Skip to main content
No Access

Enabling knowledge creation through outsiders: towards a push model of open innovation

Published Online:pp 411-431https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2010.035983

Open innovation is increasingly being adopted in business and describes a situation in which firms exchange ideas and knowledge with external participants, such as customers, suppliers, partner firms, and universities. This article extends the concept of open innovation with a push model of open innovation: knowledge is voluntarily created outside a firm by individuals and organisations who proceed to push knowledge into a firm’s open innovation project. For empirical analysis, we examine source code and newsgroup data on the Eclipse Development Platform. We find that outsiders invest as much in the firm’s project as the founding firm itself. Based on the insights from Eclipse, we develop four propositions: ‘preemptive generosity’ of a firm, ‘continuous commitment’, ‘adaptive governance structure’, and ‘low entry barrier’ are contexts that enable the push model of open innovation.

Keywords

innovation, open innovation, open source software, knowledge creation, governance structure’ enabling contexts

References

  • 1. Albrecht, A. , Gaffney, J. (1983). ‘Software function, source lines of code, and development effort prediction: a software science validation’. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 9, 639-648 Google Scholar
  • 2. Allio, R.J. (2004). ‘CEO interview: the InnoCentive model of open innovation’. Strategy & Leadership. 32, 4, 4-9 Google Scholar
  • 3. Bagozzi, R.P. , Dholakia, U.M. (2006). ‘Open source software user communities: a study of participation in Linux user groups’. Management Science. 52, 7, 1099-1115 Google Scholar
  • 4. Bessen, J. (2002). ‘Open source software: free provision of complex public goods’. Research on Innovation. Technical report, available at http://www.researchoninnovation.org/opensrc.pdf Google Scholar
  • 5. Boehm, B. (1981). Software Engineering Economics. Prentice-Hall Google Scholar
  • 6. Campbell, D.T. (1975). ‘Degrees of freedom and the case study’. Comparative Political Studies. 8, 1, 178-193 Google Scholar
  • 7. Chesbrough, H.W. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston:Harvard Business School Press Google Scholar
  • 8. Chesbrough, H.W. (2006). Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape. Boston, MA:Harvard Business School Press Google Scholar
  • 9. Chesbrough, H.W. Vanhaverbeke, W. West, J. (2006). Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford University Press Google Scholar
  • 10. Coleman, J.S. (1988). ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’. The American Journal of Sociology. 94, 95-120 Google Scholar
  • 11. Constant, D. , Sproull, L. , Kiesler, S. (1996). ‘The kindness of strangers: the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice’. Organization Science. 7, 2, 119-135 Google Scholar
  • 12. Dahlander, L. , Frederiksen, L. (2007). ‘Communication and boundary spanning in a firm-hosted online user community’. Imperial College London, Technical report Google Scholar
  • 13. Dahlander, L. , Magnusson, M.G. (2005). ‘Relationships between open source companies and communities: observations from Nordic firms’. Research Policy. 34, 481-493 Google Scholar
  • 14. Dahlander, L. , Wallin, M.W. (2006). ‘A man on the inside: unlocking communities as complementary assets’. Research Policy. 35, 8, 1243-1259 Google Scholar
  • 15. Dodgson, M. , Gann, D. , Salter, A. (2006). ‘The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: the case of Procter & Gamble’. R&D Management. 36, 3, Google Scholar
  • 16. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). ‘Building theories from case study research’. Academy of Management Review. 14, 4, 532-550 Google Scholar
  • 17. Fauchart, E. , von Hippel, E. (2006). ‘Norms-based intellectual property systems: the case of French chefs’. Working paper, available at http://web.mit.edu/evhippel/www/papers/vonhippelfauchart2006.pdf Google Scholar
  • 18. Fielding, R.T. (1999). ‘Shared leadership in the Apache Project’. Communications of the ACM. 42, 4, 42-43 Google Scholar
