The Open Innovation in Science research field: a collaborative conceptualisation approach

Abstract

Openness and collaboration in scientific research are attracting increasing attention from scholars and practitioners alike. However, a common understanding of these phenomena is hindered by disciplinary boundaries and disconnected research streams. We link dispersed knowledge on Open Innovation, Open Science, and related concepts such as Responsible Research and Innovation by proposing a unifying Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Framework. This framework captures the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of open and collaborative practices along the entire process of generating and disseminating scientific insights and translating them into innovation. Moreover, it elucidates individual-, team-, organisation-, field-, and society-level factors shaping OIS practices. To conceptualise the framework, we employed a collaborative approach involving 47 scholars from multiple disciplines, highlighting both tensions and commonalities between existing approaches. The OIS Research Framework thus serves as a basis for future research, informs policy discussions, and provides guidance to scientists and practitioners.

A strategic alignment framework for the entrepreneurial university

“…Since the creation of Humboldt University, with its primary emphasis on academic freedom and independence of inquiry, universities have become more entrepreneurial (Urbano and Guerrero 2013;Guerrero, Urbano, and Fayolle 2016). They now contribute to the Open Innovation in Science and related concepts such as Responsible Research and Innovation (Chesbrough and Bogers 2014;Beck et al 2020). The concept that universities are fuelling the entrepreneurial ecosystem and driving regional growth is emerging as a popular topic worldwide, as entrepreneurial universities are perceived to act as catalysts for national and regional economic development Bramwell and Wolfe 2008;Abreu et al 2016).…”

“…Independently of how entrepreneurial they are, universities function as complex systems due to their divergent strategic goals, as well as the internal and external stakeholders they deal with (Bartell 2003;O'kane et al 2015;Cunningham, Menter, and O'Kane 2018). The purpose of universities is to produce reliable knowledge which can be used to re-solve technical, societal and environmental challenges (Beck et al 2020).…”

“…In this conceptual piece, we focus on the economic and social roles of entrepreneurial universities. We define an entrepreneurial university as a platform for scientific research that works towards furthering our understanding societal, economic and environmental challenges (Beck et al 2020) while innovating and creating new market opportunities (Kirby 2006;Kirby, Guerrero, and Urbano 2011). Entrepreneurial universities act as producers and disseminators of scientific knowledge (Etzkowitz 2003), and use a variety of formal and informal mechanisms to increase the economic and societal impact of universities.…”

Uma Visão Relacional Das Contribuições Das Instituições Científicas E Tecnológicas Para a Adoção De Estratégias De Inovação Aberta Por Micro E Pequenas Empresas

“…De um modo mais geral, a essência da inovação aberta é a capacidade de criar um ecossistema em que pessoas, organizações e setores possam promover a cocriação (ADNER; KAPOOR, 2010; CHES-BROUGH; KIM; AGOGINO, 2014; GAWER; CUSUMANO, 2014). Isso envolve modelos de negócios -a lógica de criação e captura de valor -que transcendem dinamicamente os limites organizacionais dentro desse ecossistema de inovação (RITALA et al, 2013; RADZIWON; BOGERS; BILBERG, 2017; HOLGERSSON; GRANSTRAND; BOGERS, 2017; BOGERS; CHESBROUGH; MOEDAS, 2018; GARCÍA--GONZÁLEZ; RAMÍREZ-MONTOYA, 2019;BECK et al, 2020). Como objeto de pesquisa tem crescido rapidamente desde que o termo foi cunhado (CHESBROUGH; BOGERS, 2014).…”

The fall of the innovation empire and its possible rise through open science

“…OSPs differ from open innovation models that attain openness through selective licensing of exclusive intellectual property rights ( Chesbrough, 2019 ) in both the scope of openness and the transactions costs involved. While one form of open innovation – open-source software – is very open, it is the exception and not the rule ( Beck et al., 2020 ); most open innovation models share knowledge among a much narrower set of actors. In contrast, OSPs engage in sweeping openness of explicit knowledge, reducing costs of sharing knowledge and of entering into contracts, while providing private value to firms through privileged access to tacit knowledge that expands value, increased reputation and marketing, and by de-risking product and service development.…”