Showing papers on "Open innovation published in 2012"
01 Jan 2012
TL;DR: In this paper, a new approach to national systems of innovation is proposed, where the public sector is viewed as a pacer in the development of industrial networks, and the role of finance in national system of innovation.
Abstract: Part 1 Towards a new approach to national systems of innovation: institutional learning, Bjorn Johnson user-producer relationships and national systems of innovation, Bengt-Ake Lundvall approaching national systems of innovation from the production and linkage structure, Esben Sloth Andersen. Part 2 A closer look at national systems of innovation: work organization and the innovation design dilemma, Allan Naes Gjerding innovation and the development of industrial networks, Lars Gelsing the public sector as a pacer in national systems of innovation, Birgitte Gregersen the role of finance in national systems of innovation, Jesper Lindgaard Christensen national systems of education and vocational training, Jarl Bengtsson formal scientific and technical institutions in the national system of innovation, Christopher Freeman. Part 3 Opening national systems of innovation - specialization, multinational corporations and integration: export specialization, structural competitiveness and national systems of innovation, Bent Dalum the home market hypothesis re-examined - the impact of domestic user-producer interaction on export specialization, Jan Fragerberg national systems of innovation, multinational enterprises and the contemporary process of globalization, Francois Chesnais integration, innovation and policy with special respect to EC and IT, Esben Sloth-Andersen and Asger Braendgaard perspectives and policy conclusions, Bengt-Ake Lundvall et al.
6,007 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the effects of four inbound open innovation activities on innovation performance of SMEs and found that different open innovation activity are beneficial for different innovation outcomes.
Abstract: Prior studies suggest that open innovation activities positively influence innovation outcomes in large firms. However, few studies have investigated the implications of small and medium-sized enterprises’ (SMEs) adoption of open innovation. We address this research gap by investigating the effects of four inbound open innovation activities on innovation performance of SMEs. In doing so, we draw on data from 252 high-tech SMEs. Our results reveal that different open innovation activities are beneficial for different innovation outcomes. For instance, technology sourcing is linked to radical innovation performance, whereas technology scouting is linked to incremental innovation performance. These findings hold several important theoretical and practical implications.
639 citations
TL;DR: The concept of open innovation has been adopted by hundreds of academic articles and has been incorporated into the innovation practices of a similarly large number of companies as mentioned in this paper. But it has not yet been widely adopted in the real world.
Abstract: OVERVIEW:The term “open innovation” was introduced in my 2003 book, which outlined a new model for industrial innovation. Since that time, the concept has been adopted by hundreds of academic articles and been incorporated into the innovation practices of a similarly large number of companies. At the editors' invitation, this article reviews this recent history and offers a perspective on where open innovation is going in the future.
445 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, living labs are networks that can help companies create innovations that have a superior match with user needs and can be upscaled promptly to the global market, and this knowledge will help them to identify which actor drives the innovation, to anticipate likely outcomes, and to decide what kind of role they should play while "living labbing".
Abstract: Living labs bring experimentation out of companies’ RD this knowledge will help them to identify which actor drives the innovation, to anticipate likely outcomes, and to decide what kind of role they should play while "living labbing". Living labs are networks that can help them create innovations that have a superior match with user needs and can be upscaled promptly to the global market. By living labs, we mean reconstructing the interaction space. It can be any space, anywhere, suitable for collaborative design, the application of knowledge for empowerment, uplift, and development of people and communities for the use of innovation. An interviewee in this study
368 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors sketch an alternative "innovation" practice more in line with the original visions of participatory design based on their experience of running Malmo Living Labs, an open innovation milieu where new constellations, issues and ideas evolve from bottom-up long-term collaborations among diverse stakeholders.
Abstract: Participatory design (PD) has become increasingly engaged in public spheres and everyday life and is no longer solely concerned with the workplace. This is not only a shift from work-oriented productive activities to leisure and pleasurable engagements, but also a new milieu for production and ‘innovation’. What ‘democratic innovation’ entails is often currently defined by management and innovation research, which claims that innovation has been democratised through easy access to production tools and lead-users as the new experts driving innovation. We sketch an alternative ‘innovation’ practice more in line with the original visions of PD based on our experience of running Malmo Living Labs – an open innovation milieu where new constellations, issues and ideas evolve from bottom–up long-term collaborations among diverse stakeholders. Three cases and controversial matters of concern are discussed. The fruitfulness of the concepts ‘agonistic public spaces’ (as opposed to consensual decision-making), ‘thin...
