Introduction to the open innovation paradigm

This chapter introduces the teacher and the student to the open innovation paradigm. It points out the rationale for open innovation from the historical point of view and describes the differences between closed and open innovation. As open innovation has been observed in numerous contexts, this chapter addresses theories related to open innovation on one side and practical implications on the other. We discuss the incentives for firms to engage in open innovation, as well as the shortcomings from engaging in it. Competitiveness results from generating value propositions that differ from competitors’ value propositions. Innovation increases the customers’ value propositions and generates revenues for innovators or owners of innovation (Schumpeter, 1934). Innovation also generates value to the society, even if the innovator does not capture the majority of its profits (Teece, 1986). This chapter first defines innovation and then explains how open innovation helps firms to innovate easier and faster. Section 3.1.1. “Why open innovation?” defines innovation and describes how firms innovate. It augments the historical perspectives on innovation by depicting the differences between linear technology-driven innovation, linear market-driven innovation and the chain link model of innovation, thereby portraying the rationale for the theory of open innovation.. Section 3.1.2. “What is open innovation?” defines open innovation by presenting the differences between open and closed innovation on one side, and inbound, coupled and outbound innovation on the other side. Section 3.1.3. “Main incentives for open innovation” explains how firms benefit from engaging in open innovation, as well as the conditions that need to be satisfied for firms to extract value from open innovation. Section 3.1.4. “Open innovation in a broader context” describes theories that adopt or can be associated with open innovation. Section 3.1.5. “Critique to open innovation theory” exemplifies the drawbacks of the open innovation theory by explaining theoretical shortcomings and managerial implications

The role of geographical distance on the relationship between cultural intelligence and knowledge transfer

Purpose: This paper's purpose is to investigate the ways in which the geographical distance between headquarters and subsidiaries moderates the relationship between cultural intelligence and the knowledge transfer process. Design/methodology/approach: A sample of 103 senior expatriate managers working in Croatia from several European and non-European countries was used to test the hypotheses. Data were collected using questionnaires, while the methodology employed to test the relationship between the variables was Partial least square. Furthermore, interaction-moderation effect was utilised to test the impact of geographical distance and, for testing control variables, Partial least square multigroup analysis was used. Findings: Cultural Intelligence plays a significant role in the knowledge transfer process performance. However, geographical distance has the power to moderate this relationship based on the direction of knowledge transfer. In conventional knowledge transfer, geographical distance has no significant impact. On the contrary, data have shown that, in reverse knowledge transfer, geographical distance has a moderately relevant effect. We supposed that these findings could be connected to the specific location of the knowledge produced by subsidiaries. Practical implications: Multinational companies should take into consideration that the further away a subsidiary is from the headquarters, and the varying difference between cultures, cannot be completely mitigated by the ability of the manager to deal with cultural differences, namely cultural intelligence. Thus, multinational companies need to allocate resources to facilitate the knowledge transfer between subsidiaries. Originality/value: The present study stresses the importance of cultural intelligence in the knowledge transfer process, opening up a new stream of research inside these two areas of research

Non-discriminatory rules and ethnic representation: the election of the Bosnian State Presidency

The electoral system for the state presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina guarantees the representation of the three constituent people, Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats, but it violates the political rights of other ethnic minorities and of citizens who do not identify themselves with any ethnic group. Following the 2009 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, Bosnia was urged to reform its electoral law. This paper discusses alternative practices of ethnically based political representation and their possible application in the Bosnian state presidency elections. Several innovative electoral models that satisfy fair political and legal criteria for desirable electoral dynamics in divided societies can be envisaged in the Bosnian context. Specifically, these are: the introduction of a single countrywide electoral district, the adoption of the single non-transferable vote, and the application of a geometrical mean rule. They guarantee the representation of the three constituent people, while strengthening inter-ethnic voting and giving chances to non-nationalist candidates to be elected