IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v47y2018i5p953-964.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Product innovation rumors as forms of open innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Hannigan, Timothy R.
  • Seidel, Victor P.
  • Yakis-Douglas, Basak

Abstract

Prior studies of open innovation have highlighted the effects of different flows of knowledge between firms and external partners—such as flows of software code, technical solutions, or new product ideas—and how firms face a “paradox of openness” about how open to be to external sources while also appropriating value. There are increasingly flows of more provisional knowledge as well, in the form of product innovation rumors exchanged within online technology blogs. Our study objective was to understand how product innovation rumors are used by firms as both inflows and outflows of provisional knowledge and their effect on the innovation process. Using interview data within a high-technology firm whose forthcoming products were the subject of rumor within technology blogs, we develop propositions regarding how inflows of product innovation rumors affect innovation decisions (while addressing concerns about appropriability and intrafirm knowledge flows) and how outflows from firms may affect stakeholders outside the firm (through selective revealing and influence of technology blog editors). Product innovation rumors in part address the paradox of openness by forming an informal means of open innovation alongside formal processes, and we suggest further research opportunities in this domain.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannigan, Timothy R. & Seidel, Victor P. & Yakis-Douglas, Basak, 2018. "Product innovation rumors as forms of open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 953-964.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:5:p:953-964
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.02.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318300507
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2018.02.018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hannah, David R. & McCarthy, Ian P. & Kietzmann, Jan, 2015. "We’re leaking, and everything's fine: How and why companies deliberately leak secrets," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 659-667.
    2. Oberlechner, Thomas & Hocking, Sam, 2004. "Information sources, news, and rumors in financial markets: Insights into the foreign exchange market," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 407-424, June.
    3. Felin, Teppo & Zenger, Todd R., 2014. "Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 914-925.
    4. Pound, John & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1990. "Clearly Heard on the Street: The Effect of Takeover Rumors on Stock Prices," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(3), pages 291-308, July.
    5. Christopher L. Tucci & Henry Chesbrough & Frank Piller & Joel West, 2016. "When do firms undertake open, collaborative activities? Introduction to the special section on open innovation and open business models," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(2), pages 283-288.
    6. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    7. Marcel Bogers & Ann-Kristin Zobel & Allan Afuah & Esteve Almirall & Sabine Brunswicker & Linus Dahlander & Lars Frederiksen & Annabelle Gawer & Marc Gruber & Stefan Haefliger & John Hagedoorn & Dennis, 2017. "The open innovation research landscape: established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 8-40, January.
    8. Myers, Stewart C. & Majluf, Nicholas S., 1984. "Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 187-221, June.
    9. Arora, Ashish & Athreye, Suma & Huang, Can, 2016. "The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1352-1361.
    10. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain & Rosell, Carlos, 2010. "Not Invented Here? Innovation in company towns," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 78-89, January.
    11. Ambarish, Ramasastry & John, Kose & Williams, Joseph, 1987. "Efficient Signalling with Dividends and Investments," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(2), pages 321-343, June.
    12. Dahlander, Linus & Piezunka, Henning, 2014. "Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 812-827.
    13. Gambardella, Alfonso & Giarratana, Marco S., 2013. "General technological capabilities, product market fragmentation, and markets for technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 315-325.
    14. Stewart C. Myers & Nicholas S. Majluf, 1984. "Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions When Firms Have InformationThat Investors Do Not Have," NBER Working Papers 1396, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    16. Mary J. Benner & Mary Tripsas, 2012. "The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 277-302, March.
    17. Du, Jingshu & Leten, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2014. "Managing open innovation projects with science-based and market-based partners," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 828-840.
    18. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    19. Bruno Cassiman & Giovanni Valentini, 2016. "Open innovation: Are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1034-1046, June.
    20. David Deephouse & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Linking Social Issues to Organizational Impact: The Role of Infomediaries and the Infomediary Process," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(4), pages 541-553, June.
    21. Jonathan Sims & Victor P. Seidel, 2017. "Organizations coupled with communities: the strategic effects on firms engaged in community-coupled open innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(4), pages 647-665.
    22. Kimberly D. Elsbach & Robert I. Sutton & Kristine E. Principe, 1998. "Averting Expected Challenges Through Anticipatory Impression Management: A Study of Hospital Billing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 68-86, February.
    23. Fabrizio, Kira R. & Di Minin, Alberto, 2008. "Commercializing the laboratory: Faculty patenting and the open science environment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 914-931, June.
    24. Dahlander, Linus & Wallin, Martin W., 2006. "A man on the inside: Unlocking communities as complementary assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1243-1259, October.
    25. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    26. Marcel Bogers & Stephane Lhuillery, 2011. "A Functional Perspective on Learning and Innovation: Investigating the Organization of Absorptive Capacity," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 581-610, August.
    27. Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2001. "Markets for Technology and Their Implications for Corporate Strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(2), pages 419-451, June.
