Skip to main content
Search
Search
Quick Search anywhere
Quick Search anywhere
Quick Search anywhere
Quick Search anywhere
Quick Search anywhere
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
No Access

Independent inventors and inbound open innovation: using a resource-based approach to create a tool for screening inventor approaches in order to facilitate technology in-licensing

Published Online:May 22, 2013pp 102-126https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTMKT.2013.054078

Abstract

Open innovation literature identifies independent inventors as a source of novel external knowledge. This knowledge may be licensed into an organisation in order to supplement internal R&D activity, typically as part of an inbound open innovation strategy. In opening an organisation up to approaches from individuals the capacity of the core team to identify promising licensing opportunities is diminished by the sheer volume and variable quality of approaches received. Based on a survey of 202 UK independent inventors this paper utilises a resource-based approach to identify the key resources possessed by successful independent inventors. Using this data, we devise a preliminary screening tool to facilitate technology in-licensing from independent inventors.

Keywords

independent inventors, licensing, open innovation, new product development, resource-based perspective, technology marketing

References

  • 1. Albaum, G. (1975). The Independent Inventor. Oregon:Eugene Google Scholar
  • 2. Alvarez, S.H. , Busenitz, L.W. (2001). ‘The entrepreneurship of resource-based theory’. Journal of Management. 27, 1, 20 Google Scholar
  • 3. Astebro, T. (2003). ‘The return to independent invention: evidence of unrealistic optimism, risk seeking or skewness loving?’. The Economic Journal. 113, 484, 14 Google Scholar
  • 4. Astebro, T. , Michela, J.L. (2005). ‘Predictors of the survival of innovators’. The Journal of Product Innovation Management. 22, 4, 13 Google Scholar
  • 5. Barney, J.B. (1991). ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’. Journal of Management. 17, 1, 21 Google Scholar
  • 6. Barney, J.B. (1997). Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley Google Scholar
  • 7. Barney, J.B. (2001). ‘Is the resource-based ‘view’ a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes’. Academy of Management Review. 26, 1, 16 Google Scholar
  • 8. Barney, J.B. , Mackey, T.B. , Ketchen, D.J. Bergh, D.D. (2005). ‘Testing resource-based theory’. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management. Greenwich:Elsevier , 1-13 Google Scholar
  • 9. Becker, G.S. (1964). Human Capital. New York:Columbia Google Scholar
  • 10. Bianchi, M. , Cavaliere, A. , Chiaroni, D. , Frattini, F. , Chiesa, V. (2011). ‘Organisational modes for open innovation in the bio-pharmaceutical industry: an exploratory analysis’. Technovation. 31, 1, 12 Google Scholar
  • 11. Bonner, J.M. , Walker, O.C. (2004). ‘Selecting influential business-to-business customers in new product development: relational embeddedness and knowledge heterogeneity considerations’. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 21, 3, 15 Google Scholar
  • 12. Bughin, J. , Chui, M. , Johnson, B. (2008). ‘The next step in open innovation’. The McKinsey Quarterly. 4, 6, 8 Google Scholar
  • 13. Chesbrough, H. , Crowther, A.K. (2006). ‘Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries’. R&D Management. 36, 3, 229-236 Google Scholar
  • 14. Chesbrough, H. , Vanhaverbeke, W. , West, J. (2006). Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford:Oxford University Press Google Scholar
  • 15. Coe, N.M. , Bunnell, T.G. (2003). ‘Spatializing knowledge communities: towards a conceptualization of transnational innovation networks’. Global Networks. 3, 4, 20 Google Scholar
