scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Posted Content

An Overview of Innovation

01 Jan 2009-Research Papers in Economics (World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.)-pp 173-203
TL;DR: The process of innovation must be viewed as a series of changes in a complete system not only of hardware, but also of market environment, production facilities and knowledge, and the social contexts of the innovation organization as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Models that depict innovation as a smooth, well-behaved linear process badly misspecify the nature and direction of the causal factors at work. Innovation is complex, uncertain, somewhat disorderly, and subject to changes of many sorts. Innovation is also difficult to measure and demands close coordination of adequate technical knowledge and excellent market judgment in order to satisfy economic, technological, and other types of constraints—all simultaneously. The process of innovation must be viewed as a series of changes in a complete system not only of hardware, but also of market environment, production facilities and knowledge, and the social contexts of the innovation organization.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compared two modes of innovation, Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) and Doing, Using and Interacting (DUI), and found that firms combining the two modes are more likely to innovate new products or services than those relying primarily on one mode or the other.

1,605 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a core of the innovation system is defined and it is illustrated that it is necessary both to understand micro-behaviour in the core and understand the wider setting within which the core operates.
Abstract: The term national system of innovation has been around for more than 20 years and today it has become widely spread among policy makers as well as among scholars all over the world. This paper takes stock and looks ahead from a somewhat personal point of view. It also gives some insight into how and why the concept came about. The paper argues that a key to progress is to get a better understanding of knowledge and learning as the basis for innovation and to understand how different modes of innovation complement each other and find support in the specific national context. A core of the innovation system is defined and it is illustrated that it is necessary both to understand micro‐behaviour in the core and understand “the wider setting” within which the core operates. Concepts used in organization theory referring to fit and misfit may be used to enrich the understanding of the performance of innovation systems. At the end of the paper I discuss some further developments needed to make the concept relev...

1,340 citations


Cites background from "An Overview of Innovation"

  • ...It was based upon an accumulation of empirical studies at different levels of aggregation showing that innovation is an interactive process (Rothwell, 1977; Lundvall, 1985; Kline and Rosenberg, 1986)....

    [...]

  • ...The IKE group, inspired by French structuralist Marxists and development economists, contributed with ideas about ‘‘national production systems’’ and ‘‘industrial complexes’’ where vertical interaction was seen as crucial for national economic performance and linked this to the analysis of…...

    [...]

  • ...For instance ‘‘the chain-linked model’’, by Kline and Rosenberg (1986), was important because it gave specific form to an alternative to a linear model, where new technology is assumed to develop directly on the basis of scientific efforts, and, thereafter, to be materialized in new marketed…...

    [...]

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation is presented, which suggests a four-phase model in which a linear process of obtaining, integrating, integrating and commercializing external innovations is combined with interaction between the firm and its collaborators.
Abstract: This article reviews research on open innovation that considers how and why firms commercialize external sources of innovations. It examines both the “outside-in” and “coupled” modes of Enkel et al. (2009). From an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation, it suggests a four-phase model in which a linear process — (1) obtaining, (2) integrating and (3) commercializing external innovations — is combined with (4) interaction between the firm and its collaborators. This model is used to classify papers taken from the top 25 innovation journals identified by Linton and Thongpapan (2004), complemented by highly cited work beyond those journals. A review of 291 open innovation-related publications from these sources shows that the majority of these articles indeed address elements of this inbound open innovation process model. Specifically, it finds that researchers have front-loaded their examination of the leveraging process, with an emphasis on obtaining innovations from external sources. However, there is a relative dearth of research related to integrating and commercializing these innovations.Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring — each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including not-invented-here). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as co-creation, network collaboration and community innovation.This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on inter-organizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The article concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end-to-end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation.

1,306 citations


Cites background from "An Overview of Innovation"

  • ...While Chesbrough (2003b, 2006a) augments the linear vertically integrated model of innovation commercialization with external sourcing, other models of industrial innovation include feedback loops, whether in general terms (Kline and Rosenberg, 1986) or to address specific needs....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the diffusion and characteristics of collaborative relationships between universities and industry are explored, and a research agenda informed by an open innovation perspective is developed. But the authors focus on the effects of university-industry links on innovation-specific variables, such as patents or firm innovativeness, and the dynamics of these relationships remain under-researched.
Abstract: Organisations increasingly rely on external sources of innovation via interorganisational network relationships. This article explores the diffusion and characteristics of collaborative relationships between universities and industry, and develops a research agenda informed by an ‘open innovation’ perspective. A framework is proposed, distinguishing university-industry relationships from other mechanisms such as technology transfer or human mobility. On the basis of the existing body of research, the role of practices such as collaborative research, university-industry research centres, contract research and academic consulting is analysed. The evidence suggests that such university-industry relationships are widely practiced whereby differences exist across industries and scientific disciplines. While most existing research focuses on the effects of university-industry links on innovation-specific variables, such as patents or firm innovativeness, the organisational dynamics of these relationships remain under-researched. A detailed research agenda addresses research needs in two main areas: search and match processes between universities and firms, and the organisation and management of collaborative relationships.

