Configurations of social media-enabled strategies for open innovation,firm performance,and their barriers to adoption

The use of social media offers tremendous innovation potential. Yet, while current research emphasizes success stories, little is known about how firms can leverage the full potential of their social media use for open innovation. In this paper, the authors address this gap by conducting a configurational analysis to develop an integrative taxonomy of social media-enabled strategies for open innovation. This analysis stems from the integration of internal and external variables such as social media communication activities, organizational innovation seekers, potential innovation providers, the stages of the open innovation process, and their relationship with different performance outcomes and barriers to social media adoption for open innovation. Through an empirical study of 337 firms based in eight countries, four clusters have been identified that are characterized as distinct strategies: “marketing semi-open innovators,” “cross-department semi-open innovators,” “cross-department full process semi-open innovators” and “broad adopters open innovators.” The findings reveal the trade-offs associated with different strategies for implementing social media for open innovation and provide insights of the use of these strategies. By doing so, they suggest a more nuanced approach that contrasts with the traditionally positive (or even rosy) depiction of the effects of social media on open innovation. Accordingly, managers are encouraged to contemplate their organizational competencies, capabilities, and their strategic intent when drafting social media strategies for open innovation. Selective approaches, along with greater adoption leading to greater benefits, are shown to be more rewarding than a middle way that spreads things too thin. Avenues for further research include qualitative explorations of the trajectories unfolding through implementing social media strategies for innovation activities and the use of objective performance measures rather than subjective perceptions from informants to understand the complex relationships between social media adoption and performance.     

Voices from the Field: How Exceptional Electronic Industrial Innovators Innovate

This exploratory research uses in‐depth qualitative interviews to investigate how 11 exceptional innovators in the electronics industry initiated, created, and commercialized radical innovations in their firms. From the data, two initial frameworks emerged for how radical innovations were created by these individuals. Four themes emerged associated with what these innovators bring to the organization as an underpinning for being able to radically innovate. Additional themes emerged as to the process by which they innovate. Across the literatures of innovation, psychology, and management, creativity is discussed in terms of person, product, or process. This research samples on highly creative innovations (products) and finds that it appears that both person and process need to be considered in attaining radical innovation. One may not be able to consider separately the person who achieves radical innovation from the process he or she uses to achieve it. These exceptional innovators have specific personality characteristics that support radically creative behavior, supplemented by a perspective or worldview that focuses on having a business orientation yet also a somewhat idealistic attitude. They have prepared for innovation by studying deeply, within not just one primary technology topic but also a secondary or peripheral technology topic. In addition, they have prepared broadly, across technology, business, and markets. They are both extrinsically and intrinsically motivated to innovate. People communicating what problems are urgently important to them to be solved produce external motivation for the innovator, who is then intrinsically motivated to solve these people's problems by creating new products. In terms of how they innovate, these exceptional innovators are organizationally savvy and both understand and participate in the politics necessary to gain acceptance of and resources for their project. They use an innovation process that emphasizes the up‐front aspects of finding interesting problems, planning first before executing, and understanding customer needs in great detail. This allows them to generate insights into how to solve those problems profitably for the firm. Once they have obtained and validated their insights for solving the problem, they participate in the actual implementation of the concept to a commercialized product. However, this development aspect of innovating is not much spoken of, as if it is taken for granted. Finally, they actively disseminate knowledge and acceptance of the innovation postinvention.     

Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations

The success of an innovating firm often depends on the efforts of other innovators in its environment. How do the challenges faced by external innovators affect the focal firm's outcomes? To address this question we first characterize the external environment according to the structure of interdependence. We follow the flow of inputs and outputs in the ecosystem to distinguish between upstream components that are bundled by the focal firm, and downstream complements that are bundled by the firm's customers. We hypothesize that the effects of external innovation challenges depend not only on their magnitude, but also on their location in the ecosystem relative to the focal firm. We identify a key asymmetry that results from the location of challenges relative to a focal firm—greater upstream innovation challenges in components enhance the benefits that accrue to technology leaders, while greater downstream innovation challenges in complements erode these benefits. We further propose that the effectiveness of vertical integration as a strategy to manage ecosystem interdependence increases over the course of the technology life cycle. We explore these arguments in the context of the global semiconductor lithography equipment industry from its emergence in 1962 to 2005 across nine distinct technology generations. We find strong empirical support for our framework. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Managing the challenges of business-to-business open innovation in complex projects: A multi-stage process model