299 citations
TL;DR: The challenges and how the Open PHACTS project is hoping to address these challenges technically and socially are laid out.
298 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a profile of early open innovation adopters based on collected data from secondary sources is presented. But, although outside-in open innovation principles seem to be popular, there have been emerging attempts to exploit the value of government data through inside-out approaches.
Abstract: Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine the current open innovation practices in the public sector of leading countries.Design/methodology/approach – Using a framework based on the role of the government in open innovation, this study analyses a profile of early open innovation adopters based on collected data from secondary sources.Findings – First, the USA, Australia and Singapore developed open innovation policies at the national level, facilitating a positive innovation climate. Many projects, especially those in online platforms, were established under these policies. Second, although outside‐in open innovation principles seem to be popular, there have been emerging attempts to exploit the value of government data through inside‐out approaches.Research limitations/implications – Most governments are in the early stages of adoption of open innovation and are in the process of understanding relevant issues. Future research should investigate how governments adopt open innovation, in particula...
259 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors contrast the vertically integrated innovation model to open innovation, user innovation, as well as other distributed processes (cumulative innovation, communities or social production, and co-creation), while also discuss open source software and crowdsourcing as applications of the perspectives.
Abstract: Research from a variety of perspectives has argued that innovation no longer takes place within a single organization, but rather is distributed across multiple stakeholders in a value network. Here we contrast the vertically integrated innovation model to open innovation, user innovation, as well as other distributed processes (cumulative innovation, communities or social production, and co-creation), while we also discuss open source software and crowdsourcing as applications of the perspectives. We consider differences in the nature of distributed innovation, as well as its origins and its effects. From this, we contrast the predictions of the perspectives on the sources, motivation and value appropriation of external innovation, and thereby provide a framework for the strategic management of distributed innovation.
222 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors suggest that the literature on Absorptive Capacity does not place sufficient emphasis on distributed knowledge and learning or on the application of innovative knowledge, and they suggest that to accomplish physical transformations, organisations need specific Innovative Capacities that extend beyond knowledge management.
220 citations
TL;DR: This paper addresses crowdsourcing, an under-researched type of open innovation that is often enabled by the web, and defines crowdsourcing as an open innovation model, and clarifies how crowdsourcing differs from other types of 'open' innovation (e.g. outsourcing and open-source).
Abstract: Open innovation has gained increased attention as a potential paradigm for improving innovation performance. This paper addresses crowdsourcing, an under-researched type of open innovation that is often enabled by the web. We focus on a type of crowdsourcing where financial rewards exist, where a crowd is tasked with solving problems which solution seekers anticipate to be empirically provable, but where the source of solutions is uncertain and addressing the challenge in-house perceived to be too high-risk. There is a growing recourse to crowdsourcing, but we really know little about its effectiveness, best practices, challenges and implications. We consider the shift to more open innovation trajectories over time, define crowdsourcing as an open innovation model, and clarify how crowdsourcing differs from other types of 'open' innovation (e.g. outsourcing and open-source). We explore who is crowdsourcing and how, looking at the potential diversity and core features and variables implicated in crowdsourcing models.
180 citations
TL;DR: It is found that allying firms realize significant positive abnormal returns when their entry into an OIA is made public, and that an incumbent rival that did not participate in the alliance appears to gain greater "free-riding" benefits from the OIA, as compared to peer rivals.
Abstract: In this study, we investigate the economic and strategic value of open innovation alliances (OIAs), in which collaborators and competitors integrate in the pursuit of the codevelopment of technological innovations. Given that OIAs differ substantially from traditional, closed alliances in many aspects, including their strategic scope and scale, governing mechanisms, and member composition, it is important to understand and assess the potential value inherent in these new modes of collaboration. Furthermore, OIAs evolve over time as the participating members are free to enter and leave at will. Therefore, we also examine the on-going value creation and wealth spillover that result from changes in membership. Moreover, we investigate how a firm's participation in an IT-based open alliance alters the market value of its rivals operating within the same marketplace. To gain additional insight into the factors that moderate the market valuation of OIA participation, several contextual factors, including the degree of partner heterogeneity, innovation type, and degree of openness of the OIAs are used to account for variability in abnormal returns. Based on 194 observations, we found that allying firms realize significant positive abnormal returns when their entry into an OIA is made public. The results also suggest that substantial excessive returns accrue to the allying firms with the belated entry of a market leader firm. Furthermore, we discovered that a firm's entry into an OIA increases, rather than decreases, the market valuation of its rivals. Interestingly, an incumbent rival that did not participate in the alliance appears to gain greater "free-riding" benefits from the OIA, as compared to peer rivals. Innovation type and openness were significantly associated with the amount of abnormal returns accruing to allying firms, while no significance was found for partner heterogeneity. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of the implications of our findings for research and practice with respect to value cocreation in multifirm environments.
