Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:

OpenAIRE is about to release its new face with lots of new content and services.
During September, you may notice downtime in services, while some functionalities (e.g. user registration, login, validation, claiming) will be temporarily disabled.
We apologize for the inconvenience, please stay tuned!
For further information please contact helpdesk[at]openaire.eu

fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Roper, Stephen; Love, James H.; Du, Jun
Publisher: Aston University
Languages: English
Types: Book
Recent studies have stressed the importance of ‘open innovation’ as a means of enhancing innovation performance. The essence of the open innovation model is to take advantage of external as well as internal knowledge sources in developing and commercialising innovation, so avoiding an excessively narrow internal focus in a key area of corporate activity. Although the external aspect of open innovation is often stressed, another key aspect involves maximising the flow of ideas and knowledge from different sources within the firm, for example through knowledge sharing via the use of cross-functional teams. A fully open innovation approach would therefore combine both aspects i.e. cross-functional teams with boundary-spanning knowledge linkages. This suggests that there should be complementarities between the use cross-functional teams with boundary-spanning knowledge linkages i.e. the returns to implementing open innovation in one innovation activity is should be greater if open innovation is already in place in another innovation activity. However, our findings – based on a large sample of UK and German manufacturing plants – do not support this view. Our results suggest that in practice the benefits envisaged in the open innovation model are not generally achievable by the majority of plants, and that instead the adoption of open innovation across the whole innovation process is likely to reduce innovation outputs. Our results provide some guidance on the type of activities where the adoption of a market-based governance structure such as open innovation may be most valuable. This is likely to be in innovation activities where search is deterministic, activities are separable, and where the required level of knowledge sharing is correspondingly moderate – in other words those activities which are more routinized. For this type of activity market-based governance mechanisms (i.e. open innovation) may well be more efficient than hierarchical governance structures. For other innovation activities where outcomes are more uncertain and unpredictable and the risks of knowledge exchange hazards are greater, quasi-market based governance structures such as open innovation are likely to be subject to rapidly diminishing returns in terms of innovation outputs.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Cookies make it easier for us to provide you with our services. With the usage of our services you permit us to use cookies.
More information Ok