Innovation intermediaries: A process view on open innovation coordination

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 295-309

  Katzy, Bernhard ^a   Turgut, Ebru ^a   Holzmann, Thomas ^b   Sailer, Klaus ^b  

^a BUNDESWEHR UNIVERSITY MUNICH   (Germany)

^b MUNICH UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Germany)

Author keywords

collaboration; deal flow portfolio; innovation process; innovation valuation; innovation value chain; open innovation; SME

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISE; VALUATION;

EID: 84874498318     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: 14653990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2013.764982     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Almirall, E. and Wareham, J. 2011. Living Labs: arbiters of mid- and ground-level innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23: 87-102. (doi:10.1080/09537325.2011.537110)
2. Alvarez, S. and Barney, B. 2001. How entrepreneurial firms can benefit from alliances with large partners. The Acadamy of Management Executive, 15: 139-48. (doi:10.5465/AME.2001.4251563)
3. Asheim, B. 2004. "SME innovation policy and the formation of regional networked innovation systems". In Global knowledge flows and economic development, Edited by: Potter, J. 19-50. Paris: OECD.
4. Batterink, M. H., Wubben, E. F.M., Klerkx, L. and Omta, S. W.F. 2010. Orchestrating innovation networks: The case of innovation brokers in the agri-food sector. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, 22: 47-76. (doi:10.1080/08985620903220512)
5. Bessant, J. and Rush, H. 1995. Building bridges for innovation: The role of consultants in technology transfer. Research Policy, 24: 97-114. (doi:10.1016/0048-7333(93)00751-E)
6. Chen, I. J. and Paulraj, A. 2004. Towards a theory of supply chain management: The constructs and measurements. Journal of Operations Management, 22: 119-50. (doi:10.1016/j.jom.2003.12.007)
7. Chesbrough, H. W. 2003. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
8. Coughlan, P. and Coghlan, D. 2002. Action research for operations management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22: 220-40. (doi:10.1108/01443570210417515)
9. Dahlander, L. and Gann, D. M. 2010. How open is innovation?. Research Policy, 39: 699-709. (doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.013)
10. Das, T. K. and Teng, B.-S. 2000. A resource-based theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management, 26: 31-61.
11. Deming, W. E. 1986. Out of the crisis: Quality, productivity and competitive position, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Edquist, C. 1997. Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organizations, London: Pinter.
13. Edwards, T., Delbridge, R. and Munday, M. 2005. Understanding innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises: a process manifest. Technovation, 25: 1119-27. (doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2004.04.005)
14. Eisenhardt, K. M. and Schoonhoven, C. B. 1996. Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 7: 136-50. (doi:10.1287/orsc.7.2.136)
15. Fichter, K. 2009. Innovation communities: The role of networks of promotors in open innovation. R&D Management, 39: 357-71.
16. Følstad, A. 2008. Living Labs for innovation and development of information and communication technology: A literature review. Special Issue on Living Labs. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10 Available athttp://www.ejov.org
17. Galbraith, B. and McAdam, R. 2011. The promise and problem with open innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23: 1-6. (doi:10.1080/09537325.2011.537084)
18. Gassmann, O., Enkel, E. and Chesbrough, H. 2010. The future of open innovation. R&D Management, 40: 213-21.
19. Gummesson, E. and Van Maanen, J. 2000. Qualitative methods in management research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Hammer, M. and Champy, J. 1993. Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution, New York: HarperBusiness.
21. Hansen, M. T. and Birkinshaw, J. 2007. The innovation value chain. Harvard Business Review, 85: 121-30.
22. Hargadon, A. and Sutton, R. I. 1997. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 716-49. (doi:10.2307/2393655)
23. Howells, J. 2006. Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35: 715-28. (doi:10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005)
24. Katzy, B. and Turgut, E. Developing an approach to measure innovation performance in collaborative networks. Paper presented at the 16th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising. June21-232010. Lugano, Switzerland
25. Katzy, B. R. and Crowston, K. 2008. Competency rallying for technical innovation-The case of the Virtuelle Fabrik. Technovation, 28: 679-92. (doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2007.11.003)