  • 16. Cohen, W.M. , Levinthal, D.A. (1990). ‘Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation’. Administrative Science Quarterly. 35, 1, 26 Google Scholar
  • 17. Cooper, R.G. , Klienschmidt, E.J. ‘Winning business in new product development: the critical success factors’. Research-Technology Management. 2007, 05–06, 39, 4, 18-29 Google Scholar
  • 18. Dahan, E. , Hauser, J.R. (2002). ‘The virtual customer’. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 19, 5, 22 Google Scholar
  • 19. Dahlin, K. , Taylor, M. , Fichman, M. (2004). ‘Today’s Edisons or weekend hobbyists: technical merit and success of inventions by independent inventors’. Research Policy. 33, 1, 1167-1183 Google Scholar
  • 20. Dittrich, K. , Dusters, G. , De Man, A.P. (2007). ‘Strategic repositioning by means of alliances networks: the case of IBM’. Research Policy. 36, 1, 16 Google Scholar
  • 21. Edquist, C. , Johnson, B. , Edquist, C. (1997). ‘Institutions and organisations in systems of innovation’. Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations. London and Washington:Pinter/Cassell Academic Google Scholar
  • 22. Enkel, E. , Gassmann, O. (2008). Driving Open Innovation in the Front End. The IBM Case. St. Gallen and Friedrichshafen:University of St. Gallen and Zeppelin University , Working Paper Google Scholar
  • 23. Félix-Medina, M.H. , Monjardin, P.E. (2010). ‘Combining link-tracing sampling and cluster sampling to estimate totals and means of hidden human populations’. Journal of Official Statistics. 26, 4, 29 Google Scholar
  • 24. Gassmann, O. , Enkel, E. , Chesbrough, H. (2006). ‘The future of open innovation’. R&D Management. 40, 3, 9 Google Scholar
  • 25. Huber, J.C. (1998). ‘Invention and inventivity is a random, Poisson process: a potential guide to analysis of general creativity’. Creativity Research Journal. 11, 3, 11 Google Scholar
  • 26. Hughes, T.P. (2004). American Genesis: A Century of Invention and Technological Enthusiasm 1870–1970. 2nd ed., Chicago:University of Chicago Press , 513 Google Scholar
  • 27. Jensen, R.A. , Thursby, J.G. , Thursby, M.C. (2003). ‘Disclosure and licensing of university inventions: ‘the best we can do with the s**t we get to work with’’. International Journal of Industrial Organization. 21, 9, 30 Google Scholar
  • 28. Kaufman, A. , Wood, C.H. , Theyel, G. (2000). ‘Collaboration and technology linkages: a strategic supplier typology’. Strategic Management Journal. 21, 6, 15 Google Scholar
  • 29. Kotabe, M. , Dunlap-Hinkler, D. , Parente, R. , Mishra, H.A. (2007). ‘Determinants of cross-national knowledge transfer and its effect on firm innovation’. Journal of International Business Studies. 38, 1, 23 Google Scholar
  • 30. Lacetera, N. , Cockburn, I. , Henderson, R.M. , Baum, J.A.C. Mcgahan, A.M. (2004). ‘Do firms change capabilities by hiring new people? A study of the adoption of science-based drug discovery’. Business Strategy over the Industry Life-Cycle: Advances in Strategic Management. Boston, MA:Elsevier , 133-159 Google Scholar
  • 31. Lazzarotti, V. , Manzini, R. (2009). ‘Different modes of open innovation: a theoretical framework and an empirical study’. International Journal of Innovation Management. 13, 4, 22 Google Scholar
  • 32. Lettl, C. , Rost, K. , Von Wartberg, I. (2009). ‘Why are some independent inventors ‘heroes’ and others ‘hobbyists’? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization’. Research Policy. 38, 2, 243-254 Google Scholar
  • 33. Lilien, G.L. , Morrison, P.D. , Searls, K. , Sonnack, M. , Von Hippel, E. (2002). ‘Performance assessment of the lead user idea-generation process for new product development’. Management Science. 48, 8, 18 Google Scholar
  • 34. Lynn, G.S. , Abel, K.D. , Valentine, W.S. , Wright, R.C. (1999). ‘Key factors in increasing speed to market and improving new product success rates’. Industrial Marketing Management. 28, 1, 320-329 Google Scholar