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this paper, a special issue focusing on collaborative innovation in the public sector is presented, which explores how networks, partnerships and other forms of interaction between relevant and affected actors can accommodate the development and implementation of new and bold ideas in ways that reinvigorate public policies and services.
Abstract: This special issue focuses on collaborative innovation in the public sector (Bommert, 2010; Sorensen and Torfing, 2011). It aims to explore how networks, partnerships and other forms of interaction between relevant and affected actors can accommodate the development and implementation of new and bold ideas in ways that reinvigorate public policies and services (Eggers and Singh, 2009). There has been a growing interest in public innovation (Newman, Raine and Skelcher, 2001; Borins, 2008; Hartley, 2005) and there is a burgeoning literature on the role of interactive forms of governance such as partnerships and networks (Kickert, Klijn and Koppenjan, 1997; Rhodes, 1997; Sorensen and Torfing, 2007). However, so far there have been few attempts to relate these fields of interests and bodies of literature by analyzing how interactive arenas can facilitate multi-actor collaboration that in turn may foster innovation by bringing together public and private actors with relevant innovation assets, facilitating knowledge sharing and transformative learning, and building joint ownership to new innovative visions and practices.In order to compensate this benign neglect this issue of The Innovation Journal endeavors to investigate when and how multi-actor collaboration can enhance public innovation. In this brief introduction we shall first look at the main differences between private and public innovation and the mounting interest in public innovation before presenting the argument in favor of collaborative innovation as a key driver of policy development and service improvement. Since the role and impact of collaborative innovation is determined by political-institutional macro-conditions as well as a number of micro-interventions, the Introduction concludes a discussion of the significance of the transition from Old Public Administration, via New Public Management, to New Public Governance and the importance of new forms of innovation management.Innovation in the private and public sectorIt is common knowledge that innovation is the key to success for private businesses (Schumpeter, 1934, 1946). Innovation helps private companies to cut costs, improve their products and open new markets. Failure to innovate is often fatal as private firms will gradually loose their competitive edge and face shrinking market shares and profits, before they eventually close down. The widespread recognition of the need for innovation in private companies means that large private enterprises create large R&D departments or use crowd-sourcing to get new ideas. Small and medium size companies form strategic alliances with each other and public knowledge producers and try to copy the products and practices of the larger and more innovative firms in order to maintain their competitive position.When it comes to the public sector there is a lot of skepticism with regard to the capacity for innovating public policies, organizations and services. Many people, and especially a good deal of those employed in the private sector, consider the public sector as a slow-moving bureaucracy characterized by red tape, inertia and stalemate. Indeed, pointing out the lack of dynamism and adaptive change in the public sector was a key part of the neo-liberalist bashing of the public sector in the 1980s.The critical evaluation of the innovative capacity of the public sector is not completely misguided. Max Weber (1968 [1922]) clearly sees stability as the primary objective of public bureaucracy, and we can hardly deny that the thick layer of formal rules, the multi-layered hierarchies, the organizational silos, the lack of economic incentives and the divided political leadership in the top of public bureaucracies tend to stifle public innovation (Halvorsen et al., 2005). In addition, it has been argued that with the growth of public bureaucracies most of their resources are used to provide internal coordination and fight external border wars with other public bureaucracies (Downs, 1967). …
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate the underlying drivers of openness in innovation, and find that the most important factors that increase the degree of openness are a firm's need for financial funding in innovation and the effectiveness of its IP protection mechanisms.
TL;DR: This publication contains reprint articles from the Ask*IEEE Document Delivery Service which IEEE does not hold copyright.
Abstract: A recession often forces you to cut RD others call for spinning off projects as separate ventures that still allow you to retain some equity. Whatever the specific approach, you can meet the inherent cultural and organizational challenges of inside-out open innovation by approaching it holistically and placing it under the leadership of senior executives in strategic roles.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the performance of firms in Peru in relation to entrepreneurial orientation and involvement in open innovation and find that firms with higher sales growth did not exhibit more of an entrepreneurial orientation or utilize a double loop learning style.
