IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i22p12870-d684203.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Business, Social, and Environmental Goals in Open Innovation through Partner Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Ricardo S. Santos

    (Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa (ISEL), Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa, 1959-007 Lisbon, Portugal
    GOVCOPP, Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism, Universidade de Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

  • Jose Soares

    (ADVANCE, Lisbon School of Economics and Management (ISEG), University of Lisbon, 1200-781 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Pedro Carmona Marques

    (Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa (ISEL), Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa, 1959-007 Lisbon, Portugal
    EIGeS, Engineering Faculty, Universidade Lusófona, 1749-024 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Helena V. G. Navas

    (UNIDEMI, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, NOVA School of Science and Technology, FCT NOVA, NOVA University of Lisbon, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal)

  • José Moleiro Martins

    (ISCAL, Polytechnic Institute of Lisbon, 1069-035 Lisboa, Portugal
    Business Research Unit (BRU-IUL), University Institute of Lisbon (ISCTE-IUL), 1649-026 Lisbon, Portugal)

Abstract

Although collaborative networks (CN) are widespread in academia and have come to be even more used in corporations all over the world, they still face several challenges on behalf of the new product development (NPD) context, especially in regard to the selection of the CN’s right partner. This becomes even more evident when it comes to promoting sustainable development goals within a CN’s activities, by selecting the right partners with a wide consensus from a CN’s management board, avoiding, therefore, the subjectivity around managers’ perception of a CN’s partner selection. Therefore, this work attempts to answer this problem, by presenting a soft-computing-based framework, to support the managers’ board on partner search and selection. The method presented here is further assessed by using a case study, based on the development of a green product, where, according to the obtained results, it is demonstrated that the proposed approach is extremely effective for partner selection, by assessing and prioritizing each candidate involved. The most suitable candidate that fulfills the CN’s requirements is then selected to be integrated as a future partner.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo S. Santos & Jose Soares & Pedro Carmona Marques & Helena V. G. Navas & José Moleiro Martins, 2021. "Integrating Business, Social, and Environmental Goals in Open Innovation through Partner Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:22:p:12870-:d:684203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12870/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12870/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ricardo Santos & António Abreu & Ana Dias & João M.F. Calado & Vitor Anes & José Soares, 2020. "A Framework for Risk Assessment in Collaborative Networks to Promote Sustainable Systems in Innovation Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Chien Hsiang Liao, 2011. "How to improve research quality? Examining the impacts of collaboration intensity and member diversity in collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 747-761, March.
    3. Andersen, Kristina Vaarst, 2013. "The problem of embeddedness revisited: Collaboration and market types," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 139-148.
    4. Tao Zhou & Linyuan Lü & Yi-Cheng Zhang, 2009. "Predicting missing links via local information," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 71(4), pages 623-630, October.
    5. Tsai, Kuen-Hung, 2009. "Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Toward a contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 765-778, June.
    6. Jabari Lotf, Jalil & Abdollahi Azgomi, Mohammad & Ebrahimi Dishabi, Mohammad Reza, 2022. "An improved influence maximization method for social networks based on genetic algorithm," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 586(C).
    7. Gonzalez-Brambila, Claudia N. & Veloso, Francisco M. & Krackhardt, David, 2013. "The impact of network embeddedness on research output," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1555-1567.
    8. 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.
    9. Li, Eldon Y. & Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2013. "Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1515-1530.
    10. Lopez-Vega, Henry & Tell, Fredrik & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2016. "Where and how to search? Search paths in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 125-136.
    11. Matthias R. Guertler & Udo Lindemann, 2016. "Identifying Open Innovation Partners: A Methodology For Strategic Partner Selection," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(05), pages 1-20, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Tojeiro-Rivero, Damián & Moreno, Rosina, 2019. "Technological cooperation, R&D outsourcing, and innovation performance at the firm level: The role of the regional context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1798-1808.
    14. Markovic, Stefan & Bagherzadeh, Mehdi, 2018. "How does breadth of external stakeholder co-creation influence innovation performance? Analyzing the mediating roles of knowledge sharing and product innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 173-186.
    15. Ana S. M. E. Dias & António Abreu & Helena V. G. Navas & Ricardo Santos, 2020. "Proposal of a Holistic Framework to Support Sustainability of New Product Innovation Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    16. Damián Tojeiro-Rivero & Rosina Moreno, 2019. "“Technological cooperation and R&D outsourcing at the firm level: The role of the regional context ”," IREA Working Papers 201904, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Feb 2019.
    17. Zhang, Gupeng & Wang, Xiao & Duan, Hongbo & Zheng, Leven J., 2021. "How do new entrants’ pre-entry technological backgrounds impact their cross-industry innovation performances? A retrospective study of the mobile phone vendors," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    18. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    19. Lili Wang & Xianwen Wang & Niels J. Philipsen, 2017. "Network structure of scientific collaborations between China and the EU member states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 765-781, November.
    20. Albats, Ekaterina & Alexander, Allen & Mahdad, Maral & Miller, Kristel & Post, Ger, 2020. "Stakeholder management in SME open innovation: interdependences and strategic actions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 291-301.
    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. Sanja Puzović & Jasmina Vesić Vasović & Dragan D. Milanović & Vladan Paunović, 2023. "A Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Approach to Open Innovation Partner Evaluation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Thuy Seran & Sea Matilda Bez, 2019. "Managing Open-Innovation between Competitors: A Project-Level Approach," Post-Print hal-02427680, HAL.
    2. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M. & Wallin, Martin W., 2021. "How open is innovation? A retrospective and ideas forward," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    3. Marullo, Cristina & Ahn, Joon Mo & Martelli, Irene & Di Minin, Alberto, 2022. "Open for innovation: An improved measurement approach using item response theory," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Jiancheng Guan & Lanxin Pang, 2018. "Bidirectional relationship between network position and knowledge creation in Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 201-222, April.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Xincheng Wang & Jide Sun & Longwei Tian & Wenjia Guo & Tianyu Gu, 2021. "Environmental dynamism and cooperative innovation: the moderating role of state ownership and institutional development," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1344-1375, October.
    9. Stefano Scarazzati & Lili Wang, 2019. "The effect of collaborations on scientific research output: the case of nanoscience in Chinese regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 839-868, November.
    10. Kobarg, Sebastian & Stumpf-Wollersheim, Jutta & Welpe, Isabell M., 2019. "More is not always better: Effects of collaboration breadth and depth on radical and incremental innovation performance at the project level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-10.
    11. Martie-Louise Verreynne & Rui Torres de Oliveira & John Steen & Marta Indulska & Jerad A. Ford, 2020. "What motivates ‘free’ revealing? Measuring outbound non-pecuniary openness, innovation types and expectations of future profit growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 271-301, July.
    12. El Maalouf, Nicole & Bahemia, Hanna, 2023. "The implementation of inbound open innovation at the firm level: A dynamic capability perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    13. Ben Zhang & Xiaohong Wang, 2017. "Empirical study on influence of university-industry collaboration on research performance and moderating effect of social capital: evidence from engineering academics in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 257-277, October.
    14. Gregorio González-Alcaide & Héctor Pinargote & José M. Ramos, 2020. "From cut-points to key players in co-authorship networks: a case study in ventilator-associated pneumonia research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 707-733, May.
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. Owusu Sarpong & Peter Teirlinck, 2018. "The influence of functional and geographical diversity in collaboration on product innovation performance in SMEs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1667-1695, December.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Chen, Wei & Yan, Yan, 2023. "New components and combinations: The perspective of the internal collaboration networks of scientific teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:22:p:12870-:d:684203. 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.