IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/2016-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Open Innovation: Revealing and Engagement in Open Data Organisations

Author

Listed:
  • Franz Huber

    (University of Southampton)

  • Francesco Rentocchini

    (Southampton Business School, University of Southampton)

  • Thomas Wainwright

    (University of Southampton - School of Management)

Abstract

Among many factors, we conclude it is difficult fully to comprehend the persistent intensity of official UK attachments to nuclear power, without also considering aims to maintain nuclear submarine capabilities. Yet this aspect is entirely undocumented anywhere in UK energy policy literatures. To acknowledge this, is not to entertain a conspiracy theory. It can be understood instead, in terms of more distributed and relational dynamics of power. Building on literatures in political science, we refer to this as a ‘deep incumbency complex’. Such an evidently under-visible phenomenon would hold important implications not only for UK nuclear strategies, but also the wider state of British democracy.

Suggested Citation

  • Franz Huber & Francesco Rentocchini & Thomas Wainwright, 2016. "Open Innovation: Revealing and Engagement in Open Data Organisations," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-19, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:2016-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=2016-19-swps-huber-et-al.pdf&site=25
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Sungjoo & Park, Gwangman & Yoon, Byungun & Park, Jinwoo, 2010. "Open innovation in SMEs--An intermediated network model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 290-300, March.
    2. Frenz, Marion & Ietto-Gillies, Grazia, 2009. "The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1125-1135, September.
    3. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    4. Robertson, Paul L. & Casali, G.L. & Jacobson, David, 2012. "Managing open incremental process innovation: Absorptive Capacity and distributed learning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 822-832.
    5. Henkel, Joachim & Schöberl, Simone & Alexy, Oliver, 2014. "The emergence of openness: How and why firms adopt selective revealing in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 879-890.
    6. Marco Ceccagnoli & Stuart J.H. Graham & Matthew J. Higgins & Jeongsik Lee, 2010. "Productivity and the role of complementary assets in firms' demand for technology innovations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 839-869, June.
    7. Marina G. Biniari, 2012. "The Emotional Embeddedness of Corporate Entrepreneurship: The Case of Envy," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 36(1), pages 141-170, January.
    8. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    9. Erik Brynjolfsson & Brian Kahin (ed.), 2002. "Understanding the Digital Economy: Data, Tools, and Research," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262523302, December.
    10. A. Spithoven & B. Clarysse & M. Knockaert, 2009. "Building Absorptive Capacity to Organise Inbound Open Innovation in Low Tech Industries," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 09/606, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    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. Zakaria Babutsidze, 2018. "Pirated Economics," South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, Association of Economic Universities of South and Eastern Europe and the Black Sea Region, vol. 16(2), pages 209-219.
    2. Mariana Mazzucato & Douglas K Robinson, 2016. "Lost in space? NASA and the changing publicprivate eco-system in space," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    3. Zakaria Babutsidze & Graham Bradley & Andreas Chai & Thomas Dietz, 2018. "Public perceptions and responses to climate change in France," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/7vdd604d479, Sciences Po.
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7vdd604d4797ir5fgrk0es56n5 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Zakaria Babutsidze & Graham Bradley & A. B. Chai & Thomas Dietz, 2018. "Public perceptions and responses to climate change in France," Working Papers hal-03404214, HAL.
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/3l64jkdu7v89h84ls9062ji03i is not listed 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. 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.
    2. Gabriele Santoro & Alberto Ferraris & Elisa Giacosa & Guido Giovando, 2018. "How SMEs Engage in Open Innovation: a Survey," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(2), pages 561-574, June.
    3. Stephen Roper & Helen Xia, 2014. "Unpacking open innovation: Absorptive capacity, exploratory and exploitative openness and the growth of entrepreneurial biopharmaceutical firms," Research Papers 0019, Enterprise Research Centre.
    4. Colombo, Massimo G. & Piva, Evila & Rossi-Lamastra, Cristina, 2014. "Open innovation and within-industry diversification in small and medium enterprises: The case of open source software firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 891-902.
    5. Wenjing Wang, 2014. "Do specialists exit the firm outsourcing its R&D?," Economics Working Papers 2014-21, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    6. 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.
    7. Messer, Julia & Martin, Alexander, 2019. "Open Innovation in KMU: Eine empirische Analyse ausgewählter Faktoren," Flensburger Hefte zu Unternehmertum und Mittelstand 18, Jackstädt-Zentrum Flensburg.
    8. André Spithoven & Wim Vanhaverbeke & Nadine Roijakkers, 2013. "Open innovation practices in SMEs and large enterprises," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 537-562, October.
    9. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    10. Stanko, Michael A. & Henard, David H., 2017. "Toward a better understanding of crowdfunding, openness and the consequences for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 784-798.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. Linder, Christian, 2019. "Customer orientation and operations: The role of manufacturing capabilities in small- and medium-sized enterprises," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 105-117.
    14. Hagedoorn, John & Ridder, Ann-Kristin, 2012. "Open innovation, contracts, and intellectual property rights: an exploratory empirical study," MERIT Working Papers 2012-025, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. 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.
    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. Ovuakporie, Oghogho Destina & Pillai, Kishore Gopalakrishna & Wang, Chengang & Wei, Yingqi, 2021. "Differential moderating effects of strategic and operational reconfiguration on the relationship between open innovation practices and innovation performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    18. Tsinopoulos, Christos & Yan, Ji & Sousa, Carlos M.P., 2019. "Abandoning innovation activities and performance: The moderating role of openness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1399-1411.
    19. Dominic Chalmers, 2013. "Social innovation: An exploration of the barriers faced by innovating organizations in the social economy," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 28(1), pages 17-34, February.
    20. Björn Remneland Wikhamn & Alexander Styhre, 2017. "Open Innovation As A Facilitator For Corporate Exploration," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06), pages 1-20, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Open Data; Open Innovation; digital economy; selective revealing; gatekeepers; engagement;
    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:sru:ssewps:2016-19. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.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.