Advertisement

The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 236–252 | Cite as

Glocal targeted open innovation: challenges, opportunities and implications for theory, policy and practice

Article

Abstract

In line with the growing number and type of innovation sources and partners, companies’ institutional set up to manage the potential problems of multiple sources and partners for innovation is increasingly challenged to develop and maintain effective and efficient corporate innovation activities. The paper highlights recent developments of open innovation in companies. Findings are based on company case studies involving companies from different industries and company representatives. It shows that open innovation is actually a paradigm long practised but the main efforts are targeted to continuously developing the organization and managerial model of companies to meet the new innovation challenges.

Keywords

Open innovation Globalisation Innovation culture Organization of innovation Innovation process 

JEL Classification

L22 L24 M14 O31 O32 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The article was prepared within the framework of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) and supported within the framework of the subsidy granted to the HSE by the Government of the Russian Federation for the implementation of the Global Competitiveness Program.

References

  1. Angel, R. (2006). Putting an innovation culture into practice. Ivey Business Journal, 1–5, Reprint # 9B06TA08, available online http://www.gilfordgrp.com/articles/Ivey%20Innovation%20Culture.pdf, last accessed 05 September 2013-09-05.
  2. Bianchi, M., Cavaliere, A., Chiaroni, D., Frattini, F., & Chiesa, V. (2011). Organisational modes for open innovation in the bio-pharmaceutical industry: An exploratory analysis. Technovation, 31(2011), 22–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caetano, M., & Amaral, D. C. (2011). Roadmapping for technology push and partnership: A contribution for open innovation environments. Technovation,. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2011.01.005.Google Scholar
  4. Carayannis, E. G., Meissner, D., & Edelkina, A. (2015). Targeted innovation policy and practice intelligence (TIP2E): Concepts and implications for theory, policy and practice. The Journal of Technology Transfer,. doi: 10.1007/s10961-015-9433-8.Google Scholar
  5. Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2011). The open innovation journey: How firms dynamically implement the emerging innovation management paradigm. Technovation, 31(2011), 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cooke, P. (2005). Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation exploring ‘Globalisation 2’—A new model of industry organization. Research Policy, 34(2005), 1128–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dahlandera, L., & Gann, D. M. (2010). How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39(2010), 699–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Döring, T., & Schnellenbach, J. (2004). What do we know about geographical knowledge spillovers and regional growth?—A Survey of the Literature. Deutsche Bank Research, Research Notes, Working Paper Series, October 12, 2004, No. 14.Google Scholar
  10. Doz, Y., Santos, J., & Wiliamson, P. (2004). Is your innovation process global? INSEAD Working Paper Series 2004/09/SM.Google Scholar
  11. Fallick, B., Fleischman, C. A., & Rebitzer, J. B. (2006). Job-hopping in Silicon Valley: Some evidence concerning the microfoundations of a high-technology cluster. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(3), 472–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ferrary, M. (2011). Specialized organizations and ambidextrous clusters in the open innovation paradigm. European Management Journal, 29, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fritsch, M., & Franke, G. (2004). Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation. Research Policy, 33(2), 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gassmann, O. (2006). Opening up the innovation process: Towards an agenda. R&D Management, 36, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gassmann, O., Enkel, E., & Chesbrough, H. (2010). The future of open innovation. R&D Management, 40, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harison, E., & Koski, H. (2009). Applying open innovation in business strategies: Evidence from Finnish software firms. Research Policy, 39(2010), 351–359.Google Scholar
  17. Huizingh, E. K. R. E. (2011). Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 31(2011), 2–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kesidou, E., & Szirmai, A. (2007). Local knowledge spillovers, innovation and economic performance in developing countries: Empirical evidence from the uruguay software cluster. In UNU-MERIT conference on “Micro Evidence on Innovation in Developing Economies”. Maastricht (Netherlands), May 31 & June 1, 2007.Google Scholar
  19. Khripunova, A., Vishnevskiy, K., Karasev, O., & Meissner, D. (2014). Corporate foresight for corporate functions: Impacts from purchasing functions. Strategic Change, 23, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kotsemir, M., & Meissner, D. (2013). Conceptualizing the innovation process—Trends and outlook. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No WP BRP 10/STI/2013, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2249782.
  21. Lee, S. P., Gwangman, Y., & Byungun, P. J. (2010). Open innovation in SMEs—An intermediated network model. Research Policy, 39(2010), 290–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lichtenthaler, U. (2010). Technology exploitation in the context of open innovation: Finding the right ‘job’for your technology. Technovation, 30(2010), 429–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lichtenthaler, U. (2011a). Open innovation: Past research, current debates, and future directions. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(1), 75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lichtenthaler, U. (2011b). Is open innovation a field of study or a communication barrier to theory development? A contribution to the current debate. Technovation, 31, 138–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luoma, T., Paasi, J., & Valkokari, K. (2010). Intellectual property in inter-organisational relationships: Findings from an interview study. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14(3), 399–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mancusi, M. L. (2008). International spillovers and absorptive capacity: A cross-country cross-sector analysis based on patents and citations. Journal of International Economics, 76(2008), 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Meissner, D. (2015a). Developing ‘green thinking’ towards sustainability. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 6(3), 4–7.Google Scholar
  28. Meissner, D. (2015b). Public-private partnership models for science, technology, and innovation cooperation. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. doi: 10.1007/s13132-015-0310-3.Google Scholar
  29. Proskuryakova, L., Meissner, D., & Rudnik, P. (2014). The use of technology platforms as a policy tool to address research challenges and technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s10961-014-9373-8.
  30. Simmie, J. (2003). Innovation and urban regions as national and international nodes for the transfer and sharing of knowledge. Regional Studies, 37(6–7), 607–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Spithoven, A., Clarysse, B., & Knockaert, M. (2010). Building absorptive capacity to organise inbound open innovationin traditional industries. Technovation, 30(2010), 130–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. van de Vrande, V., de Jong, J., Vanhaverbeke, W., & de Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6–7), 423–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van den Biesen, J. (2008). Open Innovation @ Philips research; presentation at the business symposium “open innovation in global networks” organised by the OECD and the danish enterprise and construction authority. Copenhagen, February 25–26.Google Scholar
  34. Vishnevskiy, K., Karasev, O., & Meissner, D. (2015). Integrated roadmaps and corporate foresight as tools of innovation management: The case of Russian companies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, 433–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. West, J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2008). Getting clear about communities in open innovation. Industry and Innovation, 15(2), 223–231. doi: 10.1080/13662710802033734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zaytseva, A., Shuvalova, O., & Meissner, D. (2013). User innovation—Empirical evidence from Russia. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP 08/STI/2013, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2246685.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Science, Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship (STIE), European Union Research CenterGWU School of Business (GWU SB)WashingtonUSA
  2. 2.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations