World Scientific
  • Search
    Quick Search in Journals
    Access type:
    Quick Search anywhere
    Access type:
    Advanced Search
  • My Cart
  •   
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.
Open Access

OPEN INNOVATION AS A FACILITATOR FOR CORPORATE EXPLORATION

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919617500426Cited by:16 (Source: Crossref)
    Next

    Abstract

    While open innovation is a management concept of increased attention in academia as well as in industry, studies have also shown that the implementation of open innovation can be a rather difficult and challenging process. Installed organisational structures, culture and knowledge are often portrayed as hinder for change. This study provides an in-depth case study, based on 50 interviews, of how a large pharmaceutical corporation implemented an open innovation initiative. Instead of considering existing internal knowledge and structures as problematic, these resources were rather utilised as cornerstones for value offerings in open innovation. Furthermore, employees’ engagement in open innovation resulted in a more open and dynamic climate, as well as an improved entrepreneurial image of the corporation internally as well as externally. The study contributes to the open innovation literature by advancing the understanding about the organisational implications of implementing open innovation in practice. As such, it provides valuable insights for researchers and practitioners about implementing open innovation in practice.

    References

    • Albert, S and DA Whetten [1985] Organizational identity. In Research in Organizational Behavior, LL Cummings and BM Staw (Eds.), pp. 263–295. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar
    • Antons, D and FT Piller [2015] Opening the black box of “Not Invented Here”: Attitudes, decision biases, and behavioral consequences. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 29 (2), 193–217. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Boje, DM [2001] Narrative Methods for Organizational and Communication Research. London: Sage. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chandy, RK and GJ Tellis [2000] The Incumbent’s Curse? incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. The Journal of Marketing, 64 (3), 1–17. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Chesbrough, H [2003] Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar
    • Chesbrough, H and M Bogers [2014] Explicating open innovation: Clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In New Frontiers in Open Innovation, H Chesbrough, W Vanhaverbeke and J West (Eds.), pp. 3–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chesbrough, H and EL Chen [2015] Using inside-out open innovation to recover abandoned pharmaceutical compounds. Journal of Innovation Management, 3 (2), 21–32. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chesbrough, H and A Crowther [2006] Beyond high tech: Early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Management, 36 (3), 229–236. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Chesbrough, H, W Vanhaverbeke and J West [2014] New frontiers in open innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chiaroni, D, V Chiesa and F Frattini [2010] Unravelling the process from closed to open innovation: Evidence from mature, asset-intensive industries. R&D Management, 40 (3), 222–245. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Chiaroni, D, V Chiesa and F Frattini [2011] The open innovation journey: How firms dynamically implement the emerging innovation management paradigm. Technovation, 31 (1), 34–43. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Clarke, A [2005] Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. London, Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Coombs, R and R Hull [1998] Knowledge management practices and path-dependency in innovation. Research Policy, 27 (3), 239–256. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Corbin, J and A Strauss [2014] Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Cowlrick, I, T Hedner, R Wolf, M Olausson and M Klofsten [2011] Decision-making in the pharmaceutical industry: Analysis of entrepreneurial risk and attitude using uncertain information. R&D Management, 41 (4), 321–336. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Czarniawska, B [2000] The Uses of narrative in organization research. In GRI-rapport, 2000:5. Göteborg: Gothenbwg Research Institute. Google Scholar
    • Dahlander, L and D Gann [2010] How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39 (6), 699–709. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • David, PA (1988). Path-dependence: Putting the past into the future of economics. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences technical report No. 533, Stanford University. Google Scholar
    • Davis, JP, KM Eisenhardt and CB Bingham [2009] Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54 (3), 413–452. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Demil, B and X Lecocq , [2006] Neither market nor hierarchy nor network: the emergence of bazaar governance. Organization Studies, 27 (10), 1447–1466. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Di Minin, A, F Frattini and A Piccaluga [2010] Fiat: Open innovation in a downturn (1993–2003). California Management Review, 52 (3), 132–159. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Dunbar, C, D Rodriguez and L Parker [2003] Race, Subjectivity, and the interview process. In Inside Interviewing – New Lenses, New Concerns, JA Holstein and JF Gubrium (Eds.), pp. 131–150, London, Thousand Oaks & New Dehli: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Eisenhardt, K [1989] Building theory from case study research. Academy of management Review, 14 (4), 532–550. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Eisenhardt, K and M Graebner [2007] Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1), 25–32. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Enkel, E, O Gassmann and N Chesbrough [2009] Open R&D and open innovation: Exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, 39 (4), 311–316. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Farrell, J and G Saloner [1985] Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. Rand Journal of Economics, 16 (1), 70–83. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Flyvbjerg, B [2006] Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative inquiry, 12 (2), 219–245. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Foster, RN [1986] Innovation: The attacker’s advantage. New York: McKinsey. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Gassmann, O [2006] Opening up the innovation process: Towards and agenda. R&D Management, 35 (3), 223–228. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gassmann, O, E Enkel and M Chesbrough [2010] The future of open innovation. R&D Management, 40 (3), 213–221. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gassmann, O and G Reepmeyer [2005] Organizing pharmaceutical innovation: From science-based knowledge creators to drug-oriented knowledge brokers. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14 (3), 233–245. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Gibson, CB and J Birkinshaw [2004] The Antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. The Academy of Management Journal, 47 (2), 209–226. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gioia, DA, SD Patvardhan, AL Hamilton and KG Corley [2013] Organizational identity formation and change. The Academy of Management Annals, 7 (1), 123–193. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gioia, DA, M Schultz and KG Corley [2000] Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of management Review, 25 (1), 63–81. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Hatch, MJ and M Schultz [1997] Relations between organizational culture, identity and image. European Journal of marketing, 31 (5/6), 356–365. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Hedner, T (2012). Change in the pharmaceutical industry: Aspects on innovation, entrepreneurship, openness, and decision making. Department of Management and Engineering. Linköping: Linköping University. Google Scholar
