Openness and collaboration in scientific research are attracting increasing attention from scholars and practitioners alike. However, a common understanding of these phenomena is hindered by disciplinary boundaries and disconnected research streams. We link dispersed knowledge on Open Innovation, Open Science, and related concepts such as Responsible Research and Innovation by proposing a unifying Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Framework. This framework captures the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of open and collaborative practices along the entire process of generating and disseminating scientific insights and translating them into innovation. Moreover, it elucidates individual-, team-, organisation-, field-, and society-level factors shaping OIS practices. To conceptualise the framework, we employed a collaborative approach involving 47 scholars from multiple disciplines, highlighting both tensions and commonalities between existing approaches. The OIS Research Framework thus serves as a basis for future research, informs policy discussions, and provides guidance to scientists and practitioners.

No abstract

For a few decades now, firms have had to innovate in cooperation with other organizations. According to the literature on co-innovation, a new form of innovation partnership is now emerging: the exploratory partnership. This type of partnership is the most often established in the early stages of the design process and faces high levels of uncertainty and instability. This paper deals with a strategic design tool, OPERA, based on a recent general design theory named C-K theory. That theory models design reasoning by suggesting a fundamental distinction between concepts (propositions about novel objects) and knowledge (propositions about known objects). According to the theory, the interaction and co-evolution of concepts and knowledge is the main engine through which design progresses. The paper proposes to extend that theory to understand and to act in innovation community context. OPERA enables power holders and design teams to drive innovation projects by providing them with an overview of explored and unexplored concepts and of the activation and production of skills and knowledge. This cartographic system was tested by MINATEC IDEAs Laboratory, a Cross-Industry Exploratory Partnership, over a 15-month period. The innovative platform is composed of partners from different sectors (e.g., energy, technology research center, sports, telecommunications) and aims to build innovative projects and to devise new products and services based on micronanotechnologies. Facing such diversities, actors of MINATEC IDEAs Laboratory used OPERA to see how each project is progressing, the contribution of each project to the global exploration process, and the complementarities between the projects. Such representations enable the committee to identify the main value of a project, any knowledge gaps and the synergies between projects. From a collective point of view, OPERA permits to MINATEC IDEAs Laboratory's members to indicate their favorite concepts and knowledge areas and to estimate converging and diverging interests.

While scientists are stepping up their efforts to develop new technologies, the ability of firms to determine the value of their technologies by identifying potential applications has become a major challenge. This article focuses on a particular phase of technology development: the emergence phase. When a promising new technology first sees the light of day in a fundamental research laboratory, its target markets often seem plentiful but are ill-defined. The inability to produce prototypes or to identify potential users makes it difficult to explore potential commercial applications. On the basis of four micro-nanotechnologies case studies conducted within a multi-partner innovation project, this article aims to theoretically explain why the identification of applications from emerging technologies is not a trivial problem. That research analyses how technologists and non-experts interact during creative investigations into new applications. It shows that the technologists are victims of a form of cognitive fixation. Indeed, their beliefs and activities are guided by a stable cognitive representation of their technology: the presumed identity of technology.Based on a recent design framework, C-K Design Theory, the technological exploration process followed in our four case studies is modelled, and mechanisms to dismantle the presumed identity and to design an extended identity of technology are provided.

No abstract

Purpose-Scholars and practitioners have both emphasized the importance of collaboration in innovation context. They have also largely acknowledged that the definition of common purpose is a major driver of successful collaboration, but surprisingly, researchers have put little effort into investigating the process whereby the partners define the common purpose. This research aims to explore the Generation of Common Purpose (GCP) in innovation partnerships. Design/methodology/approach-An action-research approach combined with modeling has been followed. Our research is based on an in-depth qualitative case study of a cross-industry exploratory partnership through which four partners, from very different arenas, aim to collectively define innovation projects based on micro-nanotechnologies. Based on a design reasoning framework, the mechanisms of GCP mechanism are depicted. Findings-Regarding GCP, two main interdependent facets are identified: (1) the determination of existing intersections between the parties' concept and knowledge spaces ('Matching'); (2) an introspective learning process that allows the parties to transforms those spaces ('Building'). Practical implications-The better understanding of the GCP and the specific notion of "C-K profiles", which is an original way to characterize each partner involved in a partnership, should improve the capabilities of organizations to efficiently define collaborative innovation projects. Originality/value-This article explores one of the cornerstones of successful collaboration in innovation: the process whereby several parties define the common purpose of their partnership.

Experimentation is paramount to innovation. In fact, innovation scholars and practitioners have espoused Thomke's (2003) book titled Experimentation matters: Unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. Unfortunately, companies still experience considerable technical and managerial difficulties with organizing experiments under high uncertainty. This study confronts Thomke's experimentation principles with a high uncertainty context by examining experiments conducted by The Manhattan Project from 1943-1945, the initiative that created the first implosion-type fission bomb. Findings suggest that lack of theoretical knowledge, a crisis of scientific instruments, and absence of pre-established organizations were critical to such highly uncertain experimentation. We conclude with a discussion of the boundary conditions of Thomke's experimentation principles. Finally, we propose five principles for facilitating the management of experimentation in the unknown.

No abstract