No abstract

No abstract

Over the past decades open innovation (OI) practices have gained prominence among both scholars and practitioners as a mean to accelerate time-to-market and reduce development costs of innovations. Thereby scholars have nearly exclusively focused on cross-boundary knowledge flows between the focal firm and (its) external collaborators. This paper argues that such a focus limits our understanding of how multi-business firms with a diverse knowledge base profit from internally applied open innovation practices that in turn provide complementary benefits to OI.We build on the current literature by investigating and describing OI activities that are conducted within the boundaries of the multi-business firm. Based on a multiple case study of 23 collaboration practices conducted across 14 firms, our findings reveal 5 archetypal forms of internally applied open innovation activities. We draw on the literature of cross-divisional innovation and crowdsourcing to highlight how these archetypes differ in terms of their purpose and underlying managerial processes. Multi-business firms regularly rely on internal practices due to lower transaction costs and for stimulating a collaborative culture. We conclude that internally applied OI practices are effectively stimulated by a combination of non-monetary reward systems and purposive integration mechanisms. 97

Purpose Despite the opportunities provided by pay-per-use (PPU) services, product companies in business-to-business sectors often fail to compete systematically by using them. The purpose of this paper is to explain how companies can avoid failures when it comes to PPU services. The paper describes the “seizing” capabilities needed to achieve the strategic objectives of PPU services. Design/methodology/approach The research process is divided into a pilot and an in-depth study. Altogether, 17 companies participated in the study. Findings The findings reveal that the seizing capabilities depend on the strategic objectives of PPU services. To expand the market share with PPU services, companies need to broaden the customer portfolio for PPU services, to align individual services within the entire service portfolio and to balance profits made by PPU services and other business lines. For strategic objectives such as rapid sales growth early in the market development and new market creation other seizing capabilities are required. Research limitations/implications The findings are not generalizable, due to the use of a qualitative study. The study is restricted to product companies in the business-to-business sector. Practical implications Managers often believe that extending and modularizing the service portfolio is beneficial. When achieving sales growth during the market development phase, these capabilities are in fact sometimes counterproductive. Practitioners have to look into the costs and benefits of setting-up their own financing company and working with banks. Social implications PPU services contribute to a more sustainable consumption and make product design more resource-efficient. Originality/value The study is original by virtue of systematically studying PPU services, providing a microfoundation for seizing capabilities and developing testable propositions for future research.