IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v43y2014i5p828-840.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing open innovation projects with science-based and market-based partners

Author

Listed:
  • Du, Jingshu
  • Leten, Bart
  • Vanhaverbeke, Wim

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between (outside-in) open innovation and the financial performance of R&D projects, drawing on a unique dataset that contains information on the open innovation practices, management and performance of 489 R&D projects of a large European multinational firm. We introduce two types of open innovation partnerships – science-based and market-based partnerships – and examine their relationships with project financial performance. In addition, we investigate whether the open innovation—project performance relationships are influenced by the way how R&D projects are managed. Our results show that R&D projects with open innovation partnerships are associated with a better financial performance providing that they are managed in the most suitable way. Market-based partnerships are positively correlated with project performance if a formal project management process is used; however these partnerships are associated with a lower performance for loosely managed projects. In contrast, science-based partnerships are associated with higher project revenues for loosely managed projects only.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:43:y:2014:i:5:p:828-840
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.12.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733313002278
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2013.12.008?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. Joel A. C. Baum & Tony Calabrese & Brian S. Silverman, 2000. "Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 267-294, March.
    2. Murray, Fiona, 2004. "The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 643-659, May.
    3. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    4. Kathy A. Paulson Gjerde & Susan A. Slotnick & Matthew J. Sobel, 2002. "New Product Innovation with Multiple Features and Technology Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(10), pages 1268-1284, October.
    5. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    6. Tether, Bruce S., 2002. "Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 947-967, August.
    7. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    8. Julia Porter Liebeskind & Amalya Lumerman Oliver & Lynne Zucker & Marilynn Brewer, 1996. "Social networks, Learning, and Flexibility: Sourcing Scientific Knowledge in New Biotechnology Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 428-443, August.
    9. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May.
    10. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    11. Hobday, Mike, 2000. "The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 871-893, August.
    12. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Shenhar, Aaron J. & Dvir, Dov, 1996. "Toward a typological theory of project management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 607-632, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    16. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Lokshin, Boris, 2004. "Cooperative R&D and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1477-1492, December.
    17. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    18. Joel West & Karim Lakhani, 2008. "Getting Clear About Communities in Open Innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 223-231.
    19. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    20. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    21. Jeffrey H. Dyer, 1996. "Does Governance Matter? Keiretsu Alliances and Asset Specificity as Sources of Japanese Competitive Advantage," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(6), pages 649-666, December.
    22. Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), 2005. "Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-0-387-25022-9, November.
    23. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    24. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    25. Cassiman, Bruno & Di Guardo, Maria Chiara & Valentini, Giovanni, 2010. "Organizing links with science: Cooperate or contract?: A project-level analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 882-892, September.
    26. 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..
    27. Roijakkers, Nadine & Hagedoorn, John, 2006. "Inter-firm R&D partnering in pharmaceutical biotechnology since 1975: Trends, patterns, and networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 431-446, April.
    28. Joachim Henkel & Eric von Hippel, 2005. "Welfare Implications of User Innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 73-87, January.
    29. Andres Barge-Gil, 2010. "Open, Semi-Open and Closed Innovators: Towards an Explanation of Degree of Openness," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 577-607.
    30. Katila, Riitta & Mang, Paul Y., 2003. "Exploiting technological opportunities: the timing of collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 317-332, February.
    31. Tsai, Kuen-Hung, 2009. "Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Toward a contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 765-778, June.
    32. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Lokshin, Boris, 2004. "Cooperative R&D and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1477-1492, December.
    33. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    34. Belderbos, René & Cassiman, Bruno & Faems, Dries & Leten, Bart & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 841-852.
    35. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    36. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    37. Sofka, Wolfgang & Grimpe, Christoph, 2009. "Specialized search and innovation performance: evidence across Europe," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-016, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    38. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    39. Mansfield, Edwin, 1998. "Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 773-776, April.
