开放式创新综述.docx

开放式创新综述.docx

《开放式创新综述.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《开放式创新综述.docx（29页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

开放式创新综述

Howopenisinnovation?

ResearchPolicy

Volume39,Issue6,July2010,Pages699-709

Linus Dahlandera, 

DavidM. Gannb, 

a

StanfordUniversity,USA

b

ImperialCollegeLondon,UnitedKingdom

Thispaperismotivatedbyadesiretoclarifythedefinitionof‘openness’ascurrentlyusedintheliteratureonopeninnovation,andtore-conceptualizetheideaforfutureresearchonthetopic.WecombinebibliographicanalysisofallpapersonthetopicpublishedinThomson'sISIWebofKnowledge（ISI）withasystematiccontentanalysisofthefieldtodevelopadeeperunderstandingofearlierwork.Ourreviewindicatestwoinboundprocesses:

sourcingandacquiring,andtwooutboundprocesses,revealingandselling.Weanalyzetheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofthesedifferentformsofopenness.Thepaperconcludeswithimplicationsfortheoryandpractice,chartingseveralpromisingareasforfutureresearch.

Keywords:

Appropriability;Complementaryassets;Openness;Innovation;Openinnovation;Review;Contentanalysis

ArticleOutline

1.Introduction

2.Reviewmethod

3.Theboundariesofthefirmandopenness

4.Differenttypesofopenness

4.1.Revealing:

Outboundinnovation—non-pecuniary

4.1.1.Definition

4.1.2.Advantages

4.1.3.Disadvantages

4.2.Selling:

outboundinnovation—pecuniary

4.2.1.Definition

4.2.2.Advantages

4.2.3.Disadvantages

4.3.Sourcing:

inboundinnovation—non-pecuniary

4.3.1.Definition

4.3.2.Advantages

4.3.3.Disadvantages

4.4.Acquiring:

Inboundinnovation—pecuniary

4.4.1.Definition

4.4.2.Advantages

4.4.3.Disadvantages

4.5.Combiningdifferenttypesofopenness

5.Discussion

5.1.Implicationsfortheory

5.2.Implicationsforpractice

5.3.Futureresearch

6.Concludingremark

Acknowledgements

References

1.Introduction

Howdoesopennessinfluencefirms’abilitytoinnovateandappropriatebenefitsofinnovation?

Thesequestionslieattheheartofrecentresearchoninnovation（e.g.[Chesbrough,2003a],[Helfat,2006]and[LaursenandSalter,2006a]）.Theiranswersrequireaconceptualframethatdefinesandclassifiesdifferentdimensionsofopenness.Therehasbeenarangeofimportantpaperspublishedonthetopicanditistimelytotakestockonwheretheresearchstandstoadvanceitfurther.Ourreviewshowsthatavarietyofdefinitionsandfocalpointsareused,butthatthesedonotyetcohereintoauseableanalyticalframe.Theabsenceofsuchaframingdevicemakesitdifficulttocompareandevaluatetheadvantagesanddisadvantagestoopennessatthelevelofthefirm.1

Astartingpointfortheideaofopennessisthatasingleorganizationcannotinnovateinisolation.Ithastoengagewithdifferenttypesofpartnerstoacquireideasandresourcesfromtheexternalenvironmenttostayabreastofcompetition（[Chesbrough,2003a]and[LaursenandSalter,2006a]）.Thishasstimulatedquestionsabouttheroleofopennessininnovationthatemphasizesthepermeabilityoffirms’boundarieswhereideas,resourcesandindividualsflowinandoutoforganizations.Inthisview,externalactorscanleverageafirm'sinvestmentininternalR&Dthroughexpandingopportunitiesofcombinationsofpreviouslydisconnectedsilosofknowledgeandcapabilities（[Fleming,2001],[HargadonandSutton,1997]and[Schumpeter,1942]）.Thedownsidesofopennesscanalsobeconsiderable,althoughthereislessfocusonthisintheliterature.Opennesscanresultinresourcesbeingmadeavailableforotherstoexploit,withintellectualpropertybeingdifficulttoprotectandbenefitsfrominnovationdifficulttoappropriate.

Indefiningopenness,Chesbrough（2003a,p.XXIV）arguesthat“openinnovationisaparadigmthatassumesthatfirmscanandshoulduseexternalideasaswellasinternalideas,andinternalandexternalpathstomarket,asfirmslooktoadvancetheirtechnology”.Chesbrough'sdefinitionofopenness,themostcommonlyusedintheliterature,isbroadandunderscoresthatvaluableideasemergeandcanbecommercializedfrominsideoroutsidethefirm.Theconcepthascommoncurrencyforatleastfourreasons.First,itreflectssocialandeconomicchangesinworkingpatterns,whereprofessionalsseekportfoliocareersratherthanajob-for-lifewithasingleemployer.Firmsthereforeneedtofindnewwaysofaccessingtalentthatmightnotwishtobeemployedexclusivelyanddirectly.Second,globalizationhasexpandedtheextentofthemarketthatallowsforanincreaseddivisionoflabour.Third,improvedmarketinstitutionssuchasintellectualpropertyrights（IPR）,venturecapital（VC）,andtechnologystandardsallowfororganizationtotradeideas.Fourth,newtechnologiesallowfornewwaystocollaborateandcoordinateacrossgeographicaldistances.

