IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cte/wbrepe/wb100702.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marketing for technologies: S-D Logic and the Open Innovation paradigm

Author

Listed:
  • Cesaroni, Fabrizio

Abstract

Firms have been modifying their innovation management processes to generate, implement and exploit new technological knowledge. A gradual shift from a closed to an open model of innovation has been the recurring pattern of this change. Firms have to revise their overall strategic orientation to adapt their managerial procedures according to the Open Innovation (OI) paradigm. The New Service-Dominant (S-D) Logic can offer a useful guideline to firms in the implementation of an OI model. This paper presents the bases of the OI paradigm by means of the S-D Logic mindset. For each of the premises characterizing the S-D Logic, instances of firms that have implicitly adopted the OI paradigm are provided. We discuss how the S-D Logic can be put in practice within the context of the OI model.

Suggested Citation

  • Cesaroni, Fabrizio, 2010. "Marketing for technologies: S-D Logic and the Open Innovation paradigm," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB wb100702, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    • Handle: RePEc:cte:wbrepe:wb100702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://e-archivo.uc3m.es/rest/api/core/bitstreams/f9b6e99e-7cc8-47c8-b540-379f800c784f/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Heiman & Jack Nickerson, 2002. "Towards Reconciling Transaction Cost Economics and the Knowledge-based View of the Firm: The Context of Interfirm Collaborations," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 97-116.
    2. Arora, Ashish, 1996. "Contracting for tacit knowledge: the provision of technical services in technology licensing contracts," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 233-256, August.
    3. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    4. Udo Zander & Bruce Kogut, 1995. "Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 76-92, February.
    5. Bernard L. Simonin, 1999. "Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(7), pages 595-623, July.
    6. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horlsey, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1974. "SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 258-291, November.
    7. Eric von Hippel & Ralph Katz, 2002. "Shifting Innovation to Users via Toolkits," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(7), pages 821-833, July.
    8. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Fabrizio Cesaroni, 2003. "Technology Strategies in the Knowledge Economy: The Licensing Activity of Himont," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(02), pages 223-245.
    10. Winter, Sidney G., 2006. "The logic of appropriability: From Schumpeter to Arrow to Teece," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1100-1106, October.
    11. Von Hippel, Eric A. & Katz, Ralph, 2002. "Shifting Innovation to Users Via Toolkits," Working papers 4232-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1994. "The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 523-532, September.
    13. Alberto Di Minin & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Andrea Piccaluga, 2005. "Industrial R&D in Italy: Exploration and Exploitation Strategies in Industrial R&D," Working Papers 200502, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    14. Ashish Arora, 1995. "Licensing Tacit Knowledge: Intellectual Property Rights And The Market For Know-How," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 41-60.
    15. Marcie J. Tyre & Oscar Hauptman, 1992. "Effectiveness of Organizational Responses to Technological Change in the Production Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 301-320, August.
    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. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2010. "The Market for Technology," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 641-678, Elsevier.
    2. Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Luzzi, Alessandra, 2007. "The market for patents in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1163-1183, October.
    3. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1999. "Markets for technology (why do we see them, why don't we see more of them and why we should care)," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB 6520, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    4. James Bessen, 2010. "Communicating Technical Knowledge," Working Papers 1001, Research on Innovation.
    5. Gans, Joshua S. & Stern, Scott, 2003. "The product market and the market for "ideas": commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 333-350, February.
    6. Alex Coad & Agustí Segarra-Blasco & Mercedes Teruel, 2021. "A bit of basic, a bit of applied? R&D strategies and firm performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1758-1783, December.
    7. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    8. Scaringella, Laurent & Burtschell, François, 2017. "The challenges of radical innovation in Iran: Knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity highlights — Evidence from a joint venture in the construction sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 151-169.
    9. Astebro, Thomas B. & Dahlin, Kristina B., 2005. "Opportunity knocks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1404-1418, November.
    10. Cesaroni, Fabrizio, 2004. "Technological outsourcing and product diversification: do markets for technology affect firms' strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1547-1564, December.
    11. Foss, Nicolai J. & Pedersen, Torben, 2001. "The MNC as a Knowledge Structure: The Roles of Knowledge Sources and Organizational Instruments for Knowledge Creation and Transfer," Working Papers 12-2001, Copenhagen Business School, Department of International Economics and Management.
    12. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    13. Quintas, Paul & Guy, Ken, 1995. "Collaborative, pre-competitive R&D and the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 325-348, May.
    14. Cristiano Antonelli, 2000. "Collective Knowledge Communication and Innovation: The Evidence of Technological Districts," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(6), pages 535-547.
    15. Hellmann, Thomas, 2007. "The role of patents for bridging the science to market gap," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 624-647, August.
    16. Novelli, Elena, 2015. "An examination of the antecedents and implications of patent scope," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 493-507.
    17. Gombau, Verònica & Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 2011. "The Innovation and Imitation Dichotomy in Spanish firms: do absorptive capacity and the technological frontier matter?," Working Papers 2072/179666, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    18. Scott Shane, 2002. "Selling University Technology: Patterns from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 122-137, January.
    19. Gombau, Verònica & Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 2011. "Innovation and absorptive capacity: What is the role of technological frontier?," Working Papers 2072/179622, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    20. Winkelbach, Andreas & Walter, Achim, 2015. "The More Learning, the Better? The Curvilinear Relationship between Technological Learning and New Product Commercialization," EconStor Preprints 107018, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    S-D Logic;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cte:wbrepe:wb100702. 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: Ana Poveda (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.business.uc3m.es/es/index .

    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.