Abstract: Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to examine the performance of firms in Peru in relation to entrepreneurial orientation and involvement in open innovation.Design/methodology/approach – Data were acquired through a survey of middle and senior managers employed in Peruvian companies.Findings – Firms achieving higher sales growth did not exhibit more of an entrepreneurial orientation or utilize a double loop learning style. More entrepreneurial firms appear to have adopted a double loop learning approach to knowledge acquisition. Peruvian firms involved in open innovation reported higher sales growth and indicated greater reliance on the use of double loop learning.Practical implications – The practical implications of the study are that firms in emerging economies do not have to be reliant on entrepreneurial behaviour to sustain business growth. Nevertheless involvement in open innovation can be beneficial.Originality/value – The originality of this paper is that although the results are only for compa...
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the results of a consortial benchmarking project that studied the supplier relationship management tactics of several best-practice firms and propose additional sourcing criteria to identify innovative suppliers and introduce a supplier portfolio model based on customer attractiveness and supplier competence.
Abstract: OVERVIEW:In the context of open innovation, firms increasingly rely on the collaboration of suppliers in their innovation processes. However, not all competent suppliers are willing to collaborate with all buyers, which is why achieving preferred customer status with key suppliers becomes important. This paper presents the results of a consortial benchmarking project that studied the supplier relationship management tactics of several best-practice firms. It identifies characteristics of suppliers who innovate well with their customers and emphasizes the importance of a firm establishing itself as an attractive customer as a prerequisite of successful buyer-supplier collaborations. This paper proposes additional sourcing criteria to identify innovative suppliers and introduces a supplier portfolio model based on customer attractiveness and supplier competence.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore how community-controlled open innovation affects cost and differentiation-based competitive advantage, and explain how it allows some sources of economic rent to remain while others are taken away.
Abstract: Purpose – This paper aims to explore how community‐controlled open innovation affects cost‐ and differentiation‐based competitive advantage, and to explain how it allows some sources of economic rent to remain while others are taken away. Although models of competitive‐advantage remain relevant, open innovation means that the main drivers of performance are changed. Open innovation means that there are implications for firms' ability to profit from intellectual property that they do not own. The paper seeks to address those issues.Design/methodology/approach – The work is conceptual.Findings – Economic rents from property rights disappear, those from economies of scale and capital requirements are reduced, but those from experience‐curve effects, differentiation, distribution, and switching costs remain. Similarly, rents from the difficult‐to‐imitate resources of networks and reputation remain intact, and while those from employee knowhow and culture remain, they are likely to be in reduced amounts.Resear...
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explain why inter-firm variations in the strategic decision to actively seek and acquire external scientific knowledge impact not only financial performance but also the effects of firms' own R&D.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors developed an indicator framework for examining open innovation practices and their impact on performance, which is based on Community Innovation Survey (CIS) data for Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Norway.
Abstract: This paper develops an indicator framework for examining open innovation practices and their impact on performance. The analysis, which is based on Community Innovation Survey (CIS) data for Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Norway, yields a number of interesting results. First, we find that open innovation practices have a strong impact on innovation performance. Second, results suggest that broad-based approaches yield the strongest impacts, and that the collective of open innovation strategies appear more important than individual practices. Third, intramural investments are still important for innovative performance, stressing that open innovation is not a substitute for internal knowledge building.
TL;DR: Examining one type of innovation intermediary, the 'Solver Brokerage,' reveals that broker-provided value-added 'orchestration' services need to enable knowledge mobility and appropriability, and to ensure that 'unsuccessful' innovation seekers and providers appropriate sufficient value to participate again.
Abstract: Exemplars of open innovation have revealed that intellectual property (IP) need not only be sourced through existing hierarchical or market relationships. Rather IP can be acquired from individuals and firms with whom an organization has no prior relationship. In such cases, an intermediary, operating as an innovation exchange or brokerage, frequently facilitates the development and acquisition of IP. This paper examines one type of innovation intermediary, the 'Solver Brokerage,' which enables innovation exchanges between organizations and unknown external firms and individuals (i.e. a crowdsourcing process). While the commercial success of Solver Brokerages indicates the potency of arguments concerning the potential of crowdsourcing, little is known about the operation of such brokerages or the crowdsourcing processes that they enable. This paper examines extant research on innovation networks, crowdsourcing, and electronic marketplaces to identify three processes (knowledge mobility, appropriability and stability) that we argue are necessary to 'orchestrate' crowdsourcing. Using a field study of four Solver Brokerages, an innovation seeking organization, as well as 15 innovation providers (i.e. members of the 'crowd'), the paper illustrates the ways in which the three orchestration processes are enhanced in Solver Brokerages. It reveals that while knowledge mobility and appropriability processes can be enhanced by activities under the control of the Solver Brokerage, stability is largely determined by innovation seeking organizations and the innovation providers. The paper concludes that broker-provided value-added 'orchestration' services need to enable knowledge mobility and appropriability, and to ensure that 'unsuccessful' innovation seekers and providers appropriate sufficient value to participate again.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the nature and impact of universities and other higher education institutions on firms' innovation and growth in an increasingly distributed and open innovation system, using a survey of some 400 firms in the UK.
Abstract: The paper will explore the nature and impact of universities and other higher education institutions (HEIs) on firms’ innovation and growth in an increasingly distributed and open innovation system, using a survey of some 400 firms in the UK. The analysis reveals significant differences in firms’ collaboration with HEIs across the UK and the value and impact that such collaborations have on a firm’s development. The nature and effects of such collaboration vary significantly between the type of firm involved and their location, and the analysis investigates this in relation to various aspects of innovative activity and firms’ performance. Much of the nature and effects of such collaboration are, as one would expect, counterintuitive and highlight the care we should place on assessing the role of universities and other HEIs in open innovation systems.
TL;DR: In this article, the influence of inside-out open innovation on firm innovation performance was examined empirically using survey data collected from stock-listed companies in Germany, Switzerland and Austria.
Abstract: Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of inside‐out open innovation (as opposed to closed innovation) on firm innovation performance. Inside‐out open innovation involves the exploitation of existing internal technologies through innovation and commercialization.Design/methodology/approach – Hypotheses are tested empirically using survey data collected from stock‐listed companies in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The data include the complete responses from 141 R&D managers for the period from 2004 to 2008.Findings – The results reveal that companies that emphasize inside‐out open innovation are more likely to create radical innovations and tend to sell a greater number of new products. Companies pursuing closed innovation are more likely to exhibit a higher incremental product innovation performance.Research limitations/implications – The cross‐sectional data approach and its dependency on the perceptions and experiences of the respondents has its limitations. Future research ...
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore linkages among Open Innovation practices and firm performance and empirically test their framework on a sample of 105 companies listed on the Industrial Machinery and Component index of NASDAQ.
Abstract: The focus of this paper is on exploring linkages among Open Innovation practices and firm performance. While, in the last ten years, a certain amount of papers facing such issue has been published, most of them treat inbound, outbound, and coupled innovation practice processes separately respect to different dimensions of innovation and financial performance. We argue that the concurrent influence of specific Open Innovation practices on both innovation and economic-financial firms' performance has not been investigated so far into the literature and it is of primary managerial importance. We empirically test our framework on a sample of 105 companies listed on the Industrial Machinery and Component index of NASDAQ.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined multiple network characteristics simultaneously in relation to innovation performance and thereby aligns with and builds further on configuration theory, which posits that for each set of network characteristics, there exists an ideal set of organizational characteristics that yields superior performance.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors focus on exploring the motivations for participating and collaborating in open innovation web-based platforms (OIPs) and analyze 116 OIPs to determine if the motivations can be a function of the phase of innovation and the dependency on members.
Abstract: Given that open innovation web-based platforms (OIPs) allow for the collaboration of individuals and companies, this paper focuses on exploring the motivations for participating and collaborating in OIPs Extant studies are conflicting, especially with respect to the importance of the monetary reward as a motivation Moreover, literature supports our premise from the individuals' motivations analysis viewpoint, but not from the companies' perspective Finally, literature does not consider the differences related to different members and to different phases of the innovation process First, we base the literature on open innovation on the Internet (crowdsourcing, peer production and open source) to identify the potential motivations We then deeply analyse 116 OIPs to determine if the motivations can be a function of the phase of innovation and the dependency on members We show that the design of the motivational system should take into consideration the different stages of the innovation process and that the OIPs should consider moving from 'work place' logic to 'social place' logic
TL;DR: In this article, the similarities and differences in the strategic orientation and innovation patterns of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and large companies are examined and their implications for market performance.
Abstract: Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine the similarities and differences in the strategic orientation and innovation patterns of small to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) and large companies and to investigate their implications for market performance.Design/methodology/approach – Miles and Snow's strategic typology is applied to 592 new products to determine their companies' strategic orientations. Data collected over a two‐year period by 62 companies in the Italian yogurt industry are analyzed.Findings – The results show that, while large firms operate with a “prospector” orientation, SMEs have a “defender” or “reactor” orientation. Only a small number of SMEs can innovate successfully, and an ex post facto investigation reveals that these firms follow an “open innovation model”.Originality/value – The findings fill a gap in the literature by clarifying the similarities and differences in the strategic orientations, innovation patterns and performance of SMEs and large companies in a dynamic in...
