Assessing the interplay between Open Innovation and Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation: A systematic literature review and a research agenda

Abstract

Open Innovation and Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation are undoubtedly two of the most debated topics of the last decades, gaining the interest of policymakers, practitioners, and scholars all over the world. Even if they have been usually described as two independent research fields, there are some emblematic examples presenting interplay and synergy between these topics, represented either by the hybrid perspectives of Open Sustainable Innovation, that is, the Open Innovation approach acting as an enabler of Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation, and Sustainable Open Innovation, which instead analyzes how firms developing Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation also adopt the Open Innovation approach. On the basis of these two perspectives and through a systematic literature review, this paper investigates the relationships between the Open Innovation and Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation approaches and frames these relationships by developing an innovative framework, which highlights the main aspects characterizing the hybrid perspectives of Open Sustainable Innovation and Sustainable Open Innovation. The proposed framework highlights the Open Innovation practices and strategies enabling Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation, as well as the contextual factors enabling both practices and strategies for Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation. In addition, it shows how firms developing Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation have a similar orientation toward the adoption of the Open Innovation approach both in terms of how they engage stakeholders, and the innovation capabilities they develop. Finally, a research agenda identifying the central issues and the key research gaps is offered for further development in future studies.

Corporate governance in SMEs: a systematic literature review and future research

“…According to Li et al (2020), to comprehensively review the existing literature and present an evidence-based systemic review, it is critical to use a tool or use a proven literature review methodology that is often used by other researchers (Elmagrhi et al , 2017; Ibrahim et al , 2022; Nguyen et al , 2020). While several authors (Capolupo et al , 2022; Cillo et al , 2019; Li et al , 2020; Natalicchio et al , 2014; Savino et al , 2018; Urbinati et al , 2023) used the methodology by Tranfield et al (2003), this study will use preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). According to Page et al (2021), PRISMA was first published in 2009 and was designed to assist the qualitative systemic reviewers in transparently indicating why reviews were done, what the authors did and their findings.…”

“…According to Page et al (2021), PRISMA was first published in 2009 and was designed to assist the qualitative systemic reviewers in transparently indicating why reviews were done, what the authors did and their findings. However, for the current study, we will use PRISMA 2020 guidelines, which are an update from the 2009 framework that includes an updated approach that reflects on the improvement of the methodology to identify, select, assess and synthesize studies (Alhossini et al , 2021; Page et al , 2021; Rethlefsen et al , 2021; Urbinati et al , 2023). Therefore, to determine the papers used in the current article, we will use the checklist provided by the PRISMA 2020 framework.…”

“…Therefore, the PRISMA would assist the authors in enhancing the reporting of systemic reviews and critical appraisal (Swartz, 2011). Furthermore, using the PRISMA tool can provide extensive guidance on reporting diverse literature search components of the systemic review (Urbinati et al , 2023). According to Page et al (2021), the PRISMA tool would allow the author to use a reproducible checklist by authors and other peer reviewers, thus facilitating the verification of each component.…”

Nurturing Social Innovation Capabilities in Businesses Through Open Innovation

“…This definition has originated a rich literature investigating OI forms and processes, OI effectiveness and performance, strategic orientation and new business models, specific aspects of knowledge transfer and stakeholder engagement [17,29,44]. Interestingly, some more recent developments combine and revisit the OI approach to the specific objectives it addresses, and framing hybrid perspectives [32]. Concepts and definitions such as Sustainable Open Innovation, in line with the company business model [24], Open Sustainable Innovation for peer development and production of more sustainable, marketable products [26], and Open Social Innovation to address social and ecological problems by non-profit and public sector organizations [23] are also guiding the creation of specific research streams on hybrid approaches.…”

“…Literature on SI has prominently focused on the role of third sectors and non-profit organizations as the main promoters or facilitators of collaborative innovation processes towards SI development [21]. An important focus deserving attention is how business organizations deploy their resources, and develop innovation capabilities for sustainable innovations through the implementation of the OI approach [32]. These should aim at joint value creation and knowledge exchange with SI stakeholders (i.e., the stakeholders that are specifically involved by the company for SI aims) "to get important things done" in tackling societal challenges [19] while identifying needs and opportunities for innovation and effective implementation of modes and tools within the circular economy transition [33].…”