26. Klerkx, L. and Leeuwis, C. 2009. Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76: 849-60. (doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2008.10.001)
27. Kock, N. F. Jr, McQueen, R. J. and Scott, J. L. 1997. Can action research be made more rigorous in a positivist sense? The contribution of an iterative approach. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 1: 1-23.
28. Lawton Smith, H., Dickson, K. and Smith, S. 1991. 'There are two sides to every story': Innovation and collaboration within networks of large and small firms. Research Policy, 20: 457-68. (doi:10.1016/0048-7333(91)90069-3)
29. Lee, S., Park, G., Yoon, B. and Park, J. 2010. Open innovation in SMEs-an intermediated network model. Research Policy, 39: 290-300. (doi:10.1016/j.respol.2009.12.009)
30. Leydesdorff, L. and Fritsch, M. 2005. Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a triple helix dynamics. Working Paper, Technical University Bergakademie Freiberg.
31. Liang-Chuan, W. 2009. Supplier selection under uncertainty: A switching options perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109: 191-205. (doi:10.1108/02635570910930091)
32. Lopez, H. and Vanhaverbeke, W. 2009. How innovation intermediaries are shaping the technology market? An analysis of their business model. MPRA Paper No. 20458, Munich.
33. Lopez-Vega, H. and Vanhaverbeke, W. 2009. Connecting open and closed innovation markets: A typology of intermediaries. MPRA Paper No. 27017, Munich.
34. Luo, X., Wu, C., Rosenber, D. and Barnes, D. 2009. Supplier selection in agile supply chains: An information-processing model and an illustration. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 15: 249-62. (doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2009.05.004)
35. Minshall, T., Mortara, L., Elia, S. and Probert, D. 2008. Development of practitioner guidelines for partnerships between start-ups and large firms. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19: 391-406.
36. Ottosson, S. 2003. Participation action research: A key to improved knowledge of management. Technovation, 23: 87-94. (doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(01)00097-9)
37. Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D. and Neely, A. 2004. Networking and innovation: A systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 5/6: 137-68. (doi:10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00101.x)
38. Roper, S., Du, J. and Love, J. H. 2008. Modelling the innovation value chain. Research Policy, 37: 961-977. (doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.005)
39. Rothaermel, F. T. 2001. Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 687-699. (doi:10.1002/smj.180)
40. Rothaermel, F. T. 2002. Technological discontinuities and interfirm cooperation: What determines a start-up's attractiveness as alliance partner. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49: 388-397. (doi:10.1109/TEM.2002.806725)
41. Röttmer, N. 2011. Innovation performance and clusters. A dynamic capability perspective on regional technology clusters, Wiesbaden: Gabler.
42. Roxas, S. A., Piroli, G. and Sorrentino, M. 2011. Efficiency and evaluation analysis of a network of technology transfer brokers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23: 7-24. (doi:10.1080/09537325.2011.537085)
43. Shvaiko, P., Mion, L., Dalpiaz, F. and Angelini, G. The TasLab portal for collaborative innovation. Paper presented at the 16th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising. June21-232010. Lugano, Switzerland
44. Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, Oxford: The Clarendon Press 1976.
45. Spulber, D. F. 1999. Market microstructure: Intermediaries and the theory of the firm, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Susman, G. I. and Evered, R. D. 1978. An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 582-603. (doi:10.2307/2392581)
47. Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G. and Koch, J. 2009. Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. The Academy of Management Review Archive, 34: 689-709. (doi:10.5465/AMR.2009.44885978)
48. Van de Ven, A. H. 1986. Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32: 590-607. (doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.590)
49. Von Hippel, E. 2005. Democratizing innovation, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
50. Witte, E. 1973. Organisation für Innovationsentscheidungen-Das Promotoren-Modell, Göttingen: Schwartz.
51. Zhao, X. Y. and Zheng, Y. N. 2011. Development of Chinese science and technology intermediaries and their integration into the open innovation paradigm. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23: 25-48. (doi:10.1080/09537325.2011.537103)