Search

There is no single best way to manage technology in a company and there is no mechanistic route to success, but this accessible handbook provides a wealth of international examples, up-to-date case studies and activities designed to ...

The literature has shown that open innovation (OI) can be a winning strategy in improving firm performance. However, in order to adopt and implement it, managers need to resolve practical problems, such as understanding the role played by OI capacities and openness on firm performance. In response to these needs, this study aims to investigate the hierarchical relationships between openness, OI capacities and performance using a structural equation model approach. This paper also attempts to compare the levels of openness between firms in different industries to discover similarities and differences in OI phenomena. The analysis of data obtained from a survey of Korean firms shows significant interrelations between openness, OI capacities and firm performance. Our results go further in developing understanding of the building blocks on which successful OI is built and particularly suggest that desorptive capacity which underpins the out-bound OI process, is in turn strongly supported by knowledge management capacity. It is hoped that the results of this study can enrich our understanding of the OI mechanism *and provide managerial and policy implications.

Emphasizing the practical side of Technology and Innovation Management, this book includes significant contributions to the practice of strategizing, management of competences and innovation management. While the findings are research-based, each contribution has 'managerial implications' which cover the recommended implementation.

Rapid development and commercialization of new products is of vital importance for small and medium sized enterprises (SME) in regulated sectors. Due to strict regulations, competitive advantage can hardly be achieved through the effectiveness of product concepts only. If an SME in a highly regulated sector wants to excell in new product development (NPD) performance, the company should focus on the flexibility, speed, and productivity of its NPD function: i.e. the development process effectiveness. Our main research goals are first to explore if SMEs should focus on their their development process effectiveness rather than on their product concept effectiveness to achieve high NPD performance; and second, to explore whether a shared pattern in the organization of the NPD function can be recognized to affect NPD performance positively. The medical devices sector in Spain is used as an example of a highly regulated sector. A structured survey among 11 SMEs, of which 2 were studied also as in in-depth case studies, led to the following results. First of all, indeed the companies in the dataset which focused on the effectiveness of their development process, stood out in NPD performance. Further, the higher performing companies did have a number of commonalities in the organisation of their NPD function: 1) The majority of the higher performing firms had an NPD strategy characterized by a predominantly incremental project portfolio. 2) a) Successful firms with an incremental project portfolio combined this with a functional team structure b) Successful firms with a radical project portfolio combined this with a heavyweight or autonomous team structure. 3) A negative reciprocal relationship exists between formalization of the NPD processes and the climate of the NPD function, in that a formalized NPD process and an innovative climate do not seem to reinforce each other. Innovative climate combined with an informal NPD process does however contribute positively to NPD performance. This effect was stronger in combination with a radical project portfolio. The highest NPD performance was measured for companies focusing mainly on incremental innovation. It is argued that in highly regulated sectors, companies with an incremental product portfolio would benefit from employing a functional structure. Those companies who choose for a more radical project portfolio in highly regulated sectors should be aware that they are likely to excell only in the longer term by focusing on strategic flexibility. In their NPD organization, they might be well advised to combine informal innovation processes with an innovative climate.