Impact of Open Innovation Communities on Enterprise Innovation Performance: A System Dynamics Perspective

Abstract

Open innovation communities (OICs) can help enterprises make full use of external knowledge resources from users, but problems such as low user participation and low conversion rate of creative ideas impact the efficiency of OICs. Most studies on this topic employ qualitative or empirical methods from a static perspective, but ignore the effect of interaction between enterprises and users as well as the cumulative effect of time. A discussion on the dynamic evolution process of open innovation is lacking. Based on a review of the literature on OICs, innovation performance, and system dynamics, this study proposes a conceptual model of innovation performance impact, which comprises the knowledge management, governance mechanism, and user behavior subsystems. Xiaomi’s OIC in China was selected as the research object, and relevant data were collected through a web spider. According to the system dynamics modeling method, a causal relationship analysis was carried out on the three aforementioned interrelated subsystems. Then, a stock flow chart with 32 variables was constructed to determine the initial values and calculation equations for each variable. Finally, the model was constructed and verified using Vensim PLE software. The simulation results were as follows. (1) The number of product releases in the Xiaomi OIC was positively correlated with the number of posts, comments, and views. Compared with user interaction behavior (i.e., commenting and viewing), the impact of user innovation behavior (i.e., posting) on enterprise innovation performance (i.e., number of patents) is clearer. Specifically, regarding interaction behavior, the impact of the users’ commenting behavior on innovation performance (i.e., number of product releases) was relatively clearer than that of their viewing behavior. (2) Governance mechanism (i.e., R&D investment and management expense), which comprises technical and organizational mechanisms, positively affected the innovation performance of enterprises. Compared with the organizational mechanism (i.e., management expense), the impact of the technical mechanism (i.e., R&D investment) on the innovation performance was clearer. (3) Governance mechanism helped to increase the number of users in the OIC, and, in turn, affected the user innovation and interaction behavior. (4) The technical mechanism positively affected knowledge application capability, which, in turn, had a positive impact on the innovation performance of enterprises. Based on these findings, management strategies are proposed for the establishment and development of OICs.

Digital Transformation and Strategy in the Banking Sector: Evaluating the Acceptance Rate of E-Services

“…It is seen that, on the one hand, workers accept the new data in the digital economy (entry of new alternative providers, e.g., viva wallet, opap wallet, N26, Revolut); on the other hand, there is an apparent risk of shrinking banking operations and intense banking competition in the domestic market. They do not leave much room for employees to oppose the new data [68][69][70][71][72][73]. This is reflected in the survey results, as the majority of the employees show that they accept the latest data, and it is not harmful to accept the new methods and practices of digital banking.…”

Linking Entrepreneurial Orientation with Innovation Performance in SMEs; the Role of Organizational Commitment and Transformational Leadership Using Smart PLS-SEM

“…Sriviboon [21] suggested that technology adoption and innovation performance are critical for organizations' success, which can be significantly predicted through entrepreneurial orientation [22,23]. According to Wu and Gong [24], innovation performance consists of the firm's indulgence in technology, development of economic and innovation goals and attaining them through technology evolution, proficient business policies and advanced research and development capabilities. Studies in the past have critically examined the process and product innovation (levels of innovation) and further suggested a comprehensive measurement scale, including five critical factors of innovation performance, such as the quantity of manufactured goods, technological methods, development feat ratio, industry response and usage of advanced technology in production processes [25,26].…”

Sustainable Development of the Innovation Ecosystem from the Perspective of T‐O‐V

“…e interactive relationship between the growth mechanism and variables of innovation ecosystem sustainable development is expressed with convincing mathematical function expression and intuitive symbol [43]. In order to ensure the credibility of the system dynamics model, we need to use authoritative and reliable data to test the model, which needs to select the appropriate case.…”