01 Jan 2012
TL;DR: The White Paper focuses on how European cities are currently developing strategies towards becoming "smarter cities" and the lessons the authors can draw for the future, and explores also how cities and urban areas represent a critical mass when it comes to shaping the demand for advanced Internet-based services in large-scale testing and validation.
Abstract: The White Paper focuses on how European cities are currently developing strategies towards becoming "smarter cities" and the lessons we can draw for the future. Such strategies are based on an assessment of the future needs of cities and innovative usages of ICTs embodied in the broadband Internet and Internet-based applications now and foreseen for the future. These strategies are also based on a new understanding of innovation, grounded in the concept of open innovation ecosystems, global innovation chains, and on citizens' empowerment for shaping innovation and urban development. This White Paper is one of the main outcomes of the FIREBALL project (www.fireball4smartcities.eu), a Coordination Action within the 7th Framework Programme for ICT, running in the period 2010-2012. The aim of FIREBALL is to bring together communities and stakeholders who are active in three areas: (1) research and experimentation on the Future Internet (FIRE); (2) open and user-driven innovation (Living Labs); and (3) urban development. The goal is to develop a common vision and a common view on how the different approaches, methodologies, policies and technologies in these areas can be aligned to boost innovation and socio-economic development of cities. The White Paper has explored the landscape of "smart cities" as environments of open and user driven innovation sustained by Future Internet technologies and services. Smart cities are also seen as environments enabled by advanced ICT infrastructure for testing and validating current Future Internet research and experimentation. Overall, the smart city is built upon a triangle of "City" - "Open Innovation Ecosystems" - "Future Internet" components. The White Paper explores also how cities and urban areas represent a critical mass when it comes to shaping the demand for advanced Internet-based services in large-scale testing and validation. Shaping this demand informs ongoing research, experimentation and deployment activities related to Future Internet testbeds, and helps establishing a dialogue between the different communities involved in the development of the future Internet and user-driven environments, to form partnerships and assess social and economic benefits and discovery of migration paths at early stages. Based on a holistic instead of technology merely driven perspective on smart cities, we consider necessary to revisit the concept of the Smart City itself. The concept of the smart city that emerges from FIREBALL can be summarized as follows: "The smart city concept is multi-dimensional. It is a future scenario (what to achieve), even more it is an urban development strategy (how to achieve it). It focuses on how (Internet-related) technologies enhance the lives of citizens. This should not be interpreted as drawing the smart city technology scenario. Rather, the smart city is how citizens are shaping the city in using this technology, and how citizens are enabled to do so. The smart city is about how people are empowered, through using technology, for contributing to urban change and realizing their ambitions. The smart city provides the conditions and resources for change. In this sense, the smart city is an urban laboratory, an urban innovation ecosystem, a living lab, an agent of change. Much less do we see a smart city in terms of a Ranking. This ranking is a moment in time, a superficial result of underlying changes, not the mechanism of transformation. The smart city is the engine of transformation, a generator of solutions for wicked problems, it is how the city is behaving smart."
TL;DR: The findings show that adoption of the open innovation model is grounded in developing organizational environments that are conducive to innovation, including expertise in creating a culture for knowledge sharing, building a trustful environment, and a resourceful use of IT.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare traditional, organization-centered models of innovation with more recent work on open innovation and suggest that when critical tasks can be modularized and when problem-solving knowledge is widely distributed and available, open innovation complements traditional innovation logics.
Abstract: This paper contrasts traditional, organization-centered models of innovation with more recent work on open innovation. These fundamentally different and inconsistent innovation logics are associated with contrasting organizational boundaries and organizational designs. We suggest that when critical tasks can be modularized and when problem-solving knowledge is widely distributed and available, open innovation complements traditional innovation logics. We induce these ideas from the literature and with extended examples from Apple, NASA, and LEGO. We suggest that task decomposition and problem-solving knowledge distribution are not deterministic but are strategic choices. If dynamic capabilities are associated with innovation streams, and if different innovation types are rooted in contrasting innovation logics, there are important implications for firm boundaries, design, and identity.
TL;DR: Results suggest that open innovation practices in health care lead to interesting innovation outcomes and are well accepted by participants, and analysis of communication content shows that empathic support and exchange of information are important elements of communication on the platform.