IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00919298.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation ouverte et management de la propriété intellectuelle : quelles stratégies dans le secteur du jeu vidéo ?

Author

Listed:
  • Romain Gandia

    (IREGE - Institut de Recherche en Gestion et en Economie - USMB [Université de Savoie] [Université de Chambéry] - Université Savoie Mont Blanc)

  • Sébastien Brion

    (IREGE - Institut de Recherche en Gestion et en Economie - USMB [Université de Savoie] [Université de Chambéry] - Université Savoie Mont Blanc)

  • Caroline Danièle Mothe

    (IREGE - Institut de Recherche en Gestion et en Economie - USMB [Université de Savoie] [Université de Chambéry] - Université Savoie Mont Blanc)

Abstract

Le concept d'innovation ouverte connaît un succès grandissant. Toutefois, les risques sont nombreux et importants, notamment en ce qui concerne les difficultés de maîtrise et de valorisation des droits de propriété attachés à l'innovation collaborative. La littérature tend à montrer qu'il existe une relation négative entre le niveau d'ouverture du processus d'innovation et la détention des droits de propriété liés à l'innovation. Toutefois, elle ne précise ni le type de collaboration, ni la nature des partenaires. Cet article a précisément pour objectif de montrer que le type de collaboration et la nature du partenaire ont un impact sur le sens de cette relation. Le secteur du jeu vidéo est particulièrement adapté à cette problématique car le processus d'innovation y est fragmenté et le régime de propriété encore mal défini. Au travers de l'étude de cinq studios, nous mettons en évidence que l'ouverture du processus d'innovation par une collaboration fermée avec des partenaires du secteur implique une relation négative entre niveau d'ouverture et détention des droits de propriété intellectuelle. A l'inverse, une collaboration ouverte sur des communautés d'utilisateurs conduit à un lien positif.

Suggested Citation

  • Romain Gandia & Sébastien Brion & Caroline Danièle Mothe, 2011. "Innovation ouverte et management de la propriété intellectuelle : quelles stratégies dans le secteur du jeu vidéo ?," Post-Print hal-00919298, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00919298
    DOI: 10.3166/RFG.210.117-131
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00919298v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00919298v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3166/RFG.210.117-131?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guy Parmentier & Vincent Mangematin, 2009. "Innovation et création dans le jeu vidéo. Comment concilier exploration et exploitation ?," Revue française de gestion, Lavoisier, vol. 0(1), pages 71-87.
    2. Storz, Cornelia, 2008. "Dynamics in innovation systems: Evidence from Japan's game software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1480-1491, October.
    3. Guy Parmentier & Vincent Mangematin, 2009. "Innovation et création dans le jeu vidéo : comment concilier exploration exploration et exploitation," Post-Print halshs-00862753, HAL.
    4. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Lars Frederiksen, 2006. "Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 45-63, February.
    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. Romain Gandia & Elodie Gardet, 2012. "Sources de dépendance et stratégies pour innover. Une application aux studios de jeu vidéo français," Post-Print hal-01293352, HAL.
    2. Panourgias, Nikiforos S. & Nandhakumar, Joe & Scarbrough, Harry, 2014. "Entanglements of creative agency and digital technology: A sociomaterial study of computer game development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 111-126.
    3. Popadiuk, Silvio, 2012. "Scale for classifying organizations as explorers, exploiters or ambidextrous," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 75-87.
    4. Romain Gandia & Elodie Gardet & Gabriel Guallino, 2016. "Quelles stratégies pour gérer les asymétries d'interdépendance ? Une application aux studios de jeu vidéo français," Post-Print hal-01592912, HAL.
    5. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    6. Isaksson, Olov H.D. & Simeth, Markus & Seifert, Ralf W., 2016. "Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain: Evidence from the high tech sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 699-706.
    7. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    8. Shane Greenstein & Yuan Gu & Feng Zhu, 2016. "Ideological Segregation among Online Collaborators: Evidence from Wikipedians," Harvard Business School Working Papers 17-028, Harvard Business School, revised Mar 2017.
    9. Fragkandreas, Thanos, 2025. "Case study research on innovation systems: Paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    10. Xing Wan & Javier Cenamor & Jing Chen, 2017. "Exploring Performance Determinants of China’s Cable Operators and OTT Service Providers in the Era of Digital Convergence—From the Perspective of an Industry Platform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Nikolaus Franke & Martin Schreier & Ulrike Kaiser, 2010. "The "I Designed It Myself" Effect in Mass Customization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 125-140, January.
    12. Alexander Brem & Volker Bilgram & Adele Gutstein, 2021. "Involving Lead Users in Innovation: A Structured Summary of Research on the Lead User Method," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem (ed.), Emerging Issues and Trends in INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, chapter 2, pages 21-48, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. HARA, Yasushi & Huang, Wei & Fukuda, Kazufumi & Ikuine, Fumihiko, 2021. "The Development Process, Scale and Scope of Console Game Industry in Japan: Through Analysis of a Multiple Connected Dataset," TDB-CAREE Discussion Paper Series E-2021-03, Teikoku Databank Center for Advanced Empirical Research on Enterprise and Economy, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    14. Joana Costa & Inês Amorim & João Reis & Nuno Melão, 2023. "User communities: from nice-to-have to must-have," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-35, December.
    15. Borner, Kathrin & Berends, Hans & Deken, Fleur & Feldberg, Frans, 2023. "Another pathway to complementarity: How users and intermediaries identify and create new combinations in innovation ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    16. Muhammad Nouman & Mohammad Sohail Yunis & Muhammad Atiq & Owais Mufti & Abdul Qadus, 2022. "‘The Forgotten Sector’: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium-Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    17. Ebbing, Tobias & Lüthje, Christian, 2021. "Pricing decisions of consumer innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    18. Cutolo, Donato & Grimaldi, Rosa, 2023. "I wasn't expecting that: How engaging with digital platforms can turn leisure passion into entrepreneurial aspirations," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    19. Parwita Setya Wardhani & Wulandari Harjanti & Charis Trinovianto & Ronald Insan Gunawan, 2023. "Sharing Scientometric Approach: Intrinsic Motivation and Knowledge," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(1), pages 1343-1351, January.
    20. Ruo-Yu Liang & Wei Guo & Ling-Hao Zhang & Lei Wang, 2019. "Investigating Sustained Participation in Open Design Community in China: The Antecedents of User Loyalty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.

    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:hal:journl:hal-00919298. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.