You are here

The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

DOI: 
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207
Abstract (2. Language): 
Abstract: The “open innovation” model is currently being touted as a superior path for achieving long-term success. Rather than relying on their own, limited resources for research and development in the traditional, closed invention system, firms are encouraged to share knowledge across firm boundaries to enhance their innovative potential. Yet, such sharing may also have adverse consequences by reducing the rarity of a firm’s inventions. This paper accordingly attempts to identify and analyze the parameters that determine whether open or closed types of innovation management are most appropriate for a given firm. Following a contingency perspective, we examine these determinants as various internal and external constraints (situational factors). More specifically, applying concepts related to absorptive capacity, complementary resources, game theory and others, we derive testable propositions and provide case study evidence regarding the value generating properties of open innovation.
176-207

REFERENCES

References: 

Afuah, A. (1998). Innovation management: Strategies, implementation, and profits.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Arora, A., Fosfuri, A., & Gambardella, A. (2001). Markets for technology and their
implications for corporate strategy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(2), 419-
451.
Arrow, K. J. (1964). Control in large organizations. Management Science, 10(3),
397-408.
Arrow, K. J. (1996). The economics of information: An exposition. Empirica, 23(2),
119-128.
Arthur, B. W. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by
historical events. Economic Journal, 99(394), 116-131.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Berkovitch, E., & Narayanan, M.P. (1993). Motives for takeovers: An empirical
investigation. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 28(3), 347-362.
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207 ©© JIEM, 2009 – 2(1): 176-207 – ISSN: 2013-0953
The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective 202
M.T. Torkkeli; C.J. Kock; P.A.S. Salmi
Blonigen, B. A., & Taylor, C. T. (2000). R&D intensity and acquisitions in hightechnology
industries: Evidence from the US electronic and electrical equipment
industries. Journal of Industrial Economics, 48(1), 47-70.
Cohen W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on
learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation: The new imperative for creating and
profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Chesbrough, H. (2004). Managing Open Innovation. Research Technology
Management, 47(1), 23-26.
Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation
landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (2006). Open Innovation:
Researching a new paradigm. USA: Oxford University Press.
Chiesa, V., & Toletti, G. (2003). Standard-Setting strategies in the multimedia
sector. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(3), 281-308.
Coughlan, P. J. (2001). Competitive Dynamics in Home Video Games (K):
PlayStation vs. Nintendo64. HBS case study 9-701-101
(http://dx.doi.org/10.1225/701101).
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of
competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504-1511.
Dougherty, D., & Hardy, C. (1996). Sustained product innovation in large, mature
organizations: overcoming innovation-to-organization problems. The Academy of
Management Journal, 39(5), 1120-1153.
Ferretti, M., & Romano, C. (2006). Technological acquisition processes in product
development of large companies. International Journal of Product Development,
3(2), 191-213.
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207 ©© JIEM, 2009 – 2(1): 176-207 – ISSN: 2013-0953
The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective 203
M.T. Torkkeli; C.J. Kock; P.A.S. Salmi
Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2006). Factors affecting university–industry
R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signaling. Research
Policy, 35(2), 309-323.
Gans, J. S., & Stern, S. (2003). The product market and the market for “ideas”:
commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Research Policy,
32(2), 333-350.
Gassmann, O., & Enkel, E. (2004). Towards a theory of open innovation: Three
core process archetypes. Proceedings of the R&D Management Conference
(RADMA), Lisbon, Portugal, July 6-9, 2004. Retrieved Jan 8th, 2009, from
http://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/EXPORT/DL/20417.pdf
Granstrand, O., Bohlin, E., Oskarsson, C., & Sjöberg, N. (1992). External
technology acquisition in large multi-technology corporations. R&D Management,
22(2), 111–133.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. N., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between
exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-
706.
Hagedoorn, J., & Duysters, G. M. (2002). External sources of innovative
capabilities: the preference for strategic alliances or mergers and acquisitions.
Journal of Management Studies, 39(2), 167-188.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change.
American Sociological Review, 49(2), 149-164.
Huston, L., & Sakkab, N. (2006). Connect and develop: Inside Procter & Gamble’s
new model for Innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 58-66.
Knudsen, L. G. (2005). Determinants of ‘openness’ in R&D collaboration: The roles
of absorptive capacity and appropriability. Paper presented at the DRUID-DIME
Academy winter 2006 PhD-conference 26-28 January: “The Evolution of
Capabilities and Industrial Dynamics”. Retrieved Jan 8th, 2009, from
http://www.druid.dk/uploads/tx_picturedb/dw2006-1704.pdf
Kogut, B. (1989). The stability of joint ventures: Reciprocity and competitive
rivalry. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 38(2), 183-198.
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207 ©© JIEM, 2009 – 2(1): 176-207 – ISSN: 2013-0953
The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective 204
M.T. Torkkeli; C.J. Kock; P.A.S. Salmi
