Shedding lights on organizational decoupling in publicly funded R&amp;D consortia: An institutional perspective on open innovation

Bertello, Alberto; Bernardi, Paola De; Ferraris, Alberto; Bresciani, Stefano

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121433

Cited by 14 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Decentralized and distributed innovation is also benefitting from the development of increasingly advanced information systems that support data-intensive applications to enhance the efficacy of service delivery to citizens and foster idea generation from a myriad of knowledge sources, which could be geographically dispersed (Kankanhalli et al 2017 ). After an initial phase, where open innovation was deliberately promoted by frontline practitioners, principally large and/or high-tech firms, to improve technical efficiency by utilizing external innovations internally, and commercializing internal innovations externally (Bertello et al 2022a ), open innovation principles are now increasingly adopted by governments and the public sector (Ham et al 2015 ). On the one hand, governments are setting up funding schemes based on subsidies and incentives to attract organizations of different natures around open innovation projects (Bertello et al 2022a ).…”

Section: Open Innovation Knowledge Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…More specifically, superior innovation performance does not exclusively rely on the activity of in-house, vertically integrated R&D laboratories, but rather requires coordination across more disintegrated networks of innovation that connect firms with suppliers, customers, universities, research labs, consultants, and start-up firms (Chesbrough and Bogers 2014 ; West and Bogers 2017 ). Almost twenty years of research on open innovation have provided thorough insights into how distributed innovation processes influence firm performance and contribute to speeding up innovation and developing new products (e.g., Dodgson et al 2006 ), services (e.g., Chesbrough 2010 ), and processes (e.g., Bertello et al 2022a ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally came a more varied third phase, in which the further consolidation of well-established conversations goes hand in hand with attempts to gradually frame open innovation according to new imperatives. During this phase, scholars have been increasingly highlighting the need to identify not only the bright sides but also the dark sides of open innovation (Chaudhary et al 2022 ; Helm et al 2019 ; Saura et al 2023 ; Stanko et al 2017 ), also in light of the growing pressures of local, national, and international policies towards the implementation of open innovation (Bertello et al 2022a ; Marullo et al 2020 ). These studies also bring to light reflections about the opportunities and challenges related to the ongoing processes of digital transformation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Open innovation: status quo and quo vadis - an analysis of a research field

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open innovation is now a widely used concept in academia, industry, and policy-making. According to the recent report “The Open Innovation Barometer”, released by the Economist, 90% of organizations have either adopted or are planning to implement key open innovation practices by opening up their organizational boundaries to collaborative innovation in the next three years (The Economist Group 2022). However, the social and economic changes imposed by the emerging processes of transition towards a more digital and sustainable society raise questions on how the open innovation field of studies is evolving to meet new, emerging needs. By combining bibliometric techniques and content analysis, this study illustrates how this research community has evolved in the last 12 years. More specifically, this study provides a descriptive analysis of the literature on open innovation, defines its knowledge structure, and illustrates a representative picture of the theoretical landscape. Our analysis shows that attempts to consolidate established topics and theoretical approaches in this field of studies go hand in hand with the emergence of new conversations about unexplored dimensions of open innovation. We conclude this article by outlining some avenues for future research on how to conceptualize, theorize, and research (methods and analytical techniques) open innovation.

show abstract

Section: Open Innovation Knowledge Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Open innovation: status quo and quo vadis - an analysis of a research field

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While research on new organisational forms for tackling emerging societal challenges is burgeoning, much remains to be understood about the implications of organising for complex, uncertain, and evaluative challenges. Grand challenges may therefore be both great stimulants of innovation and opportunities for organisational learning (Bertello et al, 2021a;Bertello et al, 2022;Chesbrough, 2020). In this regard, the open innovation community has the huge opportunity to offer possible new solutions to grand challenges, on the one side, while taking lessons on how to move forward the concept of open innovation, on the other side.…”

Section: Grand Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Vortex Tornado Blueprint for Disruptive Global Co-Creation (Inspired by EUvsVirus)

