Enriching Open Innovation Theory and Practice by Strengthening the Relationship with Strategic Thinking

Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we first argue that open innovation can be applied to situations where companies do not themselves develop new products or services. As a consequence, open innovation becomes relevant for a much larger group of organisations than hitherto. Second, we argue that open innovation scholars have failed to sufficiently differentiate open innovation initiatives in terms of their impact on companies’ growth: Some open innovation initiatives lead to incremental innovations in existing businesses while others are used to establish completely new businesses. Both arguments illustrate the need to integrate open innovation initiatives into the strategy of the firm.

Keywords

Business Model Product Development Open Innovation External Knowledge Focal Firm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adner, R. (2012). The wide lens: A new strategy for innovation. New York, NY: Portfolio/Penguin.Google Scholar
  2. Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  3. Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chesbrough, W., & Appleyard, M. (2007). Open innovation and strategy. California Management Review, 50(1), 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chesbrough, H. W. (2011). Open services innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  6. Dittrich, K., Duijsters, G. M., & de Man, A. P. (2007). Strategic repositioning by means of alliance networks: The case of IBM. Research Policy, 36(10), 1496–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Helfat, C., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D., et al. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organisations. Oxford, U.K: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Huston, L., & Sakkab, N. (2006). Connect and develop: Inside Procter and Gamble’s new model for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84, 58–66.Google Scholar
  9. Jansen, J. J. P., Simsek, Z., & Cao, Q. (2012). Ambidexterity and performance in multi-unit contexts: Cross-level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1286–1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kirschbaum, R. (2005). Open innovation in practice: New businesses get built from a culture of change at the Dutch specialty materials company DSM. R&D Management, 24–28.Google Scholar
  11. March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2010). Orchestration processes in network-centric innovation: Evidence from the field. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25, 40–57.Google Scholar
  13. O’Reilly, C. A., Harreld, J. B., & Tushman, M. L. (1996). Organizational ambidextrous: IBM and emerging business opportunities. California Management Review, 51(4), 75–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2009). Business model generation. A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Slowinsky, G., & Sahal, M. (2010). Good practices in open innovation. R&D Management, 38–43.Google Scholar
  16. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vanhaverbeke, W. (2011). The benefits of open innovation in low tech SMEs: The quilts of Denmark story. In P. Silberzahn & W. Van Dyck (Eds.), The balancing act of innovation (pp. 195–214). Heverlee: Lannoo Campus.Google Scholar
  20. Vanhaverbeke, W. & Chesbrough, H. W. (2013). A classification of open innovation and open business models. In H.W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), Exploring the next wave of open innovation research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Vanhaverbeke, W., & Peeters, N. (2005). Embracing innovation as strategy: The role of new business development in corporate renewal. Journal Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(3), 246–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wijen, F., Noorderhaven, N., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2011). Structural antecedents of corporate network evolution. International Journal of Business Environment., 4(3), 207–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hasselt UniversityDiepenbeekBelgium

Personalised recommendations