IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v8y2018i3p34-d157257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Research Agenda on Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Co-Word Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado

    (Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Paseo de los Artilleros, s/n, 28032 Madrid, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez

    (Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Paseo de los Artilleros, s/n, 28032 Madrid, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Eva-María Mora-Valentín

    (Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Paseo de los Artilleros, s/n, 28032 Madrid, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

This paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the literature on open innovation and entrepreneurship. Several studies have applied bibliometric methods to innovation and entrepreneurship separately. However, no study has considered these fields in combination while using a bibliometric approach. The main aim of this paper is to understand the relationship between open innovation and entrepreneurship. We develop a descriptive analysis, focusing on temporal evolution, journals, authors, universities, countries, and keywords, and a co-word analysis. Our research identifies the main topics investigated in the open innovation and entrepreneurship literature and describes their relationships. Based on our results, the topics are grouped in three clusters. We present observations on how this literature is influenced by the resources and how this literature affects the management of innovation and knowledge. Future research could focus on questions such as the advantages of open innovation in the creation of new companies, whether open innovation processes facilitate access to funding sources by entrepreneurs or the analysis of business models based on open innovation for the creation of new companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2018. "A Research Agenda on Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Co-Word Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:8:y:2018:i:3:p:34-:d:157257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/8/3/34/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/8/3/34/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Massimo G. Colombo & Douglas Cumming & Ali Mohammadi & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra & Anu Wadhwa, 2016. "Open business models and venture capital finance," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(2), pages 353-370.
    2. Albort-Morant, Gema & Ribeiro-Soriano, Domingo, 2016. "A bibliometric analysis of international impact of business incubators," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1775-1779.
    3. 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.
    4. Cobo, M.J. & López-Herrera, A.G. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2011. "An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 146-166.
    5. van Eck, N.J.P. & Waltman, L., 2009. "How to Normalize Co-Occurrence Data? An Analysis of Some Well-Known Similarity Measures," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-001-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    6. Gerard George & Rekha Rao-Nicholson & Christopher Corbishley & Rahul Bansal, 2015. "Institutional entrepreneurship, governance, and poverty: Insights from emergency medical response servicesin India," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 39-65, March.
    7. Alex Fabianne de Paulo & Luísa Cagica Carvalho & Maria Teresa G.V. Costa & Jose Eduardo F. Lopes & Simone V.R. Galina, 2017. "Mapping Open Innovation: A Bibliometric Review to Compare Developed and Emerging Countries," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 18(2), pages 291-307, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    10. Rey-Martí, Andrea & Ribeiro-Soriano, Domingo & Palacios-Marqués, Daniel, 2016. "A bibliometric analysis of social entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1651-1655.
    11. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan Eck, 2013. "Source normalized indicators of citation impact: an overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 699-716, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman & Rommert Dekker & Jan van den Berg, 2010. "A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2405-2416, December.
    14. Shukuan Zhao & Yu Sun & Xiaobo Xu, 2016. "Research on open innovation performance: a review," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 279-287, September.
    15. van Eck, N.J.P. & Waltman, L., 2007. "Bibliometric Mapping of the Computational Intelligence Field," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-027-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    16. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2009. "How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well‐known similarity measures," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(8), pages 1635-1651, August.
    17. Lars Bengtsson, 2017. "A comparison of university technology transfer offices’ commercialization strategies in the Scandinavian countries," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 565-577.
    18. Greco, Marco & Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio, 2016. "An analysis of the open innovation effect on firm performance," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 501-516.
    19. de Paulo, Alex Fabianne & Porto, Geciane Silveira, 2017. "Solar energy technologies and open innovation: A study based on bibliometric and social network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 228-238.
    20. Robert Huggins & Piers Thompson, 2017. "Entrepreneurial networks and open innovation: the role of strategic and embedded ties," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 403-435, May.
    21. Allen T. Alexander & Kristel Miller & Sean Fielding, 2015. "Open For Business: Universities, Entrepreneurial Academics And Open Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-21, December.
    22. Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan & Noyons, Ed C.M., 2010. "A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 629-635.
    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. Kuan, Chung-Huei & Chen, Dar-Zen & Huang, Mu-Hsuan, 2019. "Bibliographically coupled patents: Their temporal pattern and combined relevance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    2. Elia, Gianluca & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Urbinati, Andrea, 2020. "Implementing open innovation through virtual brand communities: A case study analysis in the semiconductor industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).

    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. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    2. Francesco Paolo Appio & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Alberto Minin, 2014. "Visualizing the structure and bridges of the intellectual property management and strategy literature: a document co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 623-661, October.
    3. Rodolfo Modrigais Strauss Nunes & Susana Carla Farias Pereira, 2022. "Intellectual structure and trends in the humanitarian operations field," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 319(1), pages 1099-1157, December.
    4. Juan J. Nájera-Sánchez, 2019. "A Systematic Review of Sustainable Banking through a Co-Word Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.
    5. María Pinto & Rosaura Fernández-Pascual & David Caballero-Mariscal & Dora Sales, 2020. "Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1479-1510, August.
    6. Juntao Zheng & Niancai Liu, 2015. "Mapping of important international academic awards," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 763-791, September.
    7. Belussi, Fiorenza & Orsi, Luigi & Savarese, Maria, 2019. "Mapping Business Model Research: A Document Bibliometric Analysis," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3).
    8. Paola Bernardi & Alberto Bertello & Canio Forliano & Ludovico Bullini Orlandi, 2022. "Beyond the “ivory tower”. Comparing academic and non-academic knowledge on social entrepreneurship," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 999-1032, September.
    9. Raphaël Maucuer & Alexandre Renaud, 2019. "Business Model Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Origins and Trends," Post-Print hal-01918188, HAL.
    10. Igors Skute, 2019. "Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 237-265, July.
    11. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    12. Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer, 2013. "Careers in science: policy issues according to Nature and Science editorials," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 485-495, August.
    13. Jingyuan Yu & Juan Muñoz-Justicia, 2020. "A Bibliometric Overview of Twitter-Related Studies Indexed in Web of Science," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-18, May.
    14. Filippo Corsini & Rafael Laurenti & Franziska Meinherz & Francesco Paolo Appio & Luca Mora, 2019. "The Advent of Practice Theories in Research on Sustainable Consumption: Past, Current and Future Directions of the Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    15. Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer & Cornelis A. Bochove & Nees Jan Eck, 2011. "On the map: Nature and Science editorials," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 99-112, January.
    16. Evi Sachini & Nikolaos Karampekios & Pierpaolo Brutti & Konstantinos Sioumalas-Christodoulou, 2020. "Should I stay or should I go? Using bibliometrics to identify the international mobility of highly educated Greek manpower," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 641-663, October.
    17. Jiang, Chenming & Bhat, Chandra R. & Lam, William H.K., 2020. "A bibliometric overview of Transportation Research Part B: Methodological in the past forty years (1979–2019)," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 268-291.
    18. 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.
    19. Antonio Molina-García & Julio Diéguez-Soto & M. Teresa Galache-Laza & Marta Campos-Valenzuela, 2023. "Financial literacy in SMEs: a bibliometric analysis and a systematic literature review of an emerging research field," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 787-826, April.
    20. Tomasz Ingram & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala & Karel Hlaváček, 2023. "Organizational Resilience as a Response to the Energy Crisis: Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-35, January.

    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:gam:jadmsc:v:8:y:2018:i:3:p:34-:d:157257. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.