Abstract
Open innovation is becoming the frontline strategy to develop new products and services in most R&D based firms. This paper focuses on the strategies of the companies which protect their R&D capabilities and their effect on the open innovation process in new product development. The theoretical framework of this research was extracted from open innovation, product development and management science literature. Data from 20 countries have been collected from 60 open innovation and intensive R&D dependent firms. Statistical techniques were used to analyse the data. The data analysis showed five protectionist motives involved in open innovation-based product development between companies. The results provided the validation of the theoretical framework and explored these motives based on managers' feedback. The study implies strong linkages between open innovation, product development and protectionist motives of companies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bogers, M., Afuah, A., Bastian, B.: Users as innovators: a review, critique, and future research directions. J. Manag. 36(4), 857–875 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309353944
Yam, R.C.M., Lo, W., Tang, E.P.Y., Lau, A.K.W.: Analysis of sources of innovation, technological innovation capabilities, and performance: an empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing industries. Res. Policy 40(3), 391–402 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.013
Chesbrough, H.: Open innovation: a new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In: Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm (2006)
Knudsen, M.P.: The relative importance of interfirm relationships and knowledge transfer for new product development success. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 24(2), 117–138 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00238.x
Bogers, M.: The open innovation paradox: Knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 14(1), 93–117 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1108/14601061111104715
Zafar, A.: The outsourcing innovation paradox : a company’s growth option or a risk to R&D capabilities. University of Vaasa Series, no. 418, p. 128 (2019)
West, J., Salter, A., Vanhaverbeke, W., Chesbrough, H.: Open innovation: the next decade. Res. Policy (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.001
Cassiman, B., Valentini, G.: Open innovation: are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary? Strateg. Manag. J. 37(6), 1034–1046 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2375
Keeping Your Secrets Public? Open Versus Closed Innovation Processes in the Hungarian Wine Sector. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/163358/. Accessed 29 Mar 2021
Gassmann, O., Enkel, E., Chesbrough, H.: The future of open innovation. R&D Manag. 40(3), 213–221 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00605.x
Huizingh, E.K.R.E.: Open innovation: state of the art and future perspectives. Technovation 31, 2–9 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2010.10.002
Boudreau, K.: Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access vs. devolving control. Manage. Sci. 56(10), 1849–1872 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1215
Whose internet is it, anyway? December 11, 1995. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1995/12/11/208457/index.htm. Accessed 29 Mar 2021
Teirlinck, P., Spithoven, A.: Research collaboration and R&D outsourcing: different R&D personnel requirements in SMEs. Technovation 33(4–5), 142–153 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.11.005
Hung, K.P., Chou, C.: The impact of open innovation on firm performance: the moderating effects of internal R&D and environmental turbulence. Technovation 33(10–11), 368–380 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.06.006
Connect and Develop: Inside Procter & Gamble’s New Model for Innovation. https://hbr.org/2006/03/connect-and-develop-inside-procter-gambles-new-model-for-innovation. Accessed 29 Mar 2021
Zafar, A.: Reasons for outsourcing innovations and its effect on firm performance: evidence from highly innovative firms from twenty countries. Tech. Soc. Sci. J. 13(1), 305–319 (2020). https://ideas.repec.org/a/tec/journl/v13y2020i1p305-319.html. Accessed 29 Mar 2021
Reitzig, M., Wagner, S.: The hidden costs of outsourcing: evidence from patent data. Strateg. Manag. J. 31(11), 1183–1201 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.852
Espino-Rodríguez, T.F., Padrón-Robaina, V.: A review of outsourcing from the resource-based view of the firm. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 8(1), 49–70 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00120.x
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Zafar, A. (2022). Survival of Fittest: Open Innovation and Product Development Linkages. In: Ahram, T., Taiar, R. (eds) Human Interaction, Emerging Technologies and Future Systems V. IHIET 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 319. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85540-6_145
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85540-6_145
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-85539-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-85540-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)