Research shows that knowledge sharing and system integration are two major challenges posed by openness to business partners in complex innovation projects. However, there remains limited research on the microfoundations (i.e., actions and practices) underpinning the organizational capabilities required to address these challenges. Drawing on a case study of a pioneering electric vehicle manufacturer, we develop a multi-stage process model showing how these capabilities are developed and phased out in terms of the organizational principles (e.g., hierarchical product architecture) and actions and practices (e.g., sharing knowledge by deputing staff to/from business partners). Our study contributes to the literature by taking a microfoundations approach to unpack the ‘black box’ of organizational capabilities critical for managing complex innovation projects into actions and practices, and emphasizes the importance of firms' internal preparedness for managing openness.     

Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance

This paper examines the integration of the human and technological aspects of innovation management by modelling the innovation stimulus – innovation capacity relationship in determining innovation performance. The research framework developed in this study was tested amongst 194 managers of Australian firms. The survey responses indicate that both the relationships between innovation stimulus and innovation capacity and between innovation capacity and innovation performance are significant and strong. However, innovation stimulus does not show any direct effect on innovation performance, suggesting that its effect is mediated through innovation capacity. The overall practical implication that can be drawn from the findings is that to achieve high innovation performance, organizations first need to develop the behavioural and cultural context and practices for innovation (i.e. stimulus), and only within such conducive environments is it possible for organizations to develop innovative capacity in research and development and technology so as to more effectively deliver innovation outcomes and performance.     

The commercialization of user innovations: the development of the rodeo kayak industry

In this study, we analyze the commercialization process of user innovations in open communities. We have traced 16 cases of user innovators who have commercialized their own innovations or have been involved in the commercialization process to some extent. By developing and manufacturing new products, the user innovators in our sample created a fast-growing community. They used low-cost manufacturing techniques and were able to start a new industry before established manufacturers could enter the market. The transformation process from a user innovation community to a commercial and manufacturing community brought about a number of major changes. In this paper, we track those changes as: the motives for innovating, the community size and characteristics, the type of innovation, the type of assistance and the disclosure of information, the form of communication, and competition between innovating users.     

Facilitating open innovation processes through network orchestration mechanisms

Participation in open innovation networks presents challenges, as firms must recognize value before being willing to openly collaborate, yet opportunities typically cannot be realized without active engagement. Innovation intermediaries can address these tensions through orchestration mechanisms which create value at different levels of innovation networks. This paper addresses an important research gap by identifying the role of intermediaries in delivering open innovation activities across different levels and describing how these activities form interrelated orchestration mechanisms. A longitudinal case study follows the development of an open innovation network from inception, based on interviews and observations with participants including start-ups and large firms. Findings highlight how intermediary activities and practices align with orchestration mechanisms used simultaneously at different levels and create value for members. A multi-level analysis contributes to the open innovation literature by describing the interdependent nature of value creation within the innovation intermediary model.     

Strategic Mutual Learning Between Producing and Buying Firms During Product Innovation

The product innovation activities and strategies employed by successful innovators often differ from those used by firms having more mature products. Marketing strategies for innovating firms can vary along two dimensions of knowledge: technological development (stable and evolving) and market needs (known and emerging). In addition, producers often commit to forms of strategic relationships with their buyers because of the difficulties encountered when buying firms adopt and implement technological innovations. Starting with these two orienting constructs from the literature, Patricia Meyers and Gerard Athaide describe the kinds of learning that develop between producers and buyers when markets for a technological innovation are forming.     