    • Henkel, J [2006] Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux. Research Policy, 35 (7), 953–969. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Hessel, A [2005] Open source biology., In Open Sources 2.0, C DiBona, M Stone and D Cooper (Eds.), pp. 281–296, Beijing: O’Reilly. Google Scholar
    • Huizingh, E. [2011] Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 31 (1), 2–9. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Hunter, J and S Stephens [2010] Is open innovation the way forward for big pharma? Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 9 (2), 87–88. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Hussinger, K and A Wastyn [2016] In search for the not-invented-here syndrome: the role of knowledge sources and firm success. R&D Management, 46(S3), 945–957. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Huston, L and N Sakkab [2006] Connect and develop: Inside procter & gamble’s new model for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84 (3), 58–66. Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Katz, R and TJ Allen [1982] Investigating the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns. R&D Management, 12 (1), 7–19. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Kogut, B and U Zander [1992] Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization science, 3 (3), 383–397. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Kvale, S and S Brinkmann [2006] InterViews — Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Laursen, K and AJ Salter [2014] The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration. Research Policy, 43 (5), 867–878. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lewin, K [1951] Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper & Row. Google Scholar
    • Levinthal, DA and JG March [1993] The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95–112. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • March, JG [1991] Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2 (1), 71–97. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Miles, MB and AM Huberman [1984] Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Mortara, L and T Minshall [2011] How do large multinational companies implement open innovation? Technovation, 31 (10–11), 586–597. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Munos, B [2006] Can open-source R&D reinvigorate drug research? Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 5 (9), 723–729. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Munos, B [2009] Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 8 (12), 959–968. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Munos, BH and WW Chin [2009] A call for sharing: adapting pharmaceutical research to new realities. Science Translational Medicine, 1 (9), 1–4. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Poland, BD [2001] Transcription quality. In Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, JF Gubrium and JA Holstein (Eds.), pp. 629–651. London: Sage. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Ragin, CC and HS Becker [1992] What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge university press. Google Scholar
    • Randhawa, K, R Wilden and J Hohberger [2016] A bibliometric review of open innovation: Setting a research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(6), 750–772. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Remneland Wikhamn, B [2011] Path dependence as a barrier for ‘soft’ and ‘open’ innovation. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 5 (6), 714–730. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Remneland Wikhamn, B [2013] Two different perspectives on open innovation — Libre versus control. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22 (4), 375–389. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Remneland Wikhamn, B and W Wikhamn [2011] Open innovation climate measure: The introduction of a validated scale. Creativity and Innovation Management, 20 (4), 284–295. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Robbins, P and C O’Gorman [2015] Innovating the innovation process: An organisational experiment in global pharma pursuing radical innovation. R&D Management, 45 (1), 76–93. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Simsek, Z [2009] Organizational ambidexterity: Towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 597–624. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Spithoven, A, B Clarysse and M Knockaert [2010] Building absorptive capacity to organise inbound open innovation in traditional industries. Technovation, 30 (2), 130–141. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Teece, DJ [2007] Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28 (13), 1319–1350. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Tellis, GJ [2006] Disruptive technology or visionary leadership. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23 (1), 34–38. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Van de Vrande, V, W Vanhaverbeke and O Gassmann [2010] Broadening the scope of open innovation: Past research, current state and future directions. International Journal of Technology Management, 52 (3/4), 221–235. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Van Maanen, J [1979] The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24 (4), 539–550. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Vanhaverbeke, W, H Chesbrough and J West [2014] Surfing the new wave of open innovation research. In New Frontiers in Open Innovation pp. 281–294, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Weick, KE [1995] Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • West, J and M Bogers [2014] Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31 (4), 814–831. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • West, J, A Salter, W Vanhaverbeke and H Chesbrough [2014] Open innovation: The next decade. Research Policy, 43 (5), 805–811. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • von Hippel, E [2005] Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Yin, R [1994] Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!

    Be inspired by these New Titles in Business and Management