Open Innovation Initiative

Launch Meeting

Wednesday 30th September, 2015

People

Competences

Tools

Culture

Strategy

Process

Network System

Antecedents for Open Innovation

Year 1

Strategic relationships

Transaction

Functional cooperation

Collaboration

Integration

People

Competences

Tools

Culture

Strategy

Process

Network System

1. Vision (needed capabilities)

2. Structure (system)

3. IP (risk mitigation)

4. Open business model (established SME network)

T I M E

Open Innovation Toolbox:

some personal observations

Professor Neil Kay,

Launch meeting OI Initiative,

September 30th 2015

9

Some useful background

• Gillian Tett (September, 2015) The Silo Effect: The Peril of Expertise and the Promise of Breaking Down Barriers, Little Brown, London

• Chesbrough and Brunswicker (2013) Managing open innovation in large firms,

Survey on Open Innovation, UC Berkeley and Fraunhofer Institute, • Ivanov, E. (2013) When Choosing Open Innovation Tools, Does One Size Fit All?

http://www.innovationexcellence.com/blog/2013/11/13/when-choosing-open-innovation-tools-does-one-size-fit-all/#sthash.OFrw2Nuq.dpuf

• SSLerate Consortium (2014) Open Innovation toolkit: Accelerate SSL Innovation for Europe • Euris (2014) Open Innovation toolbox, Project: European Collaborative and

Open Regional Innovation Strategies.

10

Chesbrough view

• Chesbrough and Brunswicker (2013) surveyed large firms in Europe

and the US with annual sales more than $250mill.

• They addressed core practices of managing open innovation in their executive survey and measured their adoption.

• But they concluded new practices for managing open innovation had not yet been systematically adopted.

• Noted that senior executives show a relatively low awareness of managing open innovation.

• Concluded that: (1) managing open innovation requires both formal and informal capabilities; (2) strategic guidance and cultural values are more important than written and standardized routines for innovation or metrics

11

Ivanov view

• Ivanov (2013) noted one of the problems reported in studies such as Chesbrough and Brunswicker (2013) is that some OI techniques like crowdsourcing require special expertise

• Also notes the bulk of our knowledge about open innovation practices comes from US consumer good companies, such as P&G, Kraft Foods or General Mills

• Ivanov asked in the light of Chesbrough and Brunswicker: can one size fit all in terms of open innovation toolkits?

• Answer may be that there can be common features and issues but that there needs to be sensitivity to special features

12

US versus European

perspectives

• There are some different shades of emphasis between US and European perspectives on approaches to OI; e.g.

• Initiatives and role of government may differ

• Role and feasibility of shared goals/ mutual interest or self- interest?

• Collaboration: intrinsically desirable or a necessity?

13

Some other issues

• Scottish dimensions

• Sectoral dimension

• Nature of open innovation

• Who is it for?

• Role of business models and IPR

• Role of senior management / intermediaries / government

agencies

• Open innovation / open ideas

14

Conclusions

• Open innovation toolboxes / toolkits / tools can be developed for

different contexts such as the present one.

• Aspects of existing toolboxes may be adaptable to different

circumstances

• Care has to be taken to identify core issues and best practices that be

shared and transferred within and between cohorts.

• At the same time, sensitivity has to be given to factors or features that

distinguish firms and the circumstances they face

• The trick is in finding the boundary between transferability and

specificity