IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijimxx/v24y2019i04ns1363919620500371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intermediation For Open Innovation: Comparing Direct Versus Delegated Search Strategies Of Innovation Intermediaries

Author

Listed:
  • KATHLEEN DIENER

    (Institute for Technology and Innovation Management, RWTH Aachen University, Kackertstr. 7, 52072 Aachen, Germany)

  • DIRK LUETTGENS

    (Institute for Technology and Innovation Management, RWTH Aachen University, Kackertstr. 7, 52072 Aachen, Germany)

  • FRANK THOMAS PILLER

    (Institute for Technology and Innovation Management, RWTH Aachen University, Kackertstr. 7, 52072 Aachen, Germany)

Abstract

Intermediaries are an inherent part of value creation in open innovation. They connect organisations seeking external solutions for an innovation-related problem (seekers) with potential solution providers (solvers). To bridge between the innovation problem and external knowledge sources, intermediaries deploy different search strategies. This study compares the cost of using two prevalent approaches: direct versus delegated search. Direct search corresponds to the conventional understanding of search by screening a pre-identified set of solution providers that the intermediary has identified as potentially relevant contributors. Delegated search comprises more indirect search such as problem broadcasting or crowdsourcing. Here, the innovation problem is distributed to a large external network of potential solvers, allowing even unobvious outsiders to contribute to its solution. An empirical study of 53 open innovation intermediaries indicates that delegated search outperforms direct search in terms effectiveness. The lower overall effort for intermediation in delegated search mainly arises from decoupling the effort to coordinate the search process by shifting it towards the solution provider.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathleen Diener & Dirk Luettgens & Frank Thomas Piller, 2019. "Intermediation For Open Innovation: Comparing Direct Versus Delegated Search Strategies Of Innovation Intermediaries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:24:y:2019:i:04:n:s1363919620500371
    DOI: 10.1142/S1363919620500371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919620500371
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S1363919620500371?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. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. De Silva, Muthu & Howells, Jeremy & Meyer, Martin, 2018. "Innovation intermediaries and collaboration: Knowledge–based practices and internal value creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 70-87.
    3. Sanjiv Erat & Vish Krishnan, 2012. "Managing Delegated Search Over Design Spaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(3), pages 606-623, March.
    4. Williamson, Oliver E, 1979. "Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractural Relations," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 233-261, October.
    5. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    6. Miron-Spektor, Ella & Beenen, Gerard, 2015. "Motivating creativity: The effects of sequential and simultaneous learning and performance achievement goals on product novelty and usefulness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 53-65.
    7. Valentina Lazzarotti & Raffaella Manzini, 2009. "Different Modes Of Open Innovation: A Theoretical Framework And An Empirical Study," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 615-636.
    8. Hussinger, Katrin & Wastyn, Annelies, 2011. "In search for the not-invented-here syndrome: The role of knowledge sources and firm success," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-048, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Marine Agogué & Anna Yström & Pascal Le Masson, 2013. "Rethinking The Role Of Intermediaries As An Architect Of Collective Exploration And Creation Of Knowledge In Open Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(02), pages 1-24.
    10. Marine Agogué & Anna Yström & Pascal Le Masson, 2013. "Rethinking the role of intermediaries as an architect of collective exploration and creation of knowledge in open innovation," Post-Print hal-00707376, HAL.
    11. Felin, Teppo & Zenger, Todd R., 2014. "Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 914-925.
    12. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    13. Eric von Hippel, 1998. "Economics of Product Development by Users: The Impact of "Sticky" Local Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 629-644, May.
    14. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    15. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    16. Lori Rosenkopf & Paul Almeida, 2003. "Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 751-766, June.
    17. Sabine Brunswicker & Ulrich Hutschek, 2010. "Crossing Horizons: Leveraging Cross-Industry Innovation Search In The Front-End Of The Innovation Process," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(04), pages 683-702.
    18. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    19. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
    20. Eleni Giannopoulou & Anna Yström & Susanne Ollila, 2011. "Turning Open Innovation Into Practice: Open Innovation Research Through The Lens Of Managers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 505-524.
    21. Jakki Mohr & Robert Spekman, 1994. "Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes, communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 135-152, February.
    22. Ranjay Gulati & Phanish Puranam & Michael Tushman, 2012. "Meta‐organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 571-586, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Tindara Abbate & Anna Codini & Barbara Aquilani & Demetris Vrontis, 2022. "From Knowledge Ecosystems to Capabilities Ecosystems: When Open Innovation Digital Platforms Lead to Value Co-creation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 290-304, March.
    3. Heuschneider, Sara & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2016. "External search for exploration of future discontinuities and trends: Implications from the literature using co-citation and content analysis," Working Papers 92, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    4. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    5. Schenk, Eric & Guittard, Claude & Pénin, Julien, 2019. "Open or proprietary? Choosing the right crowdsourcing platform for innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 303-310.
    6. Gattringer, Regina & Wiener, Melanie, 2020. "Key factors in the start-up phase of collaborative foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    7. Jesse Bockstedt & Cheryl Druehl & Anant Mishra, 2022. "Incentives and Stars: Competition in Innovation Contests with Participant and Submission Visibility," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(3), pages 1372-1393, March.
    8. Namgyoo Park & John Mezias & Jinju Lee & Jae-Hoon Han, 2014. "Reverse knowledge diffusion: Competitive dynamics and the knowledge seeking behavior of Korean high-tech firms," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 355-375, June.
    9. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    10. De Silva, Muthu & Howells, Jeremy & Khan, Zaheer & Meyer, Martin, 2022. "Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries: The mediating role of capabilities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 14-29.
    11. Kokshagina, Olga & Le Masson, Pascal & Bories, Florent, 2017. "Fast-connecting search practices: On the role of open innovation intermediary to accelerate the absorptive capacity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 232-239.
    12. Anna Yström & Hedvig Aspenberg, 2017. "Open For Innovation? Practices Supporting Collaboration In Swedish Regional Clusters," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(05), pages 1-28, June.
    13. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    14. Gabriele Colombo & Claudio Dell’Era & Federico Frattini & Paolo Landoni, 2016. "Understanding Virtual Knowledge Brokers And Their Differences With Traditional Ones," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(01), pages 1-23, January.
    15. Ileana Palaco & Suk Kyoung Kim & Min Jae Park & Jae Jeung Rho, 2022. "Exploring capabilities of international technology transfer intermediaries between emerging and developed countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 307-352, February.
    16. Piller, Frank & Vossen, Alexander & Ihl, Christoph, 2012. "From Social Media to Social Product Development: The Impact of Social Media on Co-Creation of Innovation," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(1), pages 7-27.
    17. Ann Majchrzak & Arvind Malhotra, 2016. "Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Trajectories on Innovative Outcomes in Temporary Online Crowds," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 685-703, December.
    18. Tinnakorn Phongthiya & Khaleel Malik & Eva Niesten & Tanyanuparb Anantana, 2022. "Innovation intermediaries for university-industry R&D collaboration: evidence from science parks in Thailand," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1885-1920, December.
    19. Just, Julian, 2024. "Natural language processing for innovation search – Reviewing an emerging non-human innovation intermediary," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    20. Luca Berchicci & Nilanjana Dutt & Will Mitchell, 2019. "Knowledge Sources and Operational Problems: Less Now, More Later," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 1030-1053, September.

    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:wsi:ijimxx:v:24:y:2019:i:04:n:s1363919620500371. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijim/ijim.shtml .

    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.