IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v9y2018i1d10.1007_s13132-015-0327-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Innovation and Market Orientation: An Analysis of the Relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Elisa Arrigo

    (University of Milan-Bicocca)

Abstract

Open innovation has become an emergent topic in innovation management founded on the assumption that the development of innovative processes may lie outside the companies’ boundaries. In particular, this paper has pursued to address one gap in existing research on open innovation, namely the investigation of its relationship with market orientation that promotes continual processes of innovation leading to higher customer value. Findings have shown how market-driven companies tend to overcome the classical view on relying innovation on internal Research & Development departments in order to become more permeable to the outside environment. In fact, market-driven companies develop distinctive outside-in, inside-out, and spanning capabilities that encourage the matching and integration of internal resources with external partners and open innovation emerges as an essential driver to preserve and improve their competitiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Elisa Arrigo, 2018. "Open Innovation and Market Orientation: An Analysis of the Relationship," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(1), pages 150-161, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:9:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s13132-015-0327-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-015-0327-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13132-015-0327-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-015-0327-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Manlio Giudice & Maria Della Peruta & Vincenzo Maggioni, 2013. "Collective Knowledge and Organizational Routines within Academic Communities of Practice: an Empirical Research on Science–Entrepreneurs," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(3), pages 260-278, September.
    3. Hienerth, Christoph & von Hippel, Eric & Berg Jensen, Morten, 2014. "User community vs. producer innovation development efficiency: A first empirical study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 190-201.
    4. Tether, Bruce S., 2002. "Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 947-967, August.
    5. Blandine Laperche, 2012. "How to Coordinate the Networked Enterprise in a Context of Open Innovation? A New Function for Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 3(4), pages 354-371, December.
    6. Elias Carayannis & Evangelos Grigoroudis & Stavros Sindakis & Christian Walter, 2014. "Business Model Innovation as Antecedent of Sustainable Enterprise Excellence and Resilience," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(3), pages 440-463, September.
    7. Martens, Rudy & Matthyssens, Paul & Vandenbempt, Koen, 2012. "Market strategy renewal as a dynamic incremental process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 720-728.
    8. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gennaro Strazzullo & William J. Ion & Jillian MacBryde, 2022. "An Investigation of the Translational Asset: A Proposed Classification," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 3123-3149, December.
    2. Francesca Iandolo & Francesca Loia & Irene Fulco & Chiara Nespoli & Francesco Caputo, 2021. "Combining Big Data and Artificial Intelligence for Managing Collective Knowledge in Unpredictable Environment—Insights from the Chinese Case in Facing COVID-19," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1982-1996, December.

    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. Caloghirou, Yannis & Giotopoulos, Ioannis & Kontolaimou, Alexandra & Korra, Efthymia & Tsakanikas, Aggelos, 2021. "Industry-university knowledge flows and product innovation: How do knowledge stocks and crisis matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    2. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    3. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Dezi, Luca & Castellano, Sylvaine, 2020. "The influence of inbound open innovation on ambidexterity performance: Does it pay to source knowledge from supply chain stakeholders?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 321-329.
    4. Demetris Vrontis & Alkis Thrassou & Gabriele Santoro & Armando Papa, 2017. "Ambidexterity, external knowledge and performance in knowledge-intensive firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 374-388, April.
    5. Lorena M. D'Agostino & Rosina Moreno, 2016. "“Exploration during turbulent times: an analysis of the effects of R&D cooperation on radical innovation performance during the economic crisis”," IREA Working Papers 201605, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Apr 2016.
    6. Gun Jea Yu & Joonkyum Lee, 2017. "When should a firm collaborate with research organizations for innovation performance? The moderating role of innovation orientation, size, and age," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1451-1465, December.
    7. Young Rok Choi & Seongwook Ha & Youngbae Kim, 2022. "Innovation ambidexterity, resource configuration and firm growth: is smallness a liability or an asset?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2183-2209, April.
    8. Belderbos, Rene & Gilsing, Victor & Lokshin, Boris, 2009. "Persistence of and interrelation between horizontal and vertical technology alliances," MERIT Working Papers 2009-065, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    9. Colombo, Massimo G. & Grilli, Luca & Piva, Evila, 2006. "In search of complementary assets: The determinants of alliance formation of high-tech start-ups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1166-1199, October.
    10. Elisa Arrigo, 2012. "Alliances, Open Innovation and Outside-in Management," Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, Niccolò Cusano University, issue 2 Innovat, pages 53-65.
    11. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    12. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    13. Li, Mingxiang, 2021. "Exploring novel technologies through board interlocks: Spillover vs. broad exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    14. D'Este, Pablo, 2005. "How do firms' knowledge bases affect intra-industry heterogeneity?: An analysis of the Spanish pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 33-45, February.
    15. Sirén, Charlotta & Kohtamäki, Marko, 2016. "Stretching strategic learning to the limit: The interaction between strategic planning and learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 653-663.
    16. Schilling, Melissa A. & Green, Elad, 2011. "Recombinant search and breakthrough idea generation: An analysis of high impact papers in the social sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1321-1331.
    17. Chen, Jian-xun & Zhang, Bo & Zhan, Wu & Sharma, Piyush & Budhwar, Pawan & Tan, Hui, 2022. "Demystifying the non-linear effect of high commitment work systems (HCWS) on firms’ strategic intention of exploratory innovation: An extended resource-based view," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    18. Justin J. P. Jansen & Gerard George & Frans A. J. Van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2008. "Senior Team Attributes and Organizational Ambidexterity: The Moderating Role of Transformational Leadership," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 982-1007, July.
    19. Orsatti, Gianluca & Pezzoni, Michele & Quatraro, Francesco, 2017. "Where Do Green Technologies Come From? Inventor Teams’ Recombinant Capabilities and the Creation of New Knowledge," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201711, University of Turin.
    20. Daniela P. Blettner & Zi-Lin He & Songcui Hu & Richard A. Bettis, 2015. "Adaptive aspirations and performance heterogeneity: Attention allocation among multiple reference points," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(7), pages 987-1005, July.

    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:spr:jknowl:v:9:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s13132-015-0327-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.