Nechkoska

González

Bertello

et al. 2023

Contributions to Management Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its burst in early 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic has deeply affected every aspect of daily life, from international trade and travelling to restrictions on an individual level, becoming a complex multi-level and highly multi-faceted problem. Due to its overarching influence and deep impact, it can be seen as one of the most disruptive Grand Challenges of our time. Different from most other lasting Grand Challenges, such as Climate Change, the pandemic exerted its influence with little ramp-up, rapidly transforming health and health systems, human lives, goods and economic flows, decision-making mechanisms, research and innovation, and many other aspects of life in a very short span of time.Grand Challenges require extraordinary efforts from society as a whole since they need holistic, effective, collaborative endeavours to solve them. One such unique orchestrated effort can be observed in the subsequent series of virtual massive EUvsVirus (https://www.euvsvirus.org/) events and committed collaborations (‘hackathon’, ‘matchathon’, ‘launchathon’, ‘community’, ‘EIC Covid platform’, and the unparalleled ‘Academia Diffusion Experiment’ [ADE], analysed in chapter “Academia Diffusion Experiment: Trailblazing the Emergence from Co-Creation” of this book).While this chapter explains ‘what’ has been produced with the ADE, inspired by the EUvsVirus phenomenon, the ADE chapter describes ‘how’ it has been done. Both are extremely unique in terms of content, procedure, motivation, collaboration, effects—and they attempt to trailblaze at highest level co-creation, co-evolution, and co-dreaming. Hence, situated as the last chapters of this book.This chapter will shed light on the EUvsVirus events, where over 30,000 individuals from 40 countries came together and addressed the complexity of this massive challenge in a pioneering and groundbreaking way. The chapter is focused on analysing the EUvsVirus hackathon (alongside its mentioned unique spillovers) as a tool, method, and process capable of channelling and activating individuals’ and institutions’ concerns, wills, and commitments into a unique orchestrated open, collaborative response to an urgent Grand Challenge, the pandemic. We are producing a multi-vortex tornado model, resembling the EUvsVirus phenomenon, its components, mechanisms, behaviour and how to replicate it to achieve such disruptive, global organisational effort of co-creation. Especially, the emergence of such collaboration in the face of such urgency leads to the assumption that there are crucial lessons to be learned from this endeavour, quite fittingly encapsulated by these words:‘We are learningThat though we weren't ready for this,We have been readied by it’.Amanda Gorman’s New Year poem (https://amandagormanbooks.com/#the-hill-we-climb-and-other-poems or https://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2022/01/06/exp-amanda-gorman-nye-poem.cnn)

show abstract

“…With the implementation of the innovative country strategy, government funding for science and technology innovation has increased, as have business innovation subsidies (Guo et al, 2022 ; Liang et al, 2022 ). Government subsidies can help businesses that rely on technology reduce the costs and risks of technological innovation, close the return on investment gap between society and businesses, and relieve financial pressure on these businesses (Li Q. et al, 2021 ; Bertello et al, 2022 ; Lenderink et al, 2022 ; Song et al, 2022 ). Hence, businesses are encouraged and motivated to innovate more frequently.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Guidance' or ‘Misleading'? The government subsidy and the choice of enterprise innovation strategy

Ding

Wang²,

Liu³

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Government subsidies have a direct impact on firms' innovation strategies. The game relationship between the government, the subsidized firm and its competitors under different subsidy strategies affects firms' innovation behavior and thus innovation performance. This paper uses a dynamic evolutionary game theory approach based on cost-benefit differences to analyse the mechanisms by which government subsidy strategies affect firms' innovation strategies. It is found that the marginal benefits of a firm's innovation strategy will directly affect the game outcome, indicating that the choice of innovation strategy depends on the maximization of individual firm's interests. At the same time, a firm's innovation strategy is influenced by the firm's own innovation ability and competitors' innovation strategy, and there are two game equilibria. Government subsidies have a positive contribution to the innovation strategy choice of subsidized firms, but have a crowding-out effect on non-subsidized competing firms. The strength of the penalty (the efficiency of the implementation of government subsidies), the marginal revenue of the subsidized firms' rational use of government subsidies and the competitors' strategic choices will directly affect the game outcome.

show abstract

Shedding lights on organizational decoupling in publicly funded R&D consortia: An institutional perspective on open innovation

Cited by 14 publications

References 56 publications

Open innovation: status quo and quo vadis - an analysis of a research field

Open innovation: status quo and quo vadis - an analysis of a research field

Multi-Vortex Tornado Blueprint for Disruptive Global Co-Creation (Inspired by EUvsVirus)

‘Guidance' or ‘Misleading'? The government subsidy and the choice of enterprise innovation strategy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About