Open innovation and its relevance to industrial research and development: The case of high-technology small firms Oakey, Raymond P.
By: Oakey, Raymond P
Material type:
ArticlePublisher: 2013Description: 319-336Subject(s): Science Parks | Research And Development | Open And Closed Innovation Systems | Intellectual Property | Incubators | High-Technology Small Firms | Clusters | Acquisition
In:
International Small Business JournalSummary: Recently, there has been increasing interest in the principle of open innovation and its relevance to our understanding of innovation in modern industry. This article relates these ideas to the specific, yet important, case of innovation in high-technology small firms (HTSFs). HTSFs are of interest since they have produced a significant number of the most important innovations in the high-technology sectors over the past 30 years. Certainly as far as HTSFs are concerned, it is argued that the ideas behind greater openness during innovation are not well suited to the way in which this type of firm innovates. Moreover, it is argued more generally that the work of Chesbrough can be criticised for overstating the potential for greater openness in terms of industrial research and development, since a degree of openness has always existed, while simultaneously understating the merits of closed innovation systems.
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Ahmedabad (HO) | (Browse shelf) | Vol. 31, Issue. 3 | Available | 018413 |
Recently, there has been increasing interest in the principle of open innovation and its relevance to our understanding of innovation in modern industry. This article relates these ideas to the specific, yet important, case of innovation in high-technology small firms (HTSFs). HTSFs are of interest since they have produced a significant number of the most important innovations in the high-technology sectors over the past 30 years. Certainly as far as HTSFs are concerned, it is argued that the ideas behind greater openness during innovation are not well suited to the way in which this type of firm innovates. Moreover, it is argued more generally that the work of Chesbrough can be criticised for overstating the potential for greater openness in terms of industrial research and development, since a degree of openness has always existed, while simultaneously understating the merits of closed innovation systems.
There are no comments on this title.