PRUAB Innoget Cloud, nova plataforma de gestió d'oferta i demanda tecnològica

El Parc de Recerca UAB ha posat en marxa aquesta eina tecnològica que permet fomentar i estructurar les col·laboracions en R+D+i entre els més de 4.000 investigadors vinculats al Parc i empreses de la B30, nacionals i internacionals. D'aquesta manera, es pretén impulsar els projectes entre els diferents agents de l'entorn B30 i així incrementar la competitivitat d'aquesta regió

Open Innovation, ambiguity and technological convergence

Objectives. Current paper aims to provide a fresh conceptual framework on the relationship among open innovation, decision ambiguity, and technological convergence. We argue that there is a curvilinear relationship between open innovation and both technological convergence and ambiguity. Contained level of convergence and ambiguity foster open innovation, whilst an excess of them is an impediment to collaboration. Technological convergence further acts as a moderator for ambiguity, in light of the benefits of isomorphism. Methodology. We propose a conceptual framework for open innovation decisions after accurately reviewing the main literature antecedents. Findings. We suggest an inverse u-shaped relationship between open innovation and either ambiguity or technological convergence. Research limits. In future, the theoretical framework proposed by thus study has to be tested with robust and proper statistical techniques on large scale samples. Practical implications. The model offers a heuristic for open innovation decisions under ambiguity. Originality of the study. To the best of our knowledge, the relationship linking open innovation, technological convergence and ambiguity emerges as a literature gap. This study tackles this issue, proposing an interpretation for the analysis of alliances decision in innovation

Navigating the 'paradox of openness' in energy and transport innovation: insights from eight corporate clean technology research and development case studies

Using an inductive case study approach drawn from original interview data, this article investigates the innovation approaches among a sample of international energy companies, or corporate firms. It first presents a conceptual framework synthesized from the business studies, entrepreneurship, evolutionary economics, innovation studies, management science, organization studies, political science, and sociology literature. This framework suggests that corporate approaches to clean technology innovation will cut across the four dimensions of organizational multiplicity and stakeholder involvement, information sharing, coordination and control, and market orientation. It then explores how eight firms—the Algal Carbon Conversion Flagship and Aurora Algae (biofuel), DONG and Statoil (carbon capture and storage), Tesla and Volkswagen (electric vehicles), and Siemens and Vestas (offshore wind turbines)—approach clean technology development with “open innovation” attributes mixed with “closed” attributes. Although the study finds striking similarities among the particular approaches embraced by each corporate actor, it also notes that approaches are technology and firm specific, and the potential for different permutations leads to an almost endless number of possible stylistic combinations. The innovation profiles depicted also reveal conflict and competition among various stakeholders, the implication being that corporate innovation in the energy sector remains a conflicted, disjointed, and messy process

User, and Open Collaborative Innovation: Ascendent Economic Models

In this paper we assess the economic viability of innovation by producers relative to two increasingly important alternative models: innovations by single user individuals or firms, and open collaborative innovation projects. We analyze the design costs and architectures and communication costs associated with each model. We conclude that innovation by individual users and also open collaborative innovation increasingly compete with - and may displace -producer innovation in many parts of the economy. We argue that a transition from producer innovation to open single user and open collaborative innovation is desirable in terms of social welfare, and so worthy of support by policymakers.

More open than open innovation? Rethinking the concept of openness in innovation studies.

This paper re-examines the concept of open innovation developed in organization sciences (Chesbrough, 2003a). We claim that this paradigm, which insists on the distributive nature of innovation among a wide range of heterogeneous actors, does not put enough emphasis on the condition of access to knowledge. Yet, the open dimension of knowledge is a very important feature to sustain a collective mode of innovation. We propose therefore a stronger definition of open innovation, which is based on three constitutive characteristics: (i) Firms voluntarily release knowledge; (ii) Knowledge is open, i.e. is available to all interested parties without discrimination; (iii) dynamic interactions take place among the stakeholders to enrich the open knowledge base. Examples that fit our definition of open innovation are open science, user centered innovation (von Hippel, 2005), free-libre open source software, collective invention (Allen, 1983), etc. We conclude with a discussion on the role of IPR to secure open innovation.open source, free software, intellectual property rights (IPR), open innovation, collective invention.

Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software

Open innovation is a powerful framework encompassing the generation, capture, and employment of intellectual property at the firm level. We identify three fundamental challenges for firms in applying the concept of open innovation: finding creative ways to exploit internal innovation, incorporating external innovation into internal development, and motivating outsiders to supply an ongoing stream of external innovations. This latter challenge involves a paradox, why would firms spend money on R&D efforts if the results of these efforts are available to rival firms? To explore these challenges, we examine the activity of firms in opensource software to support their innovation strategies. Firms involved in open-source software often make investments that will be shared with real and potential rivals. We identify four strategies firms employ – pooled R&D/product development, spinouts, selling complements and attracting donated complements – and discuss how they address the three key challenges of open innovation. We conclude with suggestions for how similar strategies may apply in other industries and offer some possible avenues for future research on open innovation

Living labs as a driver for change in regional television

Traditional television production and distribution organizations are increasingly being challenged by a rapidly changing technological environment. These evolutions force the television industry to leave their comfort zone. This context in mind, regional television broadcasters often lack the resources, knowledge and organizational flexibility to cope with this external pressure. In this paper, we discuss the use of Living Labs as ‘innovation intermediaries’ and ‘change facilitators’ that foster and enable user-centric innovation development processes, both inside and outside the organization. This phenomenon is approached from both an open innovation and a user innovation point of view. This paper considers Living Labs as open innovation ecosystems, enabling organizations to reach out and collaborate with their (potential) audience and other external actors, but also as an open ‘battle arena’ for the organization itself. The Living Lab process governs different expectations and enables conflicting opinions to come together and to steadily grow towards a mutual solution. Moreover, the innovation development process in the Living Lab seems to have innovation spill-over effects on the organizational level, catalyzing a broader organizational change

Collective Innovation in Open Source Hardware

A growing community that shares digital 3D designs has created an opportunity to study, encourage and stimulate innovation. This remix community allows people not only to prototype at a minimal cost but also to work on projects they are genuinely interested in. Participants free of the limitations typically imposed by formal organizations develop products driven by their own interest.Comment: To appear in the proceedings of Collective Intelligence 2014 (Boston, June 10-12 2014

Innovation, Imitation and Open Source

An extensive empirical literature indicates that, even without formal intellectual property rights, innovators enjoy a variety of first-mover advantages and that `imitation' is itself a costly activity. There is also accumulating evidence that an `open' approach to knowledge production can deliver substantial efficiency advantages. This paper introduces a formal framework incorporating all of these factors. We examine the relative performance of an `open' versus a `closed' (proprietary) regime, and explicitly characterise the circumstances in which an open approach, despite its effect on facilitating imitation, results in a higher level of innovation.Innovation, Imitation, Intellectual Property, Openness, Open Source