1,272 citations


Cites result from "An Overview of Innovation"

  • ...This is consistent with ‘non-linear’ views of the innovation process championed by Kline and Rosenberg (1986) and von Hippel (1986) that © Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2007 267 emphasize the role of downstream development or consumers and buyers....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The 'Quadruple Helix' emphasises the importance of also integrating the perspective of the media-based and culture-based public, and results is an emerging fractal knowledge and innovation ecosystem, well-configured for the knowledge economy and society.
Abstract: 'Mode 3' allows and emphasises the co-existence and co-evolution of different knowledge and innovation paradigms: the competitiveness and superiority of a knowledge system is highly determined by its adaptive capacity to combine and integrate different knowledge and innovation modes via co-evolution, co-specialisation and co-opetition knowledge stock and flow dynamics. The 'Quadruple Helix' emphasises the importance of also integrating the perspective of the media-based and culture-based public. What results is an emerging fractal knowledge and innovation ecosystem, well-configured for the knowledge economy and society.

1,267 citations


Cites background from "An Overview of Innovation"

  • ...The ‘chain-linked model’, developed by Kline and Rosenberg (1986) (cited according to Miyata (2003, p.716) see furthermore Carayannis and Alexander, 2006)), emphasises the importance of feedback between the different R&D stages....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a core of the innovation system is defined and it is illustrated that it is necessary both to understand micro-behaviour in the core and understand the wider setting within which the core operates.
Abstract: The term national system of innovation has been around for more than 20 years and today it has become widely spread among policy makers as well as among scholars all over the world. This paper takes stock and looks ahead from a somewhat personal point of view. It also gives some insight into how and why the concept came about. The paper argues that a key to progress is to get a better understanding of knowledge and learning as the basis for innovation and to understand how different modes of innovation complement each other and find support in the specific national context. A core of the innovation system is defined and it is illustrated that it is necessary both to understand micro‐behaviour in the core and understand “the wider setting” within which the core operates. Concepts used in organization theory referring to fit and misfit may be used to enrich the understanding of the performance of innovation systems. At the end of the paper I discuss some further developments needed to make the concept relev...

1,340 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation is presented, which suggests a four-phase model in which a linear process of obtaining, integrating, integrating and commercializing external innovations is combined with interaction between the firm and its collaborators.
Abstract: This article reviews research on open innovation that considers how and why firms commercialize external sources of innovations. It examines both the “outside-in” and “coupled” modes of Enkel et al. (2009). From an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation, it suggests a four-phase model in which a linear process — (1) obtaining, (2) integrating and (3) commercializing external innovations — is combined with (4) interaction between the firm and its collaborators. This model is used to classify papers taken from the top 25 innovation journals identified by Linton and Thongpapan (2004), complemented by highly cited work beyond those journals. A review of 291 open innovation-related publications from these sources shows that the majority of these articles indeed address elements of this inbound open innovation process model. Specifically, it finds that researchers have front-loaded their examination of the leveraging process, with an emphasis on obtaining innovations from external sources. However, there is a relative dearth of research related to integrating and commercializing these innovations.Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring — each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including not-invented-here). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as co-creation, network collaboration and community innovation.This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on inter-organizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The article concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end-to-end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation.

1,306 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the diffusion and characteristics of collaborative relationships between universities and industry are explored, and a research agenda informed by an open innovation perspective is developed. But the authors focus on the effects of university-industry links on innovation-specific variables, such as patents or firm innovativeness, and the dynamics of these relationships remain under-researched.
Abstract: Organisations increasingly rely on external sources of innovation via interorganisational network relationships. This article explores the diffusion and characteristics of collaborative relationships between universities and industry, and develops a research agenda informed by an ‘open innovation’ perspective. A framework is proposed, distinguishing university-industry relationships from other mechanisms such as technology transfer or human mobility. On the basis of the existing body of research, the role of practices such as collaborative research, university-industry research centres, contract research and academic consulting is analysed. The evidence suggests that such university-industry relationships are widely practiced whereby differences exist across industries and scientific disciplines. While most existing research focuses on the effects of university-industry links on innovation-specific variables, such as patents or firm innovativeness, the organisational dynamics of these relationships remain under-researched. A detailed research agenda addresses research needs in two main areas: search and match processes between universities and firms, and the organisation and management of collaborative relationships.

1,272 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The 'Quadruple Helix' emphasises the importance of also integrating the perspective of the media-based and culture-based public, and results is an emerging fractal knowledge and innovation ecosystem, well-configured for the knowledge economy and society.
Abstract: 'Mode 3' allows and emphasises the co-existence and co-evolution of different knowledge and innovation paradigms: the competitiveness and superiority of a knowledge system is highly determined by its adaptive capacity to combine and integrate different knowledge and innovation modes via co-evolution, co-specialisation and co-opetition knowledge stock and flow dynamics. The 'Quadruple Helix' emphasises the importance of also integrating the perspective of the media-based and culture-based public. What results is an emerging fractal knowledge and innovation ecosystem, well-configured for the knowledge economy and society.

1,267 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the role of different types of collaborative networks in achieving product innovations and their degree of novelty was theoretically and empirically analyzed, using data from a longitudinal sample of Spanish manufacturing firms.

1,197 citations