Through an objective, systematic, and comprehensive review of the literature on open innovation (OI), this article identifies gaps in existing research, and provides recommendations on how hitherto unused or underused organizational, management, and marketing theories can be applied to advance the field. This study adopts a novel approach by combining two complementary bibliometric methods of co-citation analysis and text mining of 321 journal articles on OI that enables a robust empirical analysis of the intellectual streams and key concepts underpinning OI. Results reveal that researchers do not sufficiently draw on theoretical perspectives external to the field to examine multiple facets of OI. Research also seems confined to innovation-specific journals with its focus restricted to a select few OI issues, thereby exerting limited influence on the wider business community. This study reveals three distinct areas within OI research: (1) firm-centric aspects of OI, (2) management of OI networks, and (3) role of users and communities in OI. Thus far, studies have predominantly investigated the firm-centric aspects of OI, with a particular focus on the role of knowledge, technology, and R&D from the innovating firm's perspective, while the other two areas remain relatively under-researched. Further gaps in the literature emerge that present avenues for future research, namely to: (1) develop a more comprehensive understanding of OI by including diverse perspectives (users, networks, and communities), (2) direct increased attention to OI strategy formulation and implementation, and (3) enhance focus on customer co-creation and conceptualize "open service innovation." Marketing (e.g., service-dominant logic), organizational behavior (e.g., communities of practice), and management (e.g., dynamic capabilities) offer suitable theoretical lenses and/or concepts to address these gaps. Practitioner PointsFirms will benefit from holistic insights on collaborating with users, networks, and communities to guide their open innovation initiatives. By integrating marketing perspectives into their R&D efforts, firms can better understand and implement open innovation in services and co-creation with customers. In order to balance the creation and capture of value, firms need to tightly link their open innovation initiatives with overall firm strategy.

No abstract

Marketing and technological capabilities are primary drivers of a firm's performance and thus of central interest to managers. Yet the way in which these two capabilities align with changing environments to secure superior performance remains unclear. Drawing on the dynamic capability view and data from a survey of 228 firms, this study proposes a model of how frequent dynamic capability utilization, assessed through its underlying processes of sensing and reconfiguring, relates to marketing and technological capabilities, as well as how market, technological, and competitor turbulence might affect these relationships. The results show that frequent sensing and reconfiguring have stronger positive effects in environments characterized by high competitor turbulence; however, frequent sensing can have negative relationships with marketing and technological capabilities in stable environments. Furthermore, marketing capabilities are positively associated with firm performance in highly competitive environments, whereas technological capabilities link to performance in stable competitive environments.

No abstract

Project governance is important in ensuring successful project delivery. In this article we conduct a systematic investigation of previous research to provide a content-driven review of the literature, and to provide future research direction. We use the textual data mining software Leximancer to identify dominant concepts and themes underlying project governance research.! Our findings indicate that agency and stakeholder theories have been adapted to the project governance context to a greater extent than other theories. Furthermore, we find differences in project governance research, published in project management journals compared to general management, IT and engineering journals. We conclude the paper by presenting a framework that links governance theories to the multiple organizational levels relevant to project governance.

The dynamic capability view (DCV) of the firm has become one of the leading frameworks aimed at identifying drivers of long-term firm survival and growth. Yet, despite considerable academic interest, there are many questions about what dynamic capabilities are, how they relate to other organizational operations, and how they relate to firm performance. In this art, we provide a unique and comprehensive examination of the DCV literature that goes beyond past reviews by combining text based analysis with surveys of, and interviews with, researchers in the field. With this approach, we are able to examine the evolution of the DCV in written literature and identify missing research themes. Based on this review, we argue that future research will benefit from integrating the DCV with configuration theory and recent microfoundational thinking. We encapsulate this discussion via an architectural model of the DCV (entitled 'House of Dynamic Capabilities') that combines microfoundations underlying DCs at the varying levels of analysis (individual, business unit, and organizational) while also accounting for important enablers of DCs and firm strategic orientation. We also show how this logic requires a completely different set of methodological approaches to those currently in use.

The dynamic capability view (DCV) of the firm has become one of the leading frameworks aimed at identifying drivers of long-term firm survival and growth. Yet, despite considerable academic interest, there are many questions about what dynamic capabilities are, how they relate to other organizational operations, and how they relate to firm performance. In this art, we provide a unique and comprehensive examination of the DCV literature that goes beyond past reviews by combining text based analysis with surveys of, and interviews with, researchers in the field. With this approach, we are able to examine the evolution of the DCV in written literature and identify missing research themes. Based on this review, we argue that future research will benefit from integrating the DCV with configuration theory and recent microfoundational thinking. We encapsulate this discussion via an architectural model of the DCV (entitled 'House of Dynamic Capabilities') that combines microfoundations underlying DCs at the varying levels of analysis (individual, business unit, and organizational) while also accounting for important enablers of DCs and firm strategic orientation. We also show how this logic requires a completely different set of methodological approaches to those currently in use.

James G. March has published his seminal work 'Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning' in 1991. We revisit March's article and analyze the impact it has had on scholarly thinking, providing a comprehensive and structured review of the extensive and diverse research inspired by this publication. Unlike previous reviews on the topic, we combine bibliometric analysis and machine-based text mining to portray a picture of the evolving landscape of this article's influence. We show that although this influence has changed significantly over the years, there are still unexplored opportunities left by this seminal work. Our approach enables us to identify promising directions for future research that reinforce the themes anchored in March's (1991) article. In particular, we call for reconnecting current research to the behavioral roots of this article and uncovering the microfoundations of exploration and exploitation. Our analysis further identifies opportunities for integrating this framework with resource-based theories, and considering how exploration and exploitation can be sourced and integrated within and across organizational boundaries. Finally, our analysis reveals prospects for extending the notions of exploration and exploitation to new domains, but we caution that such domains should be clearly delineated. We conclude with a call for more research on the antecedents of exploration and exploitation and for studying their underexplored dimensions.