IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03312263.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Open Innovation Business Models : the example of living labs in France

Author

Listed:
  • Ingrid Fasshauer

    (Université Gustave Eiffel, DICEN-IDF - Dispositifs d'Information et de Communication à l'Ère du Numérique - Paris Île-de-France - UPN - Université Paris Nanterre - CNAM - Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers [CNAM] - Université Gustave Eiffel)

Abstract

Livings labs, emerging forms of collaborative innovation including users in their real-life context, are more and more numerous in France. Even if part of them is organized in a network, they are very diverse in terms of portage, legal structure and above all business model. The latter is all the more crucial since Schuurman (2015) notes a mortality rate of 40% on living labs labeled by the largest network of living labs, European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). A large number of living labs thus have an unwanted temporary nature (Leminen et al., 2012). Based on a survey, it highlights that three forms of value are generated by the living labs studied: knowledge creation, social impact and economic value. Revenues can be exclusively public, exclusively private or mixed. As for the sharing of value, it is a concern for several living labs which respond by ensuring the dissemination of their innovations to a wide audience. Only research-oriented laboratories have intellectual property protection practices. By taking these three dimensions into account, we propose a typology distinguishing between four categories of living labs.

Suggested Citation

  • Ingrid Fasshauer, 2020. "Open Innovation Business Models : the example of living labs in France," Post-Print hal-03312263, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03312263
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03312263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03312263/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saebi, Tina & Foss, Nicolai J., 2015. "Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 201-213.
    2. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    3. Cécile Ayerbe & Sandra Dubouloz & Sophie Mignon & Marc Robert, 2020. "Management Innovation and Open Innovation: For and Towards Dialogue," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 13-41.
    4. Cécile Ayerbe & Sandra Dubouloz & Sophie Mignon & Marc Robert, 2020. "Management Innovation and Open Innovation: For and Towards Dialogue," Post-Print hal-02985953, HAL.
    5. Ingrid Fasshauer & Cathy Zadra-Veil, 2020. "Le living lab , un intermédiaire d’innovation ouverte pour les territoires ruraux ou péri-urbains ?," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 15-40.
    6. Leroux Isabelle & Paul Muller & Béatrice Plottu & Caroline Widehem, 2014. "Innovation ouverte et évolution des business models dans les pôles de compétitivité : le rôle des intermédiaires dans la création variétale végétale," Post-Print hal-01113452, HAL.
    7. Marine Agogué & Gérald Comtet & Pascal Le Masson & Jean-François Menudet & Robert Picard, 2013. "Managing innovative design within the health ecosystem: the Living Lab as an architect of the unknown," Post-Print hal-00972270, HAL.
    8. Isabelle Leroux & Paul Muller & Béatrice Plottu & Caroline Widehem, 2014. "Innovation ouverte et évolution des business models dans les pôles de compétitivité : le rôle des intermédiaires dans la création variétale végétale," Post-Print hal-02638103, HAL.
    9. Mónica E. Edwards-Schachter & Cristian E. Matti & Enrique Alcántara, 2012. "Fostering Quality of Life through Social Innovation: A Living Lab Methodology Study Case," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(6), pages 672-692, November.
    10. Sophie Mignon & Cécile Ayerbe & Sandra Dubouloz & Marc Robert & Joel West, 2020. "Managerial Innovation and Management of Open Innovation," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 3-12.
    11. Cécile Ayerbe & Valérie Chanal, 2011. "Quel management des DPI dans les business models ouverts ?," Revue française de gestion, Lavoisier, vol. 0(1), pages 99-115.
    12. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Silvia Giannangeli & Cristina Rossi, 2006. "Entry Strategies Under Competing Standards: Hybrid Business Models in the Open Source Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1085-1098, July.
    13. Sophie Mignon & Cécile Ayerbe & Sandra Dubouloz & Marc Robert & Joel West, 2020. "Managerial Innovation and Management of Open Innovation," Post-Print hal-03037869, HAL.
    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. Soufiane Kherrazi & Karim Saïd, 2022. "Managerial Practices Within Multilateral And Public-Funded R&D Collaborations," Post-Print hal-04205187, HAL.