Inspiteofrisinginterestinusingtheopennessconstruct,systematicstudiesofopennessremaincumbersomebecauseofconceptualambiguity.Theextantliteraturepresentstheconceptofopennessinquitedifferentways;LaursenandSalter（2006a）equateopennesswiththenumberofexternalsourcesofinnovation,whereasHenkel（2006）focusesonopennessasrevealingideaspreviouslyhiddeninsideorganizations.Ourapproachistoprovideananalyticalframeofdifferentformsofopennessandtheassociatedadvantagesanddisadvantagesforeachtype.

Todoso,wereviewtheliteraturebyananalysisofallpaperspublishedonopeninnovationinThomson'sISIWebofKnowledge（ISI）toAugust2009.Ourstartingpointisafocalfirmandthedifferentformsofopennessavailabletothisorganization.Wesystematicallyanalyzetheliteratureanditsintellectualpillarsbyinvestigatingtheworkthatscholarscite.Togetasenseofthecommunitythathasformedaroundthisconcept,weprovideanoverviewofwhohasbeenworkingwithwhominadvancingtheconcept.Afterestablishingthesebroadtrends,wereadallpapersandcategorizedtheminasystematicfashion.Wedevelopananalyticalframebystructuringtheanalysisintwodimensions:

（1）inboundand

（2）outbound（GassmannandEnkel,2006）versus（3）pecuniaryand（4）non-pecuniary.Thisenablesustodiscusstwoformsofinboundinnovation—AcquiringandSourcing;andtwooutbound—SellingandRevealing.

Todate,theliteraturehasbeenimbalancedinitsstrongfocusonbenefitsofopenness.Thus,wealsopaycloseattentiontodisadvantages.Wesuggestthatthesefactorsmightaffectreasonswhysomefirmsgainandotherslosefromopenness.

Thepaperisorganizedinsixsectionsthatcombinetodevelopaframeworkbasedonpriorconceptualandempiricalwork.Thenextsectionpresentsourmethod,followedbyareviewoftheantecedentsofopennessfoundinliteratureontheoriesofthefirm.Sectionfourpresentsthedifferenttypesofopennesswhichemergedfromourliteraturereview.Ourreviewenabledustoclassifyarticlesaccordingtodifferentfocalpointsandtheseclusteredaccordingtothetypesthatformthebasisofourreview.Insectionfivewediscussimplicationsfortheoryandpractice,articulatingpromisingareasforfutureresearch.Thepaperendswithconcludingremarksaboutthestudyofopeninnovation.

2.Reviewmethod

Weadoptedanapproachsimilartothesystematicreviewsusedinmedicineinwhichsystematicsearchesandformalsummariesoftheliteratureareusedtoidentifyandclassifyresultsofallmajorstudiesonaparticulartopic（HigginsandGreen,2006）.WesearchedtheISIdatabaseforarticlesthathad‘openinnovation’inthetopicfield.Thetopicfieldincludesthetitle,keywordsandabstractinthedatabase.ISIisgenerallyconsideredthemostcomprehensivedatabaseforscholarlyworkandincludesthousandsofjournals.Althoughnotalljournalsareincluded,ISItypicallyincludesthemostprominentjournalsinafield.Thissearchyielded701papersthatwedownloadedtoalocaldatabaseinAugust2009.Weintentionallyusedabroaddefinitionastheconceptisusedandpublishedinabroadrangeofjournals.Wecapturedpapersabouthowfirms‘openuptheirinnovationprocesses’andnotonlythespecificterm‘openinnovation’or‘openness’.Thisbroadsearchterm,however,introducedpapersthathadlittletodowiththeopeninnovationliterature.Wethereforereadthroughall701abstractstoassesswhethertheydealtwithopeninnovation.Whenwewereunsure,wedownloadedandreadthefullpublication.Thisscreeningresultedinashortlistof150paperswherewereadthefullpaper.Whilenotacompletelistofpapers,thestepstakenindatacollectionresultinnobiastowardsanyparticularsetofauthors.BecauseISIdoesnotincludebooks,welacksomeimportantcontributionstothefield（suchasChesbrough'soriginalbookfrom2003）.2Weoptedforthisapproachtomakeitastransparentaspossible.Wemakeourlistofpapersavailableforotherresearcherstobuildupon（Emailthecorrespondingauthorforacopyofthedatabase）.

ISIdonothaveasystematicapproachtogivingauthorsauniqueidentifier.Therecanbemisspellingsandmiddleinitialsthatarenotconsistentbetweenpublications.OneexampleincludesChesbroughwhoislistedwithbothChesbrough,H.andChesbrough,H.W.Fromthislistofauthors,wethereforedisambiguatedauthornamesmanuallybylookingatdifferentvariationsofspelling,checkingtheseagainstCVs.Havingprovidedeachauthorwithauniqueidentifier,weproducedtablesandgraphsofthemostprolificauthors,identifyingpatternsofco-authorshipandthetypesofliteraturethatthecommunitydrawupon.Toillustratehowthecommunityofscholarsinvolvedinopeninnovationevolves,wegraphedthenetworkusingPajek.

Wereadthepaperstodevelopbroadcategoriesofhowtheytreattheideaofopenness,conceptuallyandempirically,toprovidequalitativeinterpreta