How Banks Apply Marketing Expertise to Develop New Derivatives

For banks operating in the fiercely competitive derivatives market, the difference between the leaders and the also-rans often boils down to their respective approaches to product innovation. To achieve market leadership in this highly volatile field, a bank must develop and continually refine the processes and the expertise necessary for identifying new areas of business and attracting and retaining customers. Although the development of derivatives is a complex, expensive process, such development efforts provide the means for satisfying existing clients as well as attracting new customers. F. Axel Johne and M. Panos Pavlidis examine the managerial practices of banks that are acknowledged leaders in bringing new derivatives to market ahead of their competitors. In particular, they examine how those first-mover banks apply their marketing expertise and they review the advantages those banks enjoy as a result of their success in product innovation. The banks studied fall into one of two groups: highly active innovators and less active innovators. The study reveals several significant differences between the two groups with respect to managing marketing inputs for product innovation purposes. First, compared to less active banks, the highly active innovators take a more sophisticated, market-based approach to identifying innovation opportunities. Rather than looking for innovations that offer a close fit with existing products and competencies, they analyze the benefits sought by target clients and initiate innovation efforts based on those analyses. Highly active innovators recognize the important role that internal marketing plays in encouraging functional specialists to work together for the purpose of identifying follow-on development opportunities. Internal marketing also helps to ensure that all parties understand and can support the planned innovation. The highly active innovators in this study do not take a formulaic approach to the development of new derivatives; instead, they rely on marketing expertise to identify and capitalize on business opportunities. Rather than concentrate solely on improving the core technical features of a product, the highly active innovators also recognize the importance of product augmentation innovation (to ensure the appropriate support for various market segments), process innovation (so they can reduce prices, when necessary), and market innovation (to ensure that they pursue the optimal mix of markets).     

The nature of SME co-operation and innovation: A multi-scalar and multi-dimensional analysis

Recent work on SMEs and networks has emphasised the importance of external co-operative ties in enhancing firms’ innovative performance. These external ties provide resource constrained SMEs with access to a wider set of technological opportunities through information sharing and resource pooling. Previous studies of the SME innovation–cooperation relationship have used categorical measures to capture tie existence which, while providing some useful insights, largely fail to capture the strength of co-operative relationships and/or the variety of relational directions in which co-operation occurs. This study aims to address this measurement deficiency and explore the SME innovation–cooperation relationship by designing and utilising measures that capture both the multi-scalar (strength) and multi-dimensional (variety) nature of co-operation and innovation. We then apply these measures to a survey of UK manufacturing SMEs. Data is obtained for 371 SMEs, and we then assess the innovation–co-operation relationship within a multivariate regression framework. We find that the strength of cooperative ties across a range of productive activities within the value chain are important facilitators for SME innovative capability; this is true for both product and process innovation. However, we find that SME co-operation with rivals (co-opetition) has no significant impact upon innovation. Our results have significant implications for both supply chain managers and policy-makers interested in enhancing innovation among SMEs. In particular, we argue that SME innovative activity benefits from good, close dyadic relations within the supply chain, while more generally policy should be geared towards nurturing and sustaining SME innovation networks.     

中国企业管理创新现状与展望——中国企业管理前沿论坛暨山东省管理学学会2007年理事大会观点述评

作为一门新兴学科,管理学在中国理论和实践中存在诸多问题,同时也孕育着巨大的创新潜力。目前,中国企业管理创新主要表现在思想创新和实践创新两个层面。专家学者们在这两个层面上分别对中国公司治理、中国企业制度改革、中国企业管理整体创新特点、现状及发展趋势等具体研究方向提出了独到的见解。总体来看,中国企业管理创新具有研究重点多元化、学术观点多样性的特点。     

Creating Dynamic Capability: The Role of Intertemporal Integration, Knowledge Retention, and Interpretation

