IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pab/wpboam/17.02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Improving the efectivenses of open innovation: a configurational approach

Author

Listed:
  • Gloria Cuevas-Rodríguez

    (Department of Business Organization and Marketing, Universidad Pablo de Olavide)

  • Antonio Carmona-Lavado

    (Department of Business Organization and Marketing, Universidad Pablo de Olavide)

  • Carmen Cabello-Medina

    (Department of Business Organization and Marketing, Universidad Pablo de Olavide)

Abstract

In this research, we propose that biotech firms use Open Innovation (OI) configurations by combining three openness practices (number of alliances, breadth and external R&D) and five complementary organizational assets for openness (internal R&D, human capital, alliances coordination and interorganizational learning capabilities, and patenting) and that such configurations have influence on firm performance. From our empirical study on a sample of Spanish biotech firms, three predominant configurations are identified, which are located at different points in the openness continuum, and encompass different combinations of openness practices and organizational complementary assets. The most open configuration presents a significant superior performance while the least open is associated with the lowest performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Gloria Cuevas-Rodríguez & Antonio Carmona-Lavado & Carmen Cabello-Medina, 2017. "Improving the efectivenses of open innovation: a configurational approach," Working Papers 17.02, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Business Organization and Marketing (former Department of Business Administration).
  • Handle: RePEc:pab:wpboam:17.02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.upo.es/serv/bib/wpboam/wpboam1702.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2017
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christine Gulbranson & David Audretsch, 2008. "Proof of concept centers: accelerating the commercialization of university innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 249-258, June.
    2. Henry Chesbrough & Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2002. "The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 529-555, June.
    3. John Hagedoorn & Geert Duysters, 2002. "External Sources of Innovative Capabilities: The Preferences for Strategic Alliances or Mergers and Acquisitions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 167-188, March.
    4. Kingston, William, 2001. "Innovation needs patents reform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 403-423, March.
    5. Narula, Rajneesh & Duysters, Geert, 2004. "Globalisation and trends in international R&D alliances," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 199-218.
    6. Petr Hanel & Marc St-Pierre, 2006. "Industry–University Collaboration by Canadian Manufacturing Firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 485-499, July.
    7. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    9. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
    10. Zahra, Shaker A., 1996. "Technology strategy and new venture performance: A study of corporate-sponsored and independent biotechnology ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 289-321, July.
    11. Kock, Alexander & Gemünden, Hans Georg & Salomo, Søren & Schultz, Carsten, 2011. "The Mixed Blessings of Technological Innovativeness for the Commercial Success of New Products," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 63285, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    12. Charlene L. Nicholls‐Nixon & Carolyn Y. Woo, 2003. "Technology sourcing and output of established firms in a regime of encompassing technological change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(7), pages 651-666, July.
    13. Wincent, Joakim & Anokhin, Sergey & Örtqvist, Daniel, 2010. "Does network board capital matter? A study of innovative performance in strategic SME networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 265-275, March.
    14. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    15. Frans A. J. Van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda & Michiel de Boer, 1999. "Coevolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment: Organizational Forms and Combinative Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(5), pages 551-568, October.
    16. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    17. Tether, Bruce S., 2002. "Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 947-967, August.
    18. Santoro, Michael D. & Chakrabarti, Alok K., 2002. "Firm size and technology centrality in industry-university interactions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1163-1180, September.
    19. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    20. Peter J. Lane & Michael Lubatkin, 1998. "Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning," Post-Print hal-02311860, HAL.
    21. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    23. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
    24. Mark A. Youndt & Mohan Subramaniam & Scott A. Snell, 2004. "Intellectual Capital Profiles: An Examination of Investments and Returns," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 335-361, March.
    25. Peter J Buckley & Mark C Casson, 2009. "The internalisation theory of the multinational enterprise: A review of the progress of a research agenda after 30 years," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 40(9), pages 1563-1580, December.
    26. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2004. "Little Patents and Big Secrets: Managing Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, Spring.
    27. Berchicci, Luca, 2013. "Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 117-127.
    28. Michael J. Leiblein & Douglas J. Miller, 2003. "An empirical examination of transaction‐ and firm‐level influences on the vertical boundaries of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(9), pages 839-859, September.
    29. Rothaermel, Frank T. & Deeds, David L., 2006. "Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 429-460, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Carmona-Lavado, Antonio & Cuevas-Rodríguez, Gloria & Cabello-Medina, Carmen & Fedriani, Eugenio M., 2021. "Does open innovation always work? The role of complementary assets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    2. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    3. Haeussler, Carolin & Patzelt, Holger & Zahra, Shaker A., 2012. "Strategic alliances and product development in high technology new firms: The moderating effect of technological capabilities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 217-233.
    4. Schön, Benjamin & Pyka, Andreas, 2013. "The success factors of technology-sourcing through mergers & acquisitions: An intuitive meta-analysis," FZID Discussion Papers 78-2013, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    5. Gómez, Jaime & Salazar, Idana & Vargas, Pilar, 2020. "The Role Of Extramural R&D And Scientific Knowledge In Creating High Novelty Innovations: An Examination Of Manufacturing And Service Firms In Spain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    6. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    8. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Beerkens, B.E. & Duysters, G.M., 2003. "Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks," Working Papers 03.22, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    9. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    10. Bruce Rasmussen, 2010. "Innovation and Commercialisation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13680.
    11. 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.
    12. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    13. Arie Y. Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2011. "Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 81-98, February.
    14. Frank T. Rothaermel & Andrew M. Hess, 2007. "Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual-, Firm-, and Network-Level Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 898-921, December.
    15. Lewandowska Małgorzata Stefania, 2015. "Capturing Absorptive Capacity: Concepts, Determinants, Measurement Modes and Role in Open Innovation," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 45(1), pages 32-56, March.
    16. Chigu Kim & Chul Lee & Jina Kang, 2018. "Determinants Of Firm’S Innovation-Related External Knowledge Search Strategy: The Role Of Potential Absorptive Capacity And Appropriability Regime," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-33, August.
    17. Scuotto, Veronica & Beatrice, Orlando & Valentina, Cillo & Nicotra, Melita & Di Gioia, Leonardo & Farina Briamonte, Massimiliano, 2020. "Uncovering the micro-foundations of knowledge sharing in open innovation partnerships: An intention-based perspective of technology transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    18. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Buss, Philipp & Peukert, Christian, 2015. "R&D outsourcing and intellectual property infringement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 977-989.
    20. Avimanyu Datta, 2011. "Combining Networks, Ambidexterity and Absorptive Capacity to Explain Commercialization of Innovations: A Theoretical Model from Review and Extension," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(4), pages 2-25, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Open Innovation; Configurations; Internal R&D; Human Capital; Coordination and Interorganizational Learning capabilities; and Patenting.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pab:wpboam:17.02. 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: Publicación Digital - UPO (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/doupoes.html .

    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.