Lambe, C. J., & Spekman, R. E. (1997). Alliances, external technology acquisition,
and discontinuous technological change. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 14(2), 102-116.
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2004). Searching high and low: what types of firms use
universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy, 33(8), 1201-1215.
Laursen K., & Salter A. (2005). The Paradox of Openness Appropriability and the
Use of External Sources of Knowledge for Innovation. Paper prepared for the All-
Academy Symposium “Open Innovation: Empirical Research on Locating and
Incorporating External Innovations”, August 9, 2005, at the Academy of
Management Conference 2005, August 5-10, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. Retrieved
Jan 8th, 2009, from http://www.cob.sjsu.edu/west_j/OpenInnovation/
2005_Academy/LaursenSalter.pdf
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment:
Management differentiation and integration. Boston: Harvard Business School
Press.
Leiponen, A. (2006). Cooperative strategies in the standardization of wireless
telecommunications. Unpublished manuscript, Cornell University. Retrieved Jan
8th, 2009, from http://emertech.wharton.upenn.edu/Agenda/SDO_Wharton.pdf
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of
Sociology, 14, 319-338.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2004). Organising the external technology exploitation process:
current practices and future challenges. International Journal of Technology
Management, 27(2/3), 255-271.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2006). Technology exploitation strategies in the context of open
innovation. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 2(1), 1-
21.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2007a). Corporate technology out-licensing: Motives and scope.
World Patent Information, 29(2), 117-121.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2007b). Hierarchical strategies and strategic fit in the keep-orsell
decision. Management Decision, 45(3), 340-359.
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207 ©© JIEM, 2009 – 2(1): 176-207 – ISSN: 2013-0953
The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective 205
M.T. Torkkeli; C.J. Kock; P.A.S. Salmi
Lieberman, M., & Montgomery, D. (1988). First mover advantage. Strategic
Management Journal, 9(S1/Summer), 41-58.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.
Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
Nash, J. (1950). The bargaining problem. Econometrica, 18(2), 155-162.
Nash, J. (1953). Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica, 21(1), 128-140.
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
N.N. 2007, Intel personal communication, 24 September.
N.N. 2007, Philips personal communication, 22 August.
Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resourcebased
view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179-191.
Philips. (2004). Research Password Magazine. Issue 19, Apr2004. Retrieved Jan
8th, 2009, from http://www.research.philips.com/password/download/
password_19.pdf
Philips. (2006). Research Password Magazine. Issue 27, May 2006. Retrieved Jan
8th, 2009, from http://www.research.philips.com/password/download/
password_27.pdf
Rivette, K. G., & Kline, D. (2000). Rembrandts in the attic: Unlocking the hidden
value of patents. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Sakakibara, M. (2003). Knowledge sharing in cooperative research and
development. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(2-3), 117-132.
Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207 ©© JIEM, 2009 – 2(1): 176-207 – ISSN: 2013-0953
The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective 206
M.T. Torkkeli; C.J. Kock; P.A.S. Salmi
Teece, D. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for
integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285-
305.
Tennenhouse, D. (2004). Intel’s open collaborative model of industry-university
research. Research Technology Management, 49(4), 19-26.
Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing innovation: Integrating
technological, market and organizational change. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Tschirky, H., Koruna, S. M., & Lichtenthaler, E. (2004). Technology marketing: a
firm’s core competence? International Journal of Technology Management,
27(2/3), 115-122.
Tsai, K-H., & Wang, J-C. (2007). Inward technology licensing and firm
performance: a longitudinal study. R&D Management, 37(2), 151-160.
van de Vrande, V., Lemmens, C., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2006). Choosing
governance modes for external technology sourcing. R&D Management, 36(3),
347-363.
Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., & Noorderhaven, N. (2002). External technology
sourcing through alliances or acquisitions: An analysis of the application-specific
integrated circuits industry. Organization Science, 13(6), 714-733.
Vanhaverbeke, W., Gelsin, V., & Duysters, G. (2007). Exploration and exploitation
in technology-based alliance networks. Academy of Management Proceedings,
2007, 1-6.
Veugelers, R., & Cassiman, B. (1999). Make and buy in innovation strategies:
evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 28(1), 63-80.
West, J. (2006). Does appropriability enable or retard open innovation? In H.
Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke & J. West (Eds.), Open Innovation: Researching a
new paradigm (pp. 109-133.) USA: Oxford University Press.
Williamson, O. (1979). Transaction cost economics: The governance of contractual
relations. The Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233-261.
doi:10.3926/jiem.2009.v2n1.p176-207 ©© JIEM, 2009 – 2(1): 176-207 – ISSN: 2013-0953
The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective 207
M.T. Torkkeli; C.J. Kock; P.A.S. Salmi
Winter, S. (1995). Four Rs of profitability: Rents, resources, routines and
replication. In C. Montgomery (Ed.), Resource-based and evolutionary theories of
the firm: Towards a synthesis (pp. 147-178). Boston: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Woodward, J. (1965). Industrial organization: Theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com