Open innovation: Factors explaining universities as service firm innovation sources

Journal of Business Research

Volumn 66, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 2017-2023

  Janeiro, Pedro ^a   Proença, Isabel ^a   Gonçalves, Vítor da Conceição ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Open innovation; Random intercept ordered probit; Service innovation; University service firm links

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878630465     PISSN: 01482963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.027     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Abernathy W.J., Utterback J.M. A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega 1975, 3(6):639-656.
2. Adame-Sánchez C., Miquel-Romero M.J. Are Spanish SMEs good places to work?. Management Decision 2012, 50(4):668-687.
3. Arundel A., Geun A. Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 2004, 13(6):559-580.
4. Boes S., Winkelmann R. Ordered response models. Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv 2006, 90:167-181.
5. Brown J.S., Duguid P. The social life of information 2000, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
6. Chandy R.K., Tellis G.J. Organizing for radical product innovation: The overlooked role of willingness to cannibalize. Journal of Marketing Research 1998, 35:474-487.
7. Chesbrough H. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology 2003, Harvard Business Press, Boston.
8. Cohen W.M., Levinthal D.A. Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. The Economic Journal 1989, 99:569-596.
9. Cohen W.M., Levinthal D.A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective of learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 1990, 35:128-152.
10. Cohen W.M., Nelson R.R., Walsh J. Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science 2002, 48(1):1-23.
11. Congregado E., Golpe A., Van Stel A. The 'recession-push' hypothesis reconsidered. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 2012, 8(3):325-342.
12. Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorff L. The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy 2000, 29:109-123.
13. Eurostat Science, technology and innovation in Europe 2011, European Union, Brussels.
14. Fagerberg J., Mowery D.C., Nelson R.R. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation 2005, Oxford University Press, New York.
15. Flikkema M., Jansen P., Van der Sluis L. Identifying neo-Schumpeterian innovation in service firms: A conceptual essay with a novel classification. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 2007, 16(7):541-588.
16. Gemünden H.G., Ritter T. The impact of a company's business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success. Journal of Business Research 2004, 57:548-556.
17. Gibbons M., Johnston R. The roles of science in technological innovation?. Research Policy 1974, 3:220-242.
18. GPEARI Sumários Estatísticos CIS 2006 - Inquérito Comunitário à Inovação 2008, Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior, Lisbon.
19. Grandstrand O., Sjolander S. Managing innovation in multi-technology corporations. Research Policy 1990, 19:25-60.
20. Herrera L., Muñoz-Doyague M.F., Nieto M. Mobility of public researchers, scientific knowledge transfer, and the firm's innovation process. Journal of Business Research 2010, 63:510-518.
21. Hicks D., Breitzman T., Olivastro D., Hamilton K. The changing composition of innovative activity in the US: A portrait based on patent analysis. Research Policy 2001, 30:681-703.
22. Landroguez S.M., Castro C.B., Cepeda-Carrión G. Creating dynamic capabilities to increase customer value. Management Decision 2011, 49(7):1141-1159.
23. Lapiedra R., Palau F., Reig I. Managing asymmetry in franchise contracts: Transparency as the overriding rule. Management Decision 2012, 50(8):1488-1499.
24. Laursen K., Salter A. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal 2006, 27:131-150.
25. Laursen K., Salter A. Searching high and low: What types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?. Research Policy 2004, 33:1201-1215.
26. Lee C.Y., Huang Y.C. Knowledge stock, ambidextrous learning, and firm performance: Evidence form technologically intensive industries. Management Decision 2012, 50(6):1096-1116.
27. Link A.L., Rees J. Firm size, university based research, and the returns to R&D. Small Business Economics 1990, 2:25-31.
28. Lundvall B.A. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning 1992, Pinter Publishers, London.
29. Mendonça S., Pereira T.S., Godinho M.M. Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change. Research Policy 2004, 33:1385-1404.
30. Mohnem P., Hoareau C. What type of enterprise forges close links with universities and government labs?. Managerial and Decision Economics 2003, 24:133-146.
31. Mol M.J., Birkinshaw J. The sources of management innovation: When firms introduce new management practices. Journal of Business Research 2009, 62(12):1269-1280.
32. Mueller W.F. The origins of the basic inventions underlying DuPont's major product and process innovations, 1920 to 1950. The rate and direction of inventive activity 1962, University Press, Princeton.
33. Negassi S. R&D co-operation and innovation: A microeconometric study on French firms. Research Policy 2004, 33:365-384.
34. Nelson R.R. National Innovation Systems: A comparative study 1993, Oxford University Press, New York.
35. Niosi J. Fourth-generation R&D: From linear models to flexible innovation. Journal of Business Research 1999, 45:111-117.
36. OECD Oslo Manual: Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data 2005, OECD Publications, Paris.
37. Perkmann M., Walsh K. University-industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 2007, 9(4):259-280.
38. Prahalad C.K., Krishnan M.S. The new age of innovation: Driving co-created value through global networks 2008, McGraw-Hill, New York.
39. Rabe-Hesketh S., Skrondal A., Pickles A. Maximum likelihood estimation of limited and discrete dependent variable models with nested random effects. Journal of Econometrics 2005, 128(2):301-323.
40. Rothwell R., Freeman C., Jervis P., Robertson A., Townsend J. SAPPHO updated: Project SAPPHO phase 2. Research Policy 1974, 3(3):258-291.
41. Santoro M., Chakrabarti A. Firm size and technology centrality in industry-university interactions. Research Policy 2002, 31:1163-1180.
42. Schartinger D., Schibany A., Gassler H. Interactive relations between universities and firms: Empirical evidence for Austria. The Journal of Technology Transfer 2001, 26:255-269.
43. Schmidt T. Knowledge flows and R&D co-operation: Firm-level evidence from Germany. Discussion paper no. 05-22 2005, Center for European Economic Research.
44. Segarra-Blasco A., Arauzo-Carod J.M. Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms. Research Policy 2008, 37:1283-1295.
45. Skarzynski P., Gibson R. Innovation to the core: A blueprint for transforming the way your company innovates 2008, Harvard Business Press, Boston.
46. Spencer J.W. How relevant is university-based scientific research to private high-technology firms? A United States-Japan comparison. Academy of Management Journal 2001, 44:432-440.
47. Tether B.S., Swann P. Services, innovation and the science base: A research into the UK's system of innovation using evidence from the UK's third community innovation survey 2003, ISPRI-NCR and University of Urbino, Rome.
48. Tutz G., Hennevogl W. Random effects in ordinal regression models. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 1996, 22:537-557.
49. Urban G.L., von Hippel E. Lead user analysis for development of new industrial products. Management Science 1988, 34(5):569-582.
50. Von Hippel E. The sources of innovation 1988, Oxford University Press, New York.
51. Von Hippel E. Democratizing innovation 2006, The MIT Press, Cambridge.
52. Zucker L., Darby M., Brewer M. Intellectual capital and the birth of the U.S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review 1998, 88:290-306.