  • 19. Fitzgerald, B. (2006). ‘The transformation of open source software’. MIS Quarterly. 30, 3, 587-598 Google Scholar
  • 20. Fleiss, J.L. (1971). ‘Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters’. Psychological Bulletin. 76, 378-382 Google Scholar
  • 21. Gächter, S. , von Krogh, G. , Haefliger, S. (2006). ‘Private-collective innovation and the fragility of knowledge sharing’. University of Nottingham, CeDEx Discussion Paper No. 2006-21, available at http://www.nottinghamnetlearning.com/economics/cedex/papers/2006-21.pdf Google Scholar
  • 22. Gassmann, O. , Enkel, E. (2004). ‘Towards a theory of open innovation: three core process archetypes’. Proceedings of the R&D Management Conference (RADMA). Google Scholar
  • 23. Gassmann, O. , Gaso, B. (2004). ‘Insourcing creativity with listening posts in decentralized firms’. Creativity and Innovation Management. 13, 1, 3-14 Google Scholar
  • 24. Gibbons, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage Google Scholar
  • 25. Grand, S. , von Krogh, G. , Leonard, D. , Swap, W. (2004). ‘Resource allocation beyond firm boundaries: a multi-level model for open source innovation’. Long Range Planning. 37, 6, 591-610 Google Scholar
  • 26. Hagedoorn, J. (1993). ‘Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences’. Strategic Management Journal. 14, 5, 371-385 Google Scholar
  • 27. Hagedoorn, J. , Link, A.N. , Vonortas, N.S. (2000). ‘Research partnerships’. Research Policy. 29, 4–5, 567-586 Google Scholar
  • 28. Hamel, G. (1991). ‘Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances’. Strategic Management Journal. 12, S1, 83-103 Google Scholar
  • 29. Harhoff, D. (1996). ‘Strategic spillovers and incentives for R&D’. Management Science. 42, 6, 907-925 Google Scholar
  • 30. Harhoff, D. , Henkel, J. , von Hippel, E. (2003). ‘Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations’. Research Policy. 32, 10, 1753-1769 Google Scholar
  • 31. Henkel, J. (2006). ‘Selective revealing in open innovation processes: the case of embedded Linux’. Research Policy. 37, 7, 953-969 Google Scholar
  • 32. Herraiz, I. , Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M. , Robles, G. (2007). ‘Forecasting the number of changes in Eclipse using time series analysis’. 29th International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops (ICSEW’07) Google Scholar
  • 33. Hounshell, D.A. , Smith, J.K. (1988). Science and Strategy: Du Pont R&D. Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
  • 34. Kogut, B. (1988). ‘Joint ventures: theoretical and empirical perspectives’. Strategic Management Journal. 9, 4, 319-332 Google Scholar
  • 35. Lakhani, K.R. , von Hippel, E. (2003). ‘How open source software works: ‘free; user-to-user assistance’. Research Policy. 32, 6, 923-943 Google Scholar
  • 36. MacCormack, A. , Rusnak, J. , Baldwin, C.Y. (2006). ‘Exploring the structure of complex software designs: an empirical study of open source and proprietary code’. Management Science. 52, 7, 1015-1030 Google Scholar
  • 37. Mayer, K.J. (2006). ‘Spillovers and governance: an analysis of knowledge and reputational spillovers in information technology’. Academy of Management Journal. 49, 1, 69-84 Google Scholar
  • 38. Mowery, D.C. , Oxely, J.E. , Silvermann, B.S. (1996). ‘Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer’. Strategic Management Journal. 17, 77-91 Google Scholar
  • 39. Muller, P. , Pénin, J. (2006). ‘Why do firms disclose knowledge and how does it matter?’. Journal of Evolutionary Economics. 16, 1–2, 85-108 Google Scholar
  • 40. Myatt, D.P. , Wallis, C. (2002). ‘Equilibrium selection and public-good provision: the development of open source software’. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 18, 4, 446-461 Google Scholar
  • 41. Nahapiet, J. , Ghoshal, S. (1998). ‘Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage’. Academy of Management Review. 23, 242-266 Google Scholar
  • 42. Nonaka, I. (1994). ‘A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation’. Organization Science. 5, 14-37 Google Scholar
  • 43. Nonaka, I. , Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press Google Scholar
  • 44. Nonaka, I. , von Krogh, G. , Voelpel, S. (2006). ‘Organizational knowledge creation theory: evolutionary paths and future advances’. Organization Studies. 27, 8, 1179-1208 Google Scholar