    2. Paul Muller & Bérangère L. Szostak & Thierry Burger-Helmchen, 2020. "The role of middleground's entrepreneurial activities for the circulation of creative ideas. The case of Krautrock Music [Le rôle d’intermédiation des activités entrepreneuriales du middleground da," Post-Print hal-03539612, HAL.
    3. Monique Combes-Joret & Sophie Bollinger, 2023. "Le rôle majeur des Établissements et Services d’Aide par le Travail (ESAT) dans les écosystèmes d’innovation sociale pour l’inclusion des personnes en situation de handicap. Le cas de l’ESAT l’ENVOL," Post-Print hal-04142261, HAL.
    4. Rachel Levy & Pierre Triboulet & Brice Navereau, 2020. "Trajectories of innovative collaborative project in agrofood industry [La trajectoire de projets collaboratifs innovants dans le secteur agro-alimentaire]," Post-Print hal-03215014, HAL.
    5. Charlène Lambert & Albéric Tellier, 2015. "Quel rôle peut jouer un syndicat professionnel dans un réseau inter-organisationnel innovant ? Le cas de l'Union Nationale des Entreprises de Paysage," Post-Print hal-01488067, HAL.
    6. Katharina Greve & Riccardo De Vita & Seppo Leminen & Mika Westerlund, 2021. "Living Labs: From Niche to Mainstream Innovation Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, January.
    7. Serge Blondel & Ngoc-Thao Noet, 2023. "Quels facteurs expliquent la faible coopération en horticulture ?," TEPP Research Report 2023-01, TEPP.
    8. Maria Luisa Zamora Rodriguez & Nathalie Daniela Avila Hierrezuelo & Rosa Acosta Roca, 2023. "Innovacion abierta en Cuba: Experiencia del Programa de Innovacion Agropecuaria Local (PIAL)(Open innovation in Cuba: Experience of the Local Agricultural Innovation Program (PIAL) )," Revista Internacional de Gestión del Conocimiento y la Tecnología (GECONTEC), Revista Internacional de Gestión del Conocimiento y la Tecnología (GECONTEC), vol. 11(2), pages 75-89, November.
    9. Lhoste, Evelyne F., 2020. "Can do-it-yourself laboratories open up the science, technology, and innovation research system to civil society?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    10. Vito Manfredi Latilla & Fedrico Frattini & Simone Franzo & Vittorio Chiesa, 2019. "Organisational Change And Business Model Innovation: An Exploratory Study Of An Energy Utility," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-33, June.
    11. Heuschneider, Sara & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2016. "External search for exploration of future discontinuities and trends: Implications from the literature using co-citation and content analysis," Working Papers 92, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    12. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Sheila Walsh & Cuiwen Li & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Exploring technology business incubators and their business incubation models: case studies from China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 90-116, February.
    13. Bitzer, Jürgen & Geishecker, Ingo, 2010. "Who contributes voluntarily to OSS? An investigation among German IT employees," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 165-172, February.
    14. Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Li, Ying & Van de Vrande, Vareska, 2009. "The dual role of external corporate venturing in technological exploration," MPRA Paper 26488, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    15. Caloffi, Annalisa & Freo, Marzia & Ghinoi, Stefano & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica, 2022. "Assessing the effects of a deliberate policy mix: The case of technology and innovation advisory services and innovation vouchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    16. Emmanuelle Reuter, 2022. "Hybrid business models in the sharing economy: The role of business model design for managing the environmental paradox," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 603-618, February.
    17. Krzysztof BORODAKO & Jadwiga BERBEKA & Michał RUDNICKI & Mariusz ŠAPCZYŃSKI, 2021. "Online Visibility and Knowledge-Intensive Business Services Performance: The Scope of Interrelatedness," Journal of Emerging Trends in Marketing and Management, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 157-173, August.
    18. 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.
    19. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    20. Cinzia Battistella & Gianluca Murgia & Fabio Nonino, 2021. "Free-driven web-based business models," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 445-486, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Living Lab; Open Innovation; Business Model; Value sharing;
    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:hal:journl:hal-03312263. 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.