dynamic process perspective. From a systemic perspective, we zoom in on the building blocks of stakeholder engagement and address multi-level stakeholder engagement platforms (i.e., innovation networks). From a dynamic process perspective, we treat stakeholder engagement as an emerging process and zoom in on the temporal and relational connections and hybrid orchestration to allow for both structural and emerging stakeholder engagement during innovation. We develop a stakeholder engagement journey in which we integrate service and innovation stages and propose how service design activities can support and facilitate the aforementioned challenges and complexities. Finally, we identify concrete research questions and, accordingly, develop a research agenda for future research on stakeholder engagement in B2B innovation trajectories.     

Divergent and convergent logic of firms: Barriers and enablers for development and commercialization of innovations

This paper describes and discusses similarities and differences in the priorities, interests, and interactional goals of companies involved in the development and commercialization of innovation. We refer to such priorities, interests, and interactional goals as the logic of firms, and point to how differences among companies in these regards may enable or inhibit the development and commercialization of innovation. A case study in drug development, from a Taiwanese biopharmaceutical, illustrates two types of innovations: generic and novel drug development. Findings suggest how logic places focus on how certain actors may be more motivated toward innovation, but also on how the logic portrayed by actors can promote certain types of innovations (in this case generic ones), while inhibiting others (novel innovations). The paper concludes that companies need to have convergent logic (i.e. have the same priorities and similar or complementary interests and interaction goals) if an innovation process is to be successful. The focus on priorities, interests, and interactional goals of companies in innovation processes complements previous research that has primarily focused on the actual interaction, not what motivates it. The construct of shared logic nets as a means of analyzing convergent logic and gaps between different types of logic help to understand enablers and barriers to innovation.     

B2B SME management of antecedents to the application of social media

This paper elucidates how business-to-business (B2B) small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can manage antecedents to the application of social media for potential contributions to their business. This in-depth qualitative research study was conducted at four plastic-producing SMEs from October 2013 to October 2014, with follow-up interviews in October 2015.The findings reveal two important antecedents to the application of social media that overcome the gap between acknowledging the usefulness of social media and its actual limited application in practical B2B contexts. First, open collaborative business model innovation is needed to apply social media in local business processes. Second, central and distributed leadership must be integrated to create ownership and responsibility across the SME organisation and beyond to customers and partners. These findings differ from the social media application stages and the gaps between them identified in the previous literature. The developed model makes a contribution to the B2B SME field and to academia by recognising the importance of integrating critical antecedents before social media application can enhance business in B2B SMEs. This understanding is beneficial for the B2B SMEs and for society.     

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.