  • 45. O’Mahony, S.C. (2003). ‘Guarding the commons: how community managed software projects protect their work research policy’. Research Policy. 32, 7, 1179-1198 Google Scholar
  • 46. O’Mahony, S. , Ferraro, F. (2007). ‘The emergence of governance in an open source community’. Academy of Management Journal. 50, 5, Google Scholar
  • 47. O’Mahony, S. , Diaz, F.C. , Mamas, E. (2005). ‘IBM and Eclipse (A)’. Technical report, Harvard Business School Case Study Google Scholar
  • 48. Pentland, B.T. (1999). ‘Building process theory with narrative: from description to explanation’. Academy of Management Review. 24, 4, 711-724 Google Scholar
  • 49. Rizova, P. (2006). ‘Are you networked for successful innovation?’. MIT Sloan Management Review. 47, 3, 49-55 Google Scholar
  • 50. Robles, G. , Koch, S. , Gonzalez-Barahona, J. (2004). ‘Remote analysis and measurement of Libre Software Systems by means of the Cvsanaly tool’. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, Technical report Google Scholar
  • 51. Rullani, F. (2006). ‘Dragging developers towards the core. How the free/Libre/open source software community enhances developers’ contribution (2006/22)’. Pisa, Italy:Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies , Technical report, available at http://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2006-22.html Google Scholar
  • 52. Sawhney, M. , Prandelli, E. (2000). ‘Communities of creation: managing distributed innovation in turbulent markets’. California Management Review. 42, 4, 24-54 Google Scholar
  • 53. Scacchi, W. (2004). ‘Free and open source development practices in the game community’. IEEE Software. 21, 1, 59-66 Google Scholar
  • 54. Shah, S. (2003). ‘Understanding the nature of participation & coordination in open and gated source software development communities’. Doctoral dissertation Google Scholar
  • 55. Shah, S.K. (2006). ‘Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development’. Management Science. 52, 7, 1000-1014 Google Scholar
  • 56. Spencer, J.W. (2003). ‘Firms’ knowledge-sharing strategies in the global innovation system: empirical evidence from the flat panel display industry’. Strategic Management Journal. 24, 3, 217-233 Google Scholar
  • 57. Straub, D.W. , Boudreau, M. , Gefen, D. (2004). ‘Validation guidelines for IS Positivist research’. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 13, 380-427 Google Scholar
  • 58. von Hippel, E. (1988). The Sources of Innovation. Oxford University Press Google Scholar
  • 59. von Hippel, E. , Katz, R. (2002). ‘Shifting innovation to users via toolkits’. Management Science. 48, 7, 821-833 Google Scholar
  • 60. von Hippel, E. , von Krogh, G. (2003). ‘Open source software and the ‘private-collective’ innovation model: issues for organization science’. Organization Science. 14, 2, 209-223 Google Scholar
  • 61. von Hippel, E. , von Krogh, G. (2006). ‘Free revealing and the private-collective model for innovation incentives’. R&D Management. 36, 3, 295-306 Google Scholar
  • 62. von Krogh, G. ‘Customers demand their share of IP’. Harvard Business Review. 2006, 02, 45-46 Google Scholar
  • 63. von Krogh, G. , Spaeth, S. , Lakhani, K.R. (2003). ‘Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study’. Research Policy. 32, 7, 1217-1241 Google Scholar
  • 64. Wasko, M.M. , Samer, F. (2005). ‘Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice’. MIS Quarterly. 29, 1, 35-37 Google Scholar
  • 65. West, J. (2003). ‘How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies’. Research Policy. 32, 7, 1259-1285 Google Scholar
  • 66. West, J. , Gallagher, S. (2006a). ‘Patterns of open innovation in open source software ‘open innovation’: researching a new paradigm’. Oxford University Press. 82-109 Google Scholar
  • 67. West, J. , Gallagher, S. (2006b). ‘Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software’. R&D Management. 36, 3, 319-331 Google Scholar
  • 68. West, J. , O’Mahony, S. (2008). ‘The role of participation architecture in growing sponsored open source communities’. Industry & Innovation. 15, 2, 145-168 Google Scholar
  • 69. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Google Scholar