    28. Dahlander, Linus & Magnusson, Mats G., 2005. "Relationships between open source software companies and communities: Observations from Nordic firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 481-493, May.
    29. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
    30. Scott D. Graffin & Andrew J. Ward, 2010. "Certifications and Reputation: Determining the Standard of Desirability Amidst Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 331-346, April.
    31. Eric von Hippel & Georg von Krogh, 2003. "Open Source Software and the “Private-Collective” Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 209-223, April.
    32. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Foege, J. Nils & Lauritzen, Ghita Dragsdahl & Tietze, Frank & Salge, Torsten Oliver, 2019. "Reconceptualizing the paradox of openness: How solvers navigate sharing-protecting tensions in crowdsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1323-1339.
    2. Cuevas-Vargas, Héctor & Aguirre, Joao & Parga-Montoya, Neftalí, 2022. "Impact of ICT adoption on absorptive capacity and open innovation for greater firm performance. The mediating role of ACAP," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 11-24.
    3. Yash Raj Shrestha & Vivianna Fang He & Phanish Puranam & Georg von Krogh, 2021. "Algorithm Supported Induction for Building Theory: How Can We Use Prediction Models to Theorize?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 856-880, May.
    4. Fábio De Oliveira Paula & Jorge Ferreira Da Silva, 2019. "The Role Of The Appropriability Mechanisms For The Innovative Success Of Portuguese Small And Medium Enterprises," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-23, May.
    5. Taewon Suh & Omar J. Khan & Benedikt Schnellbächer & Sven Heidenreich, 2019. "Strategic Accord And Tension For Business Model Innovation: Examining Different Tacit Knowledge Types And Open Action Strategies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-29, July.
    6. Muninger, Marie-Isabelle & Mahr, Dominik & Hammedi, Wafa, 2022. "Social media use: A review of innovation management practices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 140-156.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M. & Wallin, Martin W., 2021. "How open is innovation? A retrospective and ideas forward," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    2. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    3. Lu, Qinli & Chesbrough, Henry, 2022. "Measuring open innovation practices through topic modelling: Revisiting their impact on firm financial performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Bogers, Marcel & Foss, Nicolai J. & Lyngsie, Jacob, 2018. "The “human side” of open innovation: The role of employee diversity in firm-level openness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 218-231.
    5. Thuy Seran & Sea Matilda Bez, 2019. "Managing Open-Innovation between Competitors: A Project-Level Approach," Post-Print hal-02427680, HAL.
    6. Lopes, Ana Paula Vilas Boas Viveiros & de Carvalho, Marly Monteiro, 2018. "Evolution of the open innovation paradigm: Towards a contingent conceptual model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 284-298.
    7. Alessandro Comai, 2020. "A new approach for detecting open innovation in patents: the designation of inventor," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1797-1822, December.
    8. van Criekingen, Kristof & Freel, Mark & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2021. "Open innovation deficiency: Evidence on project abandonment and delay," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-006, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Torres de Oliveira, Rui & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Steen, John & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 137-150.
    10. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    11. Schäper, Thomas & Jung, Christopher & Foege, Johann Nils & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Fainshmidt, Stav & Nüesch, Stephan, 2023. "The S-shaped relationship between open innovation and financial performance: A longitudinal perspective using a novel text-based measure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    12. Shaikh, Maha & Levina, Natalia, 2019. "Selecting an open innovation community as an alliance partner: Looking for healthy communities and ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    13. Foege, J. Nils & Lauritzen, Ghita Dragsdahl & Tietze, Frank & Salge, Torsten Oliver, 2019. "Reconceptualizing the paradox of openness: How solvers navigate sharing-protecting tensions in crowdsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1323-1339.
    14. Broekhuizen, Thijs & Dekker, Henri & de Faria, Pedro & Firk, Sebastian & Nguyen, Dinh Khoi & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2023. "AI for managing open innovation: Opportunities, challenges, and a research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Cappa, Francesco & Oriani, Raffaele & Pinelli, Michele & De Massis, Alfredo, 2019. "When does crowdsourcing benefit firm stock market performance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    16. Frank Nagle, 2018. "Learning by Contributing: Gaining Competitive Advantage Through Contribution to Crowdsourced Public Goods," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 569-587, August.
    17. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    18. Santoro, Gabriele & Bresciani, Stefano & Papa, Armando, 2020. "Collaborative modes with Cultural and Creative Industries and innovation performance: The moderating role of heterogeneous sources of knowledge and absorptive capacity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    19. Kokshagina, Olga & Le Masson, Pascal & Bories, Florent, 2017. "Fast-connecting search practices: On the role of open innovation intermediary to accelerate the absorptive capacity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 232-239.
    20. Yuosre F. Badir & Björn Frank & Marcel Bogers, 2020. "Employee-level open innovation in emerging markets: linking internal, external, and managerial resources," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 891-913, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:5:p:953-964. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.