Explicating the role of innovation intermediaries in the “unknown”: a contingency approach

Abstract

Innovation intermediaries have become key actors in open innovation contexts. Research has improved our understanding of the managerial challenges inherent to intermediation in situations in which problems are rather well-defined. Yet, in some open innovation situations, the relevant actor networks may not be known, there may be no clear common interest, or severe problems may exist with no legitimate common place where they can be discussed. This paper contributes to the research on innovation intermediaries by showing how intermediaries address managerial challenges related to a high degree of unknown. We draw upon the extant literature to highlight the common core functions of different types of intermediaries. We then introduce the "degree of unknown" as a new contingency variable for the analysis of the role of intermediaries for each of these core functions. We illustrate the importance of this new variable with four empirical case studies in in different industries and countries in which intermediaries are experiencing situations of high level of unknown. We highlight the specific managerial principles that the four intermediaries applied in creating an environment for collective innovation. Therefore, we clarify what intermediation in the unknown may entail.

Exploring practices in collaborative innovation: Unpacking dynamics, relations, and enactment in in‐between spaces

“…Most forms of multi‐actor collaboration can be expected to be a “ tangled web of dynamic, ambiguous, and partially overlapping goal hierarchies ” (Vangen & Huxham, , p. 752). Collaboration therefore requires that partners cope with different institutional or disciplinary logics, develop specific capabilities to collaborate in the unknown (Agogué et al, ), and deal with an unwillingness to compromise, political struggles and unrealistic expectations of one another. We know from empirical evidence that many collaborations collapse or do not create satisfactory value (Sivadas & Dwyer, ), and to avoid this, developing a collaborative competence at the individual as well as the organizational level is considered essential, and consequently, focusing on the what and when of collaboration is not enough—there is also a need to consider how to collaborate.…”

Design theory: a foundation of a new paradigm for design science and engineering

“…More recently, new methods for patent design have been developed based on design theory (Felk et al 2011;Kokshagina et al 2014). Design theory provides a basis to characterize innovative design organizations in companies (Hatchuel et al 2006;Hatchuel et al 2010;Le Masson et al 2010b) or new collective forms of action like colleges (Le Masson et al 2012b;Le Masson et al 2012a) and architects of the unknown (Agogué et al 2013;Agogué et al 2016).…”

Mind the Gap: Lessons from the UK to Brazil about the Roles of TTOs throughout Collaborative R&D Projects

“…To face the challenge of finding partners with common goals, the intermediary scans the environment and selects the players, establishing the procedures and tasks for a possible partnership as network orchestration (Agogué et al, 2017;Batterink, Wubben, Klerkx, & Omta, 2010). In addition, the intermediary may be responsible for typical issues of innovation management in an interorganizational context, such as conflict management and prevention of opportunistic behaviour (Hacievliyagil, Maisonneuve, Auger, & Hartmann, 2007).…”