IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v136y2018icp103-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Walrave, Bob
  • Talmar, Madis
  • Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S.
  • Romme, A. Georges L.
  • Verbong, Geert P.J.

Abstract

Path-breaking innovations are increasingly developed and commercialized by networks of co-creating actors, called innovation ecosystems. Previous work in this area demonstrates that the ‘internal’ alignment of actors is critical to value creation in the innovation ecosystem. However, the literature has largely overlooked that the success of an innovation ecosystem also depends on its ‘external’ viability, determined by the broader socio-technical environment. That is, path-breaking innovations inherently challenge the prevailing socio-technical regime in a domain (e.g., established rules, artifacts and habits) that tends to be resistant to change. Overcoming this resistance is a major challenge for ventures pioneering path-breaking innovations. The paper contributes to the literature on innovation ecosystems by explicitly considering the socio-technical viability of the innovation ecosystem around a path-breaking innovation. In particular, we theorize about the objects of manipulation in an innovation ecosystem and discuss the strategies that a focal venture, orchestrating the innovation ecosystem, can employ in manipulating these objects so as to increase the socio-technical viability of the ecosystem. We arrive at a multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystem development that integrates internal alignment and external viability and informs a research agenda for future studies in this field.

Suggested Citation

  • Walrave, Bob & Talmar, Madis & Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2018. "A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 103-113.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:136:y:2018:i:c:p:103-113
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162517304997
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.011?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. Mokyr, Joel, 1990. "Punctuated Equilibria and Technological Progress," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 350-354, May.
    2. Steven W. Bradley & Dean A. Shepherd & Johan Wiklund, 2011. "The Importance of Slack for New Organizations Facing ‘Tough’ Environments," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48, pages 1071-1097, July.
    3. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    4. Fernando F. Suarez & Stine Grodal & Aleksios Gotsopoulos, 2015. "Perfect timing? Dominant category, dominant design, and the window of opportunity for firm entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 437-448, March.
    5. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Bruneel, Johan & Mahajan, Aarti, 2014. "Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1164-1176.
    6. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    7. Bob Walrave & Kim E. van Oorschot & A. Georges L. Romme, 2011. "Getting Trapped in the Suppression of Exploration: A Simulation Model," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(8), pages 1727-1751, December.
    8. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Corrigendum to 'Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars'," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 842-842, December.
    9. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow & Jack A. Nickerson, 2015. "Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 216-234, February.
    10. Felipe A. Csaszar & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2010. "How Much to Copy? Determinants of Effective Imitation Breadth," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 661-676, June.
    11. Svenja C. Sommer & Christoph H. Loch, 2004. "Selectionism and Learning in Projects with Complexity and Unforeseeable Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1334-1347, October.
    12. Johan Schot & Frank Geels, 2007. "Niches in evolutionary theories of technical change," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 605-622, October.
    13. Raven, Rob, 2007. "Niche accumulation and hybridisation strategies in transition processes towards a sustainable energy system: An assessment of differences and pitfalls," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2390-2400, April.
    14. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    15. Podoynitsyna, Ksenia & Song, Michael & van der Bij, Hans & Weggeman, Mathieu, 2013. "Improving new technology venture performance under direct and indirect network externality conditions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 195-210.
    16. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    17. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    18. Lori Rosenkopf & Paul Almeida, 2003. "Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 751-766, June.
    19. Ron Adner & Daniel Snow, 2010. "Old technology responses to new technology threats: demand heterogeneity and technology retreats," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 1655-1675, October.
    20. Rahul Kapoor & Nathan R. Furr, 2015. "Complementarities and competition: Unpacking the drivers of entrants' technology choices in the solar photovoltaic industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 416-436, March.
    21. Li, Li, 2005. "The effects of trust and shared vision on inward knowledge transfer in subsidiaries' intra- and inter-organizational relationships," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 77-95, February.
    22. Levinthal, Daniel A, 1998. "The Slow Pace of Rapid Technological Change: Gradualism and Punctuation in Technological Change," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 217-247, June.
    23. Roberto Garcia-Castro & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2015. "Incremental value creation and appropriation in a world with multiple stakeholders," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 137-147, January.
    24. Wolfgang Ulaga & Werner Reinartz, 2011. "Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully," Post-Print hal-00642039, HAL.
    25. Naga Lakshmi Damaraju & Jay B. Barney & Anil K. Makhija, 2015. "Real options in divestment alternatives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 728-744, May.
    26. Alessia Sammarra & Lucio Biggiero, 2008. "Heterogeneity and Specificity of Inter‐Firm Knowledge Flows in Innovation Networks," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 800-829, June.
    27. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    28. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    29. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 74-87, February.
    30. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & David B. Yoffie, 2007. "Wintel: Cooperation and Conflict," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 584-598, April.
    31. Almeida, Paul & Dokko, Gina & Rosenkopf, Lori, 2003. "Startup size and the mechanisms of external learning: increasing opportunity and decreasing ability?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 301-315, February.
    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. Glassey-Previdoli, Deborah & Bonazzi, Riccardo & Kuonen, Patrick, 2020. "Bifocals: Visualizing Interactions between Business Model Design and Ecosystem Innovation," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2020), Virtual Conference, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Virtual Conference, 10-12 September 2020, pages 322-332, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    2. Ghazinoory, Sepehr & Sarkissian, Alfred & Farhanchi, Mojtaba & Saghafi, Fatemeh, 2020. "Renewing a dysfunctional innovation ecosystem: The case of the Lalejin ceramics and pottery," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 96.
    3. Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2018. "Beyond agricultural innovation systems? Exploring an agricultural innovation ecosystems approach for niche design and development in sustainability transitions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 116-121.
    4. Palmié, Maximilian & Wincent, Joakim & Parida, Vinit & Caglar, Umur, 2020. "The evolution of the financial technology ecosystem: An introduction and agenda for future research on disruptive innovations in ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Zofia Gródek-Szostak & Małgorzata Luc & Anna Szeląg-Sikora & Jakub Sikora & Marcin Niemiec & Luis Ochoa Siguencia & Emil Velinov, 2020. "Promotion of RES in a Technology Transfer Network. Case Study of the Enterprise Europe Network," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(13), pages 1-13, July.
    6. Mark A. Phillips & Jagjit Singh Srai, 2018. "Exploring Emerging Ecosystem Boundaries: Defining ‘The Game’," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(08), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Kristiaan P. W. Kok & Alanya C. L. den Boer & Tomris Cesuroglu & Marjoleine G. van der Meij & Renée de Wildt-Liesveld & Barbara J. Regeer & Jacqueline E. W. Broerse, 2019. "Transforming Research and Innovation for Sustainable Food Systems—A Coupled-Systems Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(24), pages 1-23, December.
    8. Granstrand, Ove & Holgersson, Marcus, 2020. "Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    9. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Paglialunga, Elena & Sforna, Giorgia, 2020. "System transition and structural change processes in the energy efficiency of residential sector: Evidence from EU countries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 309-329.
    10. Paul Schneider, 2018. "Managerial challenges of Industry 4.0: an empirically backed research agenda for a nascent field," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 803-848, July.
    11. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Lamperti, Francesco & Mavilia, Roberto, 2019. "Do science parks sustain or trigger innovation? Empirical evidence from Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 140-151.
    12. Goulet, Frédéric, 2021. "Characterizing alignments in socio-technical transitions. Lessons from agricultural bio-inputs in Brazil," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    13. Linde, Lina & Sjödin, David & Parida, Vinit & Wincent, Joakim, 2021. "Dynamic capabilities for ecosystem orchestrationA capability-based framework for smart city innovation initiatives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    14. Inigo, Edurne A. & Albareda, Laura, 2019. "Sustainability oriented innovation dynamics: Levels of dynamic capabilities and their path-dependent and self-reinforcing logics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 334-351.
    15. Camboim, Guilherme Freitas & Zawislak, Paulo Antônio & Pufal, Nathália Amarante, 2019. "Driving elements to make cities smarter: Evidences from European projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 154-167.
    16. Zolfagharian, Mohammadreza & Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob & Romme, A. Georges L., 2019. "Studying transitions: Past, present, and future," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    17. Jing Huang & Hongqi Wang & Jianlong Wu & Zhongji Yang & Xiaobo Hu & Mengmeng Bao, 2020. "Exploring the Key Driving Forces of the Sustainable Intergenerational Evolution of the Industrial Alliance Innovation Ecosystem: Evidence from a Case Study of China’s TDIA," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(4), pages 1-31, February.
    18. Phillips, Mark A. & Ritala, Paavo, 2019. "A complex adaptive systems agenda for ecosystem research methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    19. Xie, Xuemei & Wang, Hongwei, 2021. "How to bridge the gap between innovation niches and exploratory and exploitative innovations in open innovation ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 299-311.
    20. Söderholm, Patrik & Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Hansson, Julia & Mossberg, Johanna & Sandström, Annica, 2019. "Technological development for sustainability: The role of network management in the innovation policy mix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 309-323.
    21. Guo, Jianfeng & Pan, Jiaofeng & Guo, Jianxin & Gu, Fu & Kuusisto, Jari, 2019. "Measurement framework for assessing disruptive innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 250-265.