Uncertainty about the ability for technological knowledge to be transformed to meet market demands, lack of complementary technologies, the lack of developed markets for a given technical feature, and other types of uncertainty add significant challenges to organizations as they develop products for future markets. In spite of these significant challenges, some organizations develop a dynamic capability in new product development that becomes a powerful source of competitive advantage and a source of renewal, growth, and adaptation as the environment changes. Many approaches to new product development (e.g., cross‐functional development teams, quality function deployment, early supplier involvement, heavyweight product development teams) address the need to integrate knowledge more rapidly and effectively within projects. These approaches do not address, however, how knowledge is integrated over time or how integration of knowledge from previous new product development efforts influences the firm's new product development performance. This study focuses on providing a greater understanding of the integrative practices that contribute to this capability in new product development. Based on insights from the innovation and learning literatures, this study proposes relationships about the influence of knowledge retention and interpretation activities on the organization's ability to integrate knowledge developed in prior new product development projects and on new product development performance. Data collected from a sample of new product development professionals are employed to test the proposed relationships among knowledge retention, knowledge interpretation, integration of prior knowledge, and new product development performance. The findings suggest that knowledge retention and interpretation activities positively impact a firm's new product development performance. In particular, practices that enable the retention and interpretation of knowledge improve new product development performance indirectly through the firm's enhanced ability to apply knowledge developed in prior product development projects to subsequent projects. Practices that enable the interpretation of knowledge in the firm's current strategic context also improve new product development performance directly. These findings lead to important implications for managing new product development.     

Heterogeneous Firm‐Level Effects of Knowledge Exchanges on Product Innovation: Differences between Dynamic and Lagging Product Innovators*

Product innovation is the result of a constant interaction between the in‐house research and development (R&D) department and knowledge exchanges with the firm's environment. Knowledge exchanges come in different forms. They break down into information gathering applied in new product development, research cooperation on particular innovation projects, and managing information outflows allowing the consequent appropriation of the results of product innovation through specific methods. The way firms handle knowledge exchanges affects their performance. This paper looks at three related indicators of performance: (1) research intensity (a measure of innovative input); (2) the share of revenue realized through innovative product sales (a measure of innovative output); and (3) their impact on the growth in total revenue. The bulk of the econometric literature looking into these matters only allows general statistical statements on the behavior of an “average” firm. This paper takes on another view by using the quantile regression method to stress the heterogeneity of innovative firms in their dealing with knowledge exchange and the effect this has on their performance. A first key finding is that research intensity is positively influenced by knowledge externalities, research cooperation, and appropriability, and it is through this that these variables affect innovative revenue and also the growth in total revenue. By using quantile regression these relationships are further refined to screen for differences in behavior between dynamic and lagging innovators. This refinement indicates that, in the case of research intensity, the knowledge externalities gain in importance in the higher quantiles and are insignificant in the lower ones. Next, research cooperation remains important in all quantiles, but a higher significance is observed in the higher quantiles as well. Finally, appropriability is extremely important for the lower quantiles, but it becomes insignificant in the highest. These findings corroborate the assumptions made in the literature on open innovation: knowledge externalities and research collaboration are vital for those opening up their firm for new ideas and who are, at the same time, reluctant to protect their findings through specific appropriation measures. In the case of innovative revenue all variables on knowledge exchange operate through the research intensity irrespective of the quantile, although the impact of research intensity on this type of revenue is higher in the upper quantiles. As for the growth in revenue, the effect of the innovative revenue is, again, higher in the higher quantiles. This suggests that dynamic product innovators have the most efficient R&D process and the strongest growers are so, especially, because they are successful product innovators.     

A tentative model of the innovation process

The paper proposes a model of innovation claimed to be applicable both to the lone entrepreneur and the large institution. It treats innovation as a social process and views it in some respects as analogous to natural selection.
The model takes into account 12 elements: the innovator, the new concept, the innovating group, the new product, target user, competitors, capital supply, strategy, supplying organization, technology, relevant environment and chance. The author characterises each element and shows how they interact in the course of guiding a particular innovation to success or failure.
The operation of the model is illustrated by applying it to two cases — the rise and decline of the metal ski and the launch and success of a national US newspaper.
The paper concludes with a list of possible uses of the model, as a checklist for action, as a basis for incorporating other approaches to the innovation process and as a starting point for a quantitative representation of the innovation process.     

Opening up the innovation process: the role of technology aggressiveness

Besides acquiring external knowledge, many firms have begun to actively commercialize technology, for example, by means of out-licensing. This increase in inward and outward technology transactions reflects the new paradigm of open innovation. Most prior research into open innovation is limited to theoretical considerations and case studies, whereas other lines of research have focused either on external technology acquisition or exploitation. In an integrative view, we consider inward and outward technology transactions as the main directions of open innovation. Moreover, technology aggressiveness, which constitutes an important dimension of technology strategy, is identified as a major determinant of open innovation. Data from a survey of 154 industrial firms are used to test three hypotheses relating technology aggressiveness, external technology acquisition, and external technology exploitation. In addition, clusters of firms with homogeneous strategies regarding technology aggressiveness and open innovation are identified.     

Organizing for innovation over an industry cycle

The basic hypothesis in this paper is that a gap tends to develop over an industry's evolution between potential innovators in a company and the organizational mainstream. The innovative gap is a function of the type of innovation needed for longer-run survival and the disposition of the mainstream organization towards innovation. This hypothesis is used to predict which of four popular organizations for innovation is most suited to each stage of an idealized industry's evolution. The predicted organization set is discussed in terms of well-known cases, and tested in an exploratory manner using executive survey data.     

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.     

Determinants of Alliance Portfolio Complexity and Its Effect on Innovative Performance of Companies*

Alliance formation is often described as a mechanism used by firms to increase voluntary knowledge transfers. Access to external knowledge has been increasingly recognized as a main source of a firm's innovativeness. A phenomenon that has recently emerged is alliance portfolio complexity. In line with recent studies this article develops a measure of portfolio complexity in technology partnerships in terms of diversity of elements of the alliance portfolio with which a firm must interact. The analysis considers an alliance portfolio that includes different partnership types (competitor, customer, supplier, and university and research center). So far factors that determine portfolio complexity and its impact on technological performance of firms have remained largely unexplored. This article examines firms' decisions to form alliance portfolios of foreign and domestic partners by two groups of firms: innovators (firms that are successful in introducing new products to the market), and imitators (firms that are successful at introducing products which are not new to the market). This study also assesses a nonlinear impact of the portfolio complexity measure on firms' innovative performance. The empirical models are estimated using data on more than 1800 firms from two consecutive Community Innovation Surveys conducted in 1998 and 2000 in the Netherlands. The results suggest that alliance portfolios of innovators are broader in terms of the different types of alliance partners as compared to those of imitators. This finding underlines the importance of establishing a “radar function” of links to various different partners in accessing novel information. Specifically, the results indicate that foremost innovators have a strong propensity to form portfolios consisting of international alliances. This underlines the importance of this type of partnership in the face of the growing internationalization of R&D and global technology sourcing. Being an innovator or imitator also increases the propensity to form a portfolio of domestic alliances, relative to non‐innovators; but this propensity is not stronger for innovators. Innovators appear to derive benefit from both intensive (exploitative) and broad (explorative) use of external information sources. The former type of sourcing is more important for innovators, while the latter is more important for imitators. Finally, alliance complexity is found to have an inverse U‐shape relationship to innovative performance. On the one hand, complexity facilitates learning and innovativeness; on the other hand, each organization has a certain management capacity to deal with complexity which sets limits on the amount of alliance portfolio complexity that can be managed within the firm. This clearly suggests that firms face a certain cognitive limit in terms of the degree of complexity they can handle. Despite the noted advantages of an increasing level of alliance portfolio complexity firms will at a certain stage reach a specific inflection point after which marginal costs of managing complexity are higher than the expected benefits from this increased complexity.     

Action research for innovation management: three benefits,three challenges,and three spaces

Given that the innovation landscape is changing, and new forms of organization and management are emerging, this study discusses the potential benefits of action research for innovation management (IM) as it provides closeness to living emergent systems, generates rich insights as well as knowledge for both rigorous theory development and change in practice. Drawing from a large-scale action research study involving a complex collaborative organizational construct, we outline three challenges from employing action research: the process is both reflexive and progressive, the researcher is both an outsider and an insider, and the outcome is both general and specific. A model of three social spaces (the action research space, the academic space, and the practitioner space) is proposed to address the challenges and assist in navigating the multitude of processes, roles, and outcomes associated with action research. The study argues that action research for IM is well suited to exploring tacit aspects of practices and processes in the emergent or shifting study contexts to transform practices through interventions. Thus, if implemented carefully by experienced researchers, it can provide valuable data that are indispensable for theory development in the field of IM.     

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.