Open innovation and control: a case from Volvo

Kuschel, Jonas; Remneland, Björn; Kuschel, M.

doi:10.1504/ijnvo.2011.042414

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Planning covers the joint alignment of expectations and objectives (Mohr and Spekman, 1994). It includes aspects such as financial resource deployment, time allocation and information technology infrastructure (Chau and Tam, 1997;Dogson et al, 2006;Kuschel et al, 2010;Van de Vrande et al, 2009). Wallin and Von Krogh (2010) recommended defining R&D process steps, to identify innovation-relevant knowledge and to select appropriate mechanisms for knowledge integration, creation and commercialization.…”

Section: Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing knowledge in open innovation processes: an intellectual property perspective

Bican

Guderian

Ringbeck

2017

JKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose As firms turn their innovation activities toward collaborating with external partners, they face additional challenges in managing their knowledge. While different modes of intellectual property right regimes are applied in closed innovation systems, there seems to be tension between the concepts of “open innovation” and “intellectual property rights”. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how firms best manage knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Design/methodology/approach Following a mixed methods approach, the authors review relevant literature at the intersection of knowledge management, intellectual property rights, strategic management of intellectual property rights and the open innovation process. The authors identify success drivers through the lenses of – but not limited to – intellectual property rights and classify them in five distinct groups. Expending the view on open innovation beyond its modus operandi, the authors develop the Open Innovation Life Cycle, covering three stages and three levels of the open innovation process. The authors apply their findings to a case study in the pharmaceutical industry. Findings The authors provide four key contributions. First, existing literature yields inconclusive results concerning the enabling or disabling function of intellectual property rights in open innovation processes, but the majority of scholars detect an ambivalent relation. Second, they identify and classify success drivers of successful knowledge management via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Third, they advance literature on open innovation beyond its modus operandi to include three stages and three levels. Fourth, they test their findings to a case study and show how management leverages knowledge by properly using intellectual property rights in open innovation. Practical implications The findings support firms in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Management should account for the peculiarities of open innovation preparation and open innovation termination to prevent unintentional knowledge drain. Originality/value This is one of the first studies to view open innovation as a process beyond its modus operandi by considering the preparations for and termination of open innovation activities. It also addresses the levels involved in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation from individual (personal) to project and firm level.

show abstract

Section: Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing knowledge in open innovation processes: an intellectual property perspective

Bican

Guderian

Ringbeck

2017

JKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a collaborative situation of open innovation, Kuschel et al (2011) recommend to release direct forms of control like an intellectual property strategy in favor of more indirect ways of control, for instance by an active facilitation of spin-offs that might be re-acquired when innovations are mature enough, by open standards and generative technological IT-platforms or by mobilizing a critical mass of active and participating users to create value of innovative products.…”

Section: Categorization 1: Types Of Managerial Control In the Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Fried

2016

J Manag Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article reviews the terminological distinctions (e.g. action and result control, interactive and diagnostic control) used for control in twenty-five empirical studies on management control in the context of innovation. The terminological distinctions are classed in three categorizations. These are (a) the types of managerial control, (b) the design and use mode of managerial control instruments and (c) the enabling and constraining character of managerial control instruments. By analyzing the categorizations, it becomes evident that there are two, almost independent ontological streams shaping the empirical field: the determinist perspective and the voluntarist perspective of management control with different understandings of contingency. The 'ideal fit' approach to contingency of the determinist perspective adds little cumulative knowledge to the field of management control in the context of innovation. Therefore, the article suggests to strengthen the voluntarist perspective and to develop a 'quasi fit' interpretation of contingency. The agenda for prospective research in management control in the context of innovation includes to investigate deviant and repair behavior related to management control systems (MCS) in innovating activities, to understand MCS as dependent as well as independent variable and to explore the role of MCS in economizing innovative activities.All papers listed in the references which are marked with * belong to the remaining study sample (see also "Appendix 2") after the systematic literature search.

show abstract

“…Much of the research related to the open-innovation part of ecosystems of embedded systems is empirical, and drawn from specific domains, such as mobile phones [3] or the automotive [4]. To the best of our knowledge no domainindependent study exists that aims at understanding the quantities and trends of research, types of existing research and contributions on innovation for embedded software, its origin and application domains.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystems and Open Innovation for Embedded Systems: A Systematic Mapping Study

Papatheocharous

Andersson

Axelsson

2015

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper surveys work on ecosystems and open innovation of systems in the context of software engineering for embedded systems. The primary research goal is to develop a research agenda based on the topics identified within the research publications on the topic. The agenda is based on a systematic mapping study of 260 publications obtained from digital libraries and is influenced by a set of areas of interest, i.e., product lines, open source, third party, business models, open innovation, and strategy. The results from the study include analysis of the type of research conducted in the field, its origin and research contribution. The study identifies the need for more solutions to specific open innovation problems such as mapping business models to technical platforms; defining open ecosystem processes that foster open innovation; and improving how ecosystem players can leverage on tool support for open innovation. A direction for future research is also provided.

show abstract

Open innovation and control: a case from Volvo

Cited by 9 publications

References 27 publications

Managing knowledge in open innovation processes: an intellectual property perspective

Managing knowledge in open innovation processes: an intellectual property perspective

Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Ecosystems and Open Innovation for Embedded Systems: A Systematic Mapping Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About