Exploring the contribution of innovation intermediaries to the new product development (NPD) process: a typology and an empirical study

Abstract

In the "knowledge economy" upheld by the European Lisbon strategy, knowledge-intensive services are considered a key driver for innovation and competitiveness. A category of knowledge-intensive services that has become of utmost importance in the last few decades is New Product Development (NPD) services, which interconnect distant knowledge domains with the client firms. In addition to NPD service providers, webbased innovation intermediaries have started to help innovative firms access dispersed bodies of knowledge. Despite the heterogeneity of their characteristics, however, a clear typology of the strategies used by traditional NPD service providers and web-based intermediaries to interact with their knowledge sources and with their clients is missing. This typology would be very useful for those firms that are willing to collaborate with innovation intermediaries because it could highlight the typologies of NPD problems different intermediaries are apt to address and the managerial challenges that working with them entails. Developing such a classification framework is the main goal of this paper. The typology proposed in this paper suggests that innovation intermediaries should be distinguished based on the following: (i) the way they Access their distributed knowledge sources and (ii) the way they Deliver value to their clients. By combining these two dimensions, 4 categories of innovation intermediaries are identified, which are named brokers, mediators, collectors and connectors. A multiple case study analysis involving 4 innovation intermediaries and 12 of their clients is presented in the paper. The analysis provides exploratory insights into (i) the typologies of NPD problems that each class of intermediaries addresses and (ii) the managerial challenges that working with each of them entails. These preliminary findings call for further theoretical and empirical research into the complex interaction among innovation intermediaries, their dispersed sources of knowledge and their clients.

Open Service Innovation: The Role of Intermediary Capabilities

“…The findings are relevant to other professional service firms that provide digital services. Along with their technological and marketing capabilities, managers of these firms ought to hone their CCs in assisting clients to deal with internal challenges, and achieve knowledge integration across the service ecosystem more efficiently and effectively (Colombo, Dell'Era, and Frattini, ; Verona et al, ). To achieve this, managers can direct attention in their firms to implement client engagement processes centered on personalizing client services, building client peer networks, fostering client skills and expertise, and co‐developing technology with clients, along with a clear emphasis on developing integrated service processes and creating long‐term sustainable value.…”

Open Science and Open Innovation in a socio‐political context: knowledge production for societal impact in an age of post‐truth populism

“…The movement to share scientific knowledge through the then nascent medium of print in the 1660s resonates today in Open Source Software development, Open Innovation approaches, innovation intermediaries, living‐labs, crowdsourcing (Mortara, ; Bucheler and Sieg, ; Franzoni and Sauermann, ; Colombo et al, ) and the calls for open access to scholarly research and the ethos of science as a public good (Willinsky, , ; Nielsen, ). In 2010, the first Open Science Summit was held, in Berkeley, California, to discuss the role of science in the 21st century and the wide‐ranging implications of making all research freely available to anybody to use and reuse as they see fit (Delfanti, ).…”

The function of intermediaries in collaborative innovation processes: retrofitting a Danish small island ferry with green technology

“…In contrast, other case studies on innovation intermediaries have constantly focused on one function of intermediaries, i.e., forecasting (Lichtenthaler, 2013;Chunhavuthiyanon and Intarakumnerd, 2014), scanning and information processing (Malik, 2012), brokering (Tan et al, 2010;Feller et al, 2012), and networking (Colombo et al, 2014) without describing other possible combinations. In this section, we first analyse how intermediation roles differed along the innovation journey.…”