    40. Harrison, Debbie & Waluszewski, Alexandra, 2008. "The development of a user network as a way to re-launch an unwanted product," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 115-130, February.
    41. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, 1996. "Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 136-150, April.
    42. McDonald, John F & Moffitt, Robert A, 1980. "The Uses of Tobit Analysis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 62(2), pages 318-321, May.
    43. Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S., 2005. "University-based technology initiatives: Quantitative and qualitative evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 253-257, April.
    44. 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.
    45. Miotti, Luis & Sachwald, Frederique, 2003. "Co-operative R&D: why and with whom?: An integrated framework of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1481-1499, September.
    46. Robert M. Grant & Charles Baden‐Fuller, 2004. "A Knowledge Accessing Theory of Strategic Alliances," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 61-84, January.
    47. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    48. Mansfield, Edwin, 1995. "Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations:," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 55-65, February.
    49. von Zedtwitz, Maximilian & Gassmann, Oliver, 2002. "Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: four different patterns of managing research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 569-588, May.
    50. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    51. Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Wagner, 2009. "The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1969-1984, December.
    52. Joachim Henkel & Eric Hippel, 2005. "Welfare Implications of User Innovation," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 45-59, Springer.
    53. Gruner, Kjell E. & Homburg, Christian, 2000. "Does Customer Interaction Enhance New Product Success?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 1-14, 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. 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. Jong, Simcha & Slavova, Kremena, 2014. "When publications lead to products: The open science conundrum in new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 645-654.
    3. Soh, Pek-Hooi & Subramanian, Annapoornima M., 2014. "When do firms benefit from university–industry R&D collaborations? The implications of firm R&D focus on scientific research and technological recombination," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 807-821.
    4. Antonio Malva & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Basic science as a prescription for breakthrough inventions in the pharmaceutical industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 670-695, August.
    5. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    6. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    7. Leten, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Science or graduates: How do firms benefit from the proximity of universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1398-1412.
    8. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    9. repec:wip:wpaper:6 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Alessandra Scandura, 2019. "The role of scientific and market knowledge in the inventive process: evidence from a survey of industrial inventors," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1029-1069, August.
    12. SUZUKI Shinya & Rene BELDERBOS & KWON Hyeog Ug & FUKAO Kyoji, 2012. "The Impact of Host Countries' University Research and University-Industry Collaboration on the Location of Research and Development: Evidence from Japanese multinational firms," Discussion papers 12080, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. René Belderbos & Bart Leten & Shinya Suzuki, 2017. "Scientific research, firm heterogeneity, and foreign R&D locations of multinational firms," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 691-711, September.
    14. Belderbos, Rene & Leten, Bart & Suzuki, Shinya, 2009. "Does Excellence in Academic Research Attract Foreign R&D?," MERIT Working Papers 2009-066, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Duong, Phuong-Anh Nguyen & Voordeckers, Wim & Huybrechts, Jolien & Lambrechts, Frank, 2022. "On external knowledge sources and innovation performance: Family versus non-family firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    16. Gun Jea Yu & Joonkyum Lee, 2017. "When should a firm collaborate with research organizations for innovation performance? The moderating role of innovation orientation, size, and age," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1451-1465, December.
    17. Gallego, Jorge & Rubalcaba, Luis & Suárez, Cristina, 2013. "Knowledge for innovation in Europe: The role of external knowledge on firms' cooperation strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 2034-2041.
    18. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Rene Belderbos & Victor Gilsing & Shinya Suzuki, 2015. "Direct and mediated ties to universities: ‘Scientific’ absorptive capacity and innovation performance of pharmaceutical firms," Working Papers of Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven 504836, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven.
    20. Subramanian, Annapoornima M. & Lim, Kwanghui & Soh, Pek-Hooi, 2013. "When birds of a feather don’t flock together: Different scientists and the roles they play in biotech R&D alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 595-612.
    21. Cassiman, Bruno & Di Guardo, Maria Chiara & Valentini, Giovanni, 2010. "Organizing links with science: Cooperate or contract?: A project-level analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 882-892, 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:43:y:2014:i:5:p:828-840. 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.