    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. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.
    2. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    3. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    4. Geddes, Anna & Schmidt, Tobias S., 2020. "Integrating finance into the multi-level perspective: Technology niche-finance regime interactions and financial policy interventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    5. McMeekin, Andrew & Geels, Frank W. & Hodson, Mike, 2019. "Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1216-1231.
    6. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    7. Pesch, Udo, 2015. "Tracing discursive space: Agency and change in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 379-388.
    8. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    9. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    10. Manning, Stephan & Reinecke, Juliane, 2016. "A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 618-633.
    11. Dahesh, Mehran Badin & Tabarsa, Gholamali & Zandieh, Mostafa & Hamidizadeh, Mohammadreza, 2020. "Reviewing the intellectual structure and evolution of the innovation systems approach: A social network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    12. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    13. Wesseling, J.H. & Lechtenböhmer, S. & Åhman, M. & Nilsson, L.J. & Worrell, E. & Coenen, L., 2017. "The transition of energy intensive processing industries towards deep decarbonization: Characteristics and implications for future research," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1303-1313.
    14. Jain, Sanjay, 2020. "Fumbling to the future? Socio-technical regime change in the recorded music industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    15. Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Söderholm, Patrik & Ylinenpää, Håkan, 2016. "The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1743-1761.
    16. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    17. Erlinghagen, Sabine & Markard, Jochen, 2012. "Smart grids and the transformation of the electricity sector: ICT firms as potential catalysts for sectoral change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 895-906.
    18. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    19. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    20. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.

    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:tefoso:v:136:y:2018:i:c:p:103-113. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.