Choosing the Most Effective Networking Strategy and Practice for Open Innovation

  • Gizem Ferliler
  • Burcu FelekogluEmail author
  • A. Serdar Tasan
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 280)


In today’s world, innovation is a very important force to enable companies to survive. It is no longer enough for companies to develop products or services using only their internal resources. For this reason, companies are receiving support from external sources in order to save time and cost while continuing innovation activities. This approach is an open innovation approach that includes customers, suppliers, consumers and other firms. In recent years it has been observed that companies that adopt open innovation are ahead of the competition. Choosing effective strategies and practices when networking with external partners plays an important role for success. In this study, 20 large companies interested in open innovation in America were selected and criteria they consider when creating their open innovation networks and strategies and practices they use were investigated. After reviewing the literature on open innovation, eight criteria and fifteen strategies and practices have been identified that are effective in creating networks of companies. TOPSIS method was used as a multi criteria decision-making methods to determine the most effective strategies and practices. While the importance level of the criteria was determined, the opinions of the employees of the companies within the scope of the research were taken. Based on the results, the most effective strategies and practices when creating a network, were discussed and future work directions were highlighted.


Open innovation Network TOPSIS 


  1. 1.
    Laursen, K., Salter, A.J.: The paradox of openness: appropriability, external search and collaboration. Res. Policy 43(5), 867–878 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chesbrough, H., Crowther, A.K.: Beyond high tech: Early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Manag. 36(3), 229–236 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laursen, K., Salter, A.: Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 27(2), 131–150 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Isckia, T., Lescop, D.: Open innovation within business ecosystems: a tale from Commun. Strate. 37–54, 2nd Quarter (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simard, C., West, J.: Knowledge networks and locus of innovation. In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J. (eds.) Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford University Press, NY (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gulati, R., Nohria, N., Zaheer, A.: Strategic networks. Strateg. Manag. J. 21(3), 203–215 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cantwell, J., Janne, O.: Technological globalisation and innovative centres: the role of corporate technological leadership and locational hierarchy1. Res. Policy 28(2–3), 119–144 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zander, I.: How do you mean global’? An empirical investigation of innovation networks in the multinational corporation. Res. Policy 28(2–3), 195–213 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strategyand. Last accessed 16 Mar 2018
  10. 10.
    AmerisourceBergen. Last accessed 16 Mar 2018
  11. 11.
    Fast Company. Last accessed 16 Mar 2018
  12. 12.
    Glaister, K.W., Wang, Y.: UK joint ventures in China: motivation and partner selection. Market. Intell. Plann. 11(2), 9–15 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ritter, T.: The networking company: antecedents for coping with relationships and networks effectively. Ind. Mark. Manage. 28(5), 467–479 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Canon Global. Last access 04 Mar 2019
  15. 15.
    Goyal, S., González, J.L.: R&D Networks. Rand J. Econ. 32(4), 686–707 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cheng, S.K., Kam, B.H.: A conceptual framework for analysing risk in supply networks. J. Enterpr. Informat. Manag. 21(4), 345–360 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Cisco. Last accessed 16 Mar 2018
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Dittrich, K., Duysters, M.G.: The Role of Innovation Networks in a Changing Competitive Environment: The Case of IBM. Banff, Canada: IASTED International Conference on Alliances, Mergers and Acquisitions (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Johnson & Johnson. Last accessed 04 Mar 2019
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Apple. Last accessed 16 Mar 2018
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
    General Motors. Last accessed 04 Mar 2019
  29. 29.
    Shyjith, K., Ilangkumaran, M., Kumanan, S.: Multi-criteria decision-making approach to evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry. J. Qual. Maintenance Eng. 14(4), 375–386 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications. Springer, New York, NY (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Monjezi, M., Dehghani, H., Singh, T.N., Sayadi, A.R. ve Gholinejad, A.: Application of TOPSIS method for selecting the most appropriate blast design. Arabian J. Geosci. 5(1), 95–101 (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Natural and Applied SciencesDokuz Eylul UniversityIzmirTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Industrial EngineeringDokuz Eylul UniversityIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations