Toward a better understanding of collaborative research, development, and innovation (R&D&I) - exploring virtual, physical, and cognitive structures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5585/2023.22836Keywords:
Innovation, Industry-Research collaboration, Innovation ecosystem, Collaboration structuresAbstract
Objective of the study: The research in this paper contributes to the understanding of how physical, virtual, and cognitive structures support innovation ecosystems’ multi-actor research, development, and innovation (R&D&I) collaboration in its different phases.
Methodology/Approach: The research’s methodological approach is based on a qualitative case study research strategy. It is done by exploring three innovation ecosystem cases. The case data comprises the case ecosystems’ existing documentation that was supplemented with five semi-structured interviews.
Originality/Relevance: Based on the findings of this research, it was possible to explore how industry and academy partners are collaborating through virtual, physical, and cognitive structures. Our cases also provide empirical evidence on how physical industrial sites can be used as environments for collaborative industry-academy R&D&I work.
Main Results: As a result, the paper presents lessons learned from three different innovation ecosystem cases that involve industrial, technology, and academy partners to tackle industrial use cases through virtual, physical, and cognitive structures. An example of such lessons learned is assembling dynamic teams to solve industrial problems.
Theoretical/Methodological Contributions: This article builds an understanding of how virtual, physical, and cognitive structures support collaboration between different participants in their joint R&D&I work covering industry-academy collaboration. The article also explains practical examples of this using innovation ecosystem cases.
Management/Social Contributions: The findings of this study may benefit professionals and managers who have an interest in understanding collaborative R&D&I and how physical, virtual, and cognitive structures can support it. Furthermore, the results provide means and experiences for innovation ecosystem managers to facilitate the definition of operational models suitable for the context of their innovation ecosystems.
Downloads
References
Adner, R. (2016). Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable Construct for Strategy, Journal of Management. 43(1), pp. 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451
Arnkil, R., Järvensivu, A., Koski, P., & Piirainen, T. (2010) Exploring Quadruple Helix: Outlining user-oriented innovation models. Final Report on Quadruple Helix Research for the CLIQ project, Tampere: The CLIQ. https://urn.fi/urn:isbn:978-951-44-8209-0
Bogers, M. Zobel, A.K, Afuah, A, Almirall, E., Brunswicker, S., & Dahlander, L. (2017). The open innovation research landscape: Established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis. Industry and Innovation, 24(1), pp. 8-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1240068
Brix, J. (2017). Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organizational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 33(2), pp. 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2017.05.001
Bürger, R. & Fiates, G.G.S. (2021). Fundamental elements of university-industry interaction from a grounded theory approach, Innovation & Management Review, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-08-2021-0156
Bullinger, A., Neyer, A., Rass, M., & Moeslein, K. (2010). Community-based innovation contests: Where competition meets cooperation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(3), pp. 290–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00565.x
Burnard, P., Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E. & Chadwick, B. (2008). Analysing and presenting qualitative data, British Dental Journal, 204(8), pp. 429–432, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.292
Carayannis, E., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R and D Management, 48(1), pp. 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12300
Chesbrough, H., & Garman, A. (2009). Use open innovation to cope in a downturn. Harvard Business Review, June 2009
Clark, A. (2008), Supersizing the mind. Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333213.001.0001
Crossan, M., Lane, H., & White, R. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), pp. 522-537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2202135
Dahlander, L., Gann, D. M., & Wallin, M. W. (2021). How open is innovation? A retrospective and ideas forward. Research Policy. Elsevier B.V., 50(4), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104218
Davis, G. F., & McAdam, D. (2000). Corporations, classes, and social movements after managerialism. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22: pp. 193-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(00)22006-6
de Vasconcelos Gomes, L.A.., de Faria, A., Borini, F.M., Chaparro, X.A., dos Santos, M.G., & Gurgel Amaral, G.S. (2021a). Dispersed knowledge management in ecosystems, Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(4), pp. 796–825. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-03-2020-0239
de Vasconcelos Gomes, L. A., Lopez-Vega, H., & Facin, A. L. F. (2021b). Playing chess or playing poker? Assessment of uncertainty propagation in open innovation projects, International Journal of Project Management, 39(2), pp. 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.07.002
de Vasconcelos Gomes, L.A., Facin, A.L.F., Leal, L.F., de Senzi Zancul, E., Salerno, M.S., & Borini, F.M. (2022). The emergence of the ecosystem management function in B2B companies. Industrial Marketing Management, 102, pp. 465-487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.12.015
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L-E. (2002). Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), pp. 553-560. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., & Chesbrough, H. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: Exploring the phenomenon. R and D Management, 39(4), pp. 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00570.x
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdroff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29: pp. 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Faccin, K., Balestrin, A., Martins, B.V., & Bitencourt, C.C. (2019). Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities: a joint R&D project in the French semiconductor industry, Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(3), pp. 439–465. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2018-0233
Garousi, V., Shepherd, D., & Herkiloglu, K. (2020a). Successful Engagement of Practitioners and Software Engineering Researchers: Evidence From 26 International Industry–Academia Collaborative Projects. IEEE Software, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 65-75, Nov.-Dec. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2019.2914663
Garousi, V., Borg, M., & Oivo, M. (2020b). Practical relevance of software engineering research: synthesizing the community’s voice. Empir Software Eng, 25: pp. 1687–1754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09803-0
Gassmann, O., Enkel, E., & Chesbrough, H. (2010). The future of open innovation. R&D Management, 40(3), pp. 213–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2017.1255054
Hannah, D. P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2018). How firms navigate cooperation and competition in nascent ecosystems, Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), pp. 3163–3192. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2750
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), pp. 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904
Ketonen-Oksi, S., & Valkokari, K. (2019). Innovation Ecosystems as Structures for Value Co-Creation. Technology Innovation Management Review, 9(2), pp. 25–35. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1216
Khan, I., Kauppila, O., Iancu, B., Jurmu, M., Jurvansuu, M., Pirttikangas, S., Lilius, J., Koho, M., Marjakangas, E., & Majava, J. (2022). Triple Helix Collaborative Innovation and Value Co-creation in an Industry 4.0 Context. International Journal of Innovation and Learning. 32(2), pp. 125-147, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2022.125029
Lee, S. M., Olson, D. L., & Trimi, S. (2012). Co-Innovation: Convergenomics, Collaboration, and Co-Creation for Organizational Values. Management Decision, 50(5), pp. 817-831. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211227528
Leminen, S., Nyström, A.-G., & Westerlund, M. (2020). Change processes in open innovation networks - exploring living labs. Industrial Marketing Management. 91: pp. 701-718 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.01.013
McAdam, M., & K. Debackere. (2018). Beyond ‘Triple Helix’ toward ‘Quadruple Helix’ Models in Regional Innovation Systems: Implications for Theory and Practice. R&D Management 48(1): pp. 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12309
Marijan, D., & Gotlieb, A. (2020). Lessons Learned on Research Co-Creation: Making Industry-Academia Collaboration Work. 46th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), pp. 272-275. https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA51224.2020.00053
Marijan, D., & Gotlieb, A. (2021). Industry-Academia research collaboration in software engineering: The Certus model. Information and Software Technology, 132, 106473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106473
Miller, K., McAdam, R., & McAdam, M. (2018). A Systematic Literature Review of University Technology Transfer from a Quadruple Helix Perspective: Toward a Research Agenda. R&D Management, 48(1), pp. 7-24, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12228
Misirli, A., Erdogmus, H., Juristo, N, & Dieste, O. (2014). Topic selection in industry experiments. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Conducting Empirical Studies in Industry (CESI 2014). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/2593690.2593691
Moultrie, J., Nilsson, M., Dissel, M., Haner, U., Janssen, S., & Van der Lugt, R. (2007). Innovation Spaces: Towards a Framework for Understanding the Role of the Physical Environment in Innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(1), pp. 53–65. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00419.x
Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The Concept of “Ba”: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation. Californian Management Review, 40(3). https://doi.org/10.2307/41165942
Nonaka, I., & Krogh, G. (2009). Perspective-tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science, 20(3), pp. 635-652. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0412
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995), The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press.
Oh, D., Phillips, F., Park, S., & Lee, E. (2016). Innovation ecosystems: A critical examination. Technovation, 54, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.004
Oksanen, K., & Ståhle, P. (2013). Physical environment as a source for innovation: Investigating the attributes of innovative space. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(6), pp. 815–827. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2013-0136
Paasi, J. Valkokari, K., & Rantala, T. (2013). Openness in developing inter-organizational innovation. Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2013.818789
Pavitt, K. (2005). Innovation process, in Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., and Nelson, R. R. (eds) The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press
Pellikka, J., & Ali-Vehmas, T. (2016). Managing Innovation Ecosystems to Create and Capture Value in ICT Industries. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(10): pp. 17–24. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1024.
Peschl, M.F., & Fundneider, T., (2012). Spaces enabling game-changing and sustaining innovations: Why space matters for knowledge creation and innovation. Journal of Organisational Transformation & Social Change, 9(1), pp. 41-61
Peverelli, P. (2000), Cognitive Space - A Social-Cognitive approach to Sino-Foreign Co-operation. Eburon, Delft
Rioux, M., & Kajikawa, Y. (2020). Enhancing Engagement in Remote Collaboration: A Case Study at the MIT Media Lab, ISPIM Connects Global 2020: Celebrating the World of Innovation - Virtual, 6-8 December 2020. Event Proceedings: LUT Scientific and Expertise Publications
Ritala, P., & Almpanopoulou, A. (2017). In defense of “eco” in innovation ecosystem. Technovation, 60–61(January), pp. 39–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.01.004
Robertson, J., Caruana, A., & Ferreira, C. (2023). Innovation performance: The effect of knowledge-based dynamic capabilities in cross-country innovation ecosystems, International Business Review. 32(2), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101866
Runeson, P., & Minör, S. (2014). The 4+1 view model of industry--academia collaboration. Proceedings of the 2014 international workshop on Long-term industrial collaboration on software engineering. https://doi.org/10.1145/2647648.2647651
Sandberg, A., Pareto, L., & Arts, T. (2011). Agile Collaborative Research: Action Principles for Industry-Academia Collaboration. IEEE Software, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 74-83. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2011.49
Simeone, L., Secundo, G., & Schiuma, G. (2017). Knowledge translation mechanisms in open innovation: The role of design in r&d projects. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(6), pp. 1406–1429. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2016-0432
Thomas, L. D. W., & Ritala, P. (2022). Ecosystem Legitimacy Emergence: A Collective Action View. Journal of Management, 48(3), pp. 515–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320986617
Valkokari, K. (2015). Business, Innovation, and Knowledge Ecosystems: How They Differ and How to Survive and Thrive within Them. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(8), pp. 17–24
Valkokari, K. Paasi, J., & Rantala, T. (2012). Managing knowledge within networked innovation. Knowledge Management Research & Practice. Palgrave Macmillan. Vol. 10 (1), pp. 27-40. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2011.39
Valkokari, K. Valkokari, P., Rantala, T., & Nyblom, J. (2021). Exploring the Best Practices for Co-innovation in Industry and Academy Collaboration – Four Practical Case Examples. Proceedings of PRO-VE 2021: Smart and Sustainable Collaborative Networks 4.0. Springer, IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 22nd IFIP/SoColnet Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, PRO-VE 2021, Saint Etienne, France, 22/11/21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85969-5_71
Van de Ven, A. (1992). Suggestions for studying strategy processes: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13 (S1) (1992), pp. 169-188. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250131013
Vanhaverbeke, W., Chesbrough, H., & West, J. (2014). Surfing the New Wave of Open Innovation Research. in Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverberke, W., and West, J. (eds) New Frontiers in Open Innovation. Oxford Scholarship Online, pp. 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199682461.003.0015
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 International Journal of Innovation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
The author(s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal.
The author(s) ensure that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not being evaluated in other journal(s).
The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts expressed in the texts because they are the sole responsibility of the author(s).
The publishers reserve the right to make adjustments and textual adaptation to the norms of APA.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.
