The future of open innovation

Gassmann, Oliver; Enkel, Ellen; Chesbrough, Henry

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00605.x

Cited by 1,340 publications

(1,036 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

818

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While other cited external knowledge sources: competitors, users, suppliers, universities and research institutes have received considerable levels of academic attention concerning their ability to contribute towards an organisations new product development processes (Kaufman et al, 2000;Sobrero and Roberts, 2002;Olson and Bakke, 2001;Lilien et al, 2002;Bonner and Walker, 2004;Dahan and Hauser, 2002;von Hippel and Katz, 2002;Gassmann et al, 2006;Dittrich et al, 2007;Perkmann and Walsh, 2007) we have found little evidence to suggest that the integration of independent inventors within the open innovation business model has received consideration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Independent inventors and inbound open innovation: using a resource-based approach to create a tool for screening inventor approaches in order to facilitate technology in-licensing

Smeilus

Harris

Pollard

2013

IJTMKT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Open innovation literature identifies independent inventors as a source of novel external knowledge.This knowledge may be licensed into an organisation in order to supplement internal R&D activity, typically as part of an inbound open innovation strategy. In opening an organisation up to approaches from individuals the capacity of the core team to identify promising licensing opportunities is diminished by the sheer volume and variable quality of approaches received.Based on a survey of 202 UK independent inventors this paper utilises a resource-based approach to identifying the key resources possessed by successful independent inventors. Using this data, we devise a preliminary screening tool to facilitate technology in-licensing from independent inventors.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Independent inventors and inbound open innovation: using a resource-based approach to create a tool for screening inventor approaches in order to facilitate technology in-licensing

Smeilus

Harris

Pollard

2013

IJTMKT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• A seleção dos parceiros com foco nas necessidades e oportunidades das partes envolvidas (Gassmann, Enkel & Chesbrough, 2010;Schilke & Goerzen, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Governança tecnológica e cooperabilidade nas multinacionais brasileiras

Costa

Porto

2014

Rev. adm. empres.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technological governance and cooperability in Brazilian multinationals Gobernanza tecnológica y cooperabilidad en multinacionales brasileñas RESUMOA capacidade dinâmica de inovar e cooperar e a gestão dos seus atributos de dispersão e interação são fatores essenciais à sobrevivência e ao êxito para as empresas emergentes originadas dos países em desenvolvimento, como o Brasil. Diante desse contexto, tem-se o objetivo de avaliar em que medida a governança tecnológica afeta a capacidade dinâmica de inovação e cooperação (cooperabilidade) nas multinacionais brasileiras (MNB). Para alcançar esse objetivo, a pesquisa de campo foi realizada em duas etapas, a primeira, qualitativa, e a segunda, quantitativa. Com base nos resultados da etapa qualitativa, foram revisadas as variáveis do modelo de pesquisa e refinadas as suas hipóteses, cujo teste ocorreu na etapa quantitativa. Na etapa qualitativa, o método utilizado foi o estudo de casos múltiplos, dado que foram realizados três estudos em profundidade: Oxiteno, Braskem e Petrobras. Já na etapa quantitativa, realizou-se um levantamento no universo de MNB, em que uma amostra definitiva de 60 empresas respondeu a um questionário estruturado.PALAVRAS-CHAVE | Capacidades dinâmicas, inovação, cooperação, governança, multinacionais brasileiras. ABSTRACT RAE-Revista de Administração de Empresas | FGV-EAESP

show abstract

“…As a scientific contribution, we continue the discussion on the management of co-innovation within value networks (Gassman et al, 2010;Ritala et al, 2013Ritala and Huizingh, 2014;Ritala, P. and Tidström, 2014;Wynarczyk, et al, 2013;Theyel, 2013). By studying the Hub's practiced strategy also by interviewing the SMEs and VCs on their co-innovation management views, we could bring the most controversial issues of innovation networks to light.…”

Section: Commitment Vs Independencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Until recently, the literature on the management challenges and possible obstacles of innovation activities in value networks with small and medium size companies has been scarce (Gassman et al, 2010;Wynarczyk, et al, 2013). Many studies view management of co-innovation as a firm-level phenomenon (Kale et al, 2002;Walter et al, 2006), whereas, in order to understand the innovation within a value network it requires an approach that is explicit not only about the innovation challenges that are faced by the focal firm (Christensen, 1997;Cooper and Schendel, 1976;Henderson and Clark, 1990;Tushman and Anderson, 1986), but views it from the point of multiple actors (Gnyawali and Park, 2009;Ritala et al, 2013), including the focal firm, suppliers, competitors and investors, such as VCs providing funding for the new innovations.…”

Section: Management Of Innovative Supply Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the literature mentions the need for suitable supplier management practices, there is a gap in the body of knowledge, when it comes to the actual challenges and possible dilemmas in innovation collaboration in these kinds of value network setting. Especially, research considering the views of both the focal company and the suppliers are still scarce (Gassman et al, 2010). Therefore, there is imminent need to broaden the scope of innovation research towards change management (Van de Vrande et al, 2010) to realise the expected benefits from evolving collaboration (Prashant and Harbir, 2009;Ritala et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation