The sources of process innovation in user firms:an exploration of the antecedents and impact of non-R&D innovation and learning-by-doing

Previous research has shown that innovation can have various sources and different forms. Innovation can thus be developed by different types of organizations or individuals for several reasons, and it can be related to product or process technologies. One particular stream of research has explored the role of users as a source of innovation. Examples of user innovations can be found in a variety of fields and settings such as mountain biking, snowboarding, open source software, scientific instruments, oil refining, semiconductor manufacturing, and even the World Wide Web. What these innovations have in common is that they were all initially developed by people or organizations that wanted to solve a specific need and benefited from using their innovation rather than selling it. A particular type of user innovator is a "user firm" which develops new or improved production technology for its own internal use. Such process innovation is characterized by determinants and outcomes, which are fundamentally different from for example product innovation. In particular, process innovation may be driven by learning-by-doing, which is a form of problem-solving or experimentation that takes place on the production floor rather than in research and development (R&D). However, the exact drivers and consequences of process innovation in general and learning-by-doing in particular are not yet fully explored. Therefore, the objective of this thesis is to increase the understanding of the antecedents and impact of process innovation in user firms by exploring the role of non-R&D activities and learning-by-doing. This thesis consists of four parts. Each of them addresses a specific aspect related to the sources of process innovation in user firms. The first paper particularly argues that process innovation relies on different learning mechanisms than product innovation. Using data from the Swiss Innovation Survey of the Swiss Institute of Business Cycle Research (KOF) at ETH Zürich, the paper shows which are the external and internal knowledge sources (related to R&D, manufacturing and marketing) that lead to innovation. The second paper further investigates R&D and non-R&D activities as sources of innovation and develops two measures to quantify the magnitude of non-R&D innovation. The results show that a substantial part of the firms develop innovations without R&D and that non-R&D process innovation has a very large impact on the overall cost reductions in the Swiss economy. In order to better understand the sources and attributes of process innovation in user firms, a questionnaire was conducted in a sample of Swiss manufacturing firms. Based on the results, the third paper shows the pervasiveness of major and especially minor process innovation. It also explores the sources of process innovation within the firms and identifies the practices related to the accounting, protection, appropriation, and monitoring of process innovation, which are often of an informal nature. The fourth paper investigates in more detail how such practices drive learning-by-doing and process innovation. The findings firstly show which complementary systems of practices are implemented in user firms to promote the innovative contribution of production floor workers and secondly how these practices drive learning-by-doing for either major or minor process innovation

Open innovation:Research, practices, and policies

Open innovation is now a widely used concept in academia, business, and policy making. This article describes the state of open innovation at the intersection of research, practice, and policy. It discusses some key trends (e.g., digital transformation), challenges (e.g., uncertainty), and potential solutions (e.g., EU funding programs) in the context of open innovation and innovation policy. With this background, the authors introduce select papers published in this Special Section of California Management Review that were originally presented at the second annual World Open Innovation Conference, held in Santa Clara, California, in December of 2015

The open academic: Why and how business academics should use social media to be more ‘open’ and impactful

The mission of Business Horizons is to publish research that practitioners can understand to help them change how they think and act. However, this mission remains an elusive ideal for many business school academics because they struggle to design and produce research capable of overcoming the “research-practice gap.” To help scholars address this gap, we explain why and how they should use social media to be more ‘open’ to connecting with, learning from, and working with academics and other stakeholders outside their field. We describe how social media can be used as a boundary-spanning technology to help bridge the research-practice gap. To do this, we present a process model of five research activities: networking, framing, investigating, disseminating, and assessing. Using research published in Business Horizons as an illustrative example, we describe how social media was used to make each activity more open. We present a framework of four social media enabled open academic approaches (connector, observer, promoter, and influencer) and outline some dos and don’ts for engaging in each approach. We also discuss the potential ‘dark side’ of openness through social media and offer some coping strategies. As per the mission and scope of Business Horizons, this paper aims to help business academics rethink and change their practices so that our profession is more widely regarded for how our research positively impacts business practice and society in general

Navigating collaborative open innovation projects:Staging negotiations of actors' concerns

Open innovation has attracted significant attention as companies respond to increasing innovative complexities by opening their organizational boundaries to interact with stakeholders along the innovation funnel. However, knowledge from customers and users is not always easily translated into solutions that can be commercialized. Micro-level challenges of open innovation projects that might be impeding commercialization remain under-explored in the literature. To address this research gap, we use a collaborative staging approach inspired by actor-network theory to focus on micro-level negotiations of actors' concerns at the project level. Analysing data collected via ethnographic research and participant observation in a longitudinal qualitative case study, we investigate how managers and designers navigated value creation and capture when conceptualizing an app for hospitalized stroke patients. Our findings reveal an action-oriented staging approach to collaborative open innovation efforts and selective enactment of business models depending on whether the focus is value capture or value creation. Furthermore, we point to a repertoire of staging moves that managers and designers can use to facilitate productive negotiations and network alignment as value creation opportunities co-evolve and to conceptualize value offers in collaborative open innovation processes

Ecosystem effectuation: Creating new value through open innovation during a pandemic

The severity of the COVID-19 pandemic confronts us with a global grand challenge representing an unprecedented crisis for health, economies, and societies. While digital champions are thriving, a large number of businesses and industries have been facing radical uncertainty, pushing some to the edge of collapse. This emergency calls for new ways to look at organizational ambidexterity and business model innovation. In this paper, we present and discuss a unique case study of a low-cost airline, AirAsia. With their fleet of aircraft grounded, and unable to pursue any incremental innovation opportunities, AirAsia decided to follow a radical ambidexterity path – focusing on exploration by building an innovation ecosystem. This case not only offers insights on a novel way to create value through open innovation but also extends the body of knowledge on entrepreneurial effectuation by introducing the concept of an ecosystem effectuation. AirAsia’s case shows that, in financially distressed times, business model reconfiguration may not be enough, and instead of selecting means to attain goals, the goals may be created upon available means