  • 35. Macdonald, S. (1986). ‘The distinctive research of the individual inventor’. Research Policy. 15, 4, 11 Google Scholar
  • 36. Mansfield, E. , Rapoport, J. , Romeo, A. , Wagner, S. , Beardsley, G. (1977). ‘Social and private rates of return from industrial innovations’. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 91, 2, 19 Google Scholar
  • 37. Martinez, J.I. , Jarillo, J.C. (1989). ‘The evolution of research on coordination mechanisms in multi-national corporations’. Journal of International Business Studies. 20, 3, 26 Google Scholar
  • 38. Mayer, M. (2005). ‘Independent inventors and public support measures: insights from 33 case studies in Finland’. World Patent Information. 27, 1, 113-123 Google Scholar
  • 39. Mortara, L. , Minshall, T. (2011). ‘How do large multinational companies implement open innovation?’. Technovation. 31, 10, 12 Google Scholar
  • 40. Olson, E.L. , Bakke, G. (2001). ‘Implementing the lead user method in a high technology firm: a longitudinal study of intentions versus actions’. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 18, 6, 8 Google Scholar
  • 41. Owen-Smith, J. , Powell, W.W. (2001). ‘To patent or not: faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer’. The Journal of Technology Transfer. 26, 1, 16 Google Scholar
  • 42. Parker, R.S. , Udell, G.G. , Blades, L. (1996). ‘The new independent inventor: implications for corporate policy’. Review of Business. 17, 3, 7-11 Google Scholar
  • 43. Perkmann, M. , Walsh, K. (2007). ‘University-industry relationships and open innovation: towards a research agenda’. International Journal of Management Reviews. 9, 4, 22 Google Scholar
  • 44. Prusa, T.J. , Schmitz, J.A. (1991). ‘Are new firms an important source of innovation? Evidence from the PC software industry’. Economics Letters. 35, 1, 4 Google Scholar
  • 45. Rothaermel, F.T. , Hess, A.M. (2007). ‘Building dynamic capabilities: innovation driven by individual-, firm-, and network-level effects’. Organization Science. 18, 6, 23 Google Scholar
  • 46. Schrage, M. ‘Amateur innovation’. MITTechnology Review. 2003, 06, 18 Google Scholar
  • 47. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA:Harvard Economic Studies Google Scholar
  • 48. Schumpeter, J.A. (1939). Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process. New York:McGraw-Hill Google Scholar
  • 49. Sirilli, G. (1987). ‘Patents and inventors: an empirical study’. Research Policy. 16, 1, 157-169 Google Scholar
  • 50. Smeilus, G.E. , Harris, R.J. , Pollard, A. , Nobre, F. Walker, D. Harris, R.J. (2011a). ‘An examination of independent inventor integration in open innovation’. Technological, Managerial and Organizational Core Competencies: Dynamic Innovation and Sustainable Development. 1st ed., IGI Global, 146-166 Google Scholar
  • 51. Smeilus, G.E. , Harris, R.J. , Pollard, A. , Nobre, F. Walker, D. Harris, R.J. (2011b). ‘The integration of independent inventors in open innovation’. Technological, Managerial and Organizational Core Competencies: Dynamic Innovation and Sustainable Advantage. 1st ed., IGI Global, 131-145 Google Scholar
  • 52. Sobrero, M. , Roberts, E.B. (2002). ‘Strategic management of supplier-manufacturer relations in new product development’. Research Policy. 31, 1, 23 Google Scholar
  • 53. Spithoven, A. , Clarysse, B. , Knockaert, M. (2011). ‘Building absorptive capacity to organise inbound open innovation in traditional industries’. Technovation. 31, 1, 12 Google Scholar
  • 54. Thursby, J.G. , Kemp, S. (2002). ‘Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing’. Research Policy. 31, 1, 16 Google Scholar
  • 55. Von Hippel, E. , Katz, R. (2002). ‘Shifting innovation to users via toolkits’. Management Science. 48, 7, 13 Google Scholar
  • 56. Weick, C.W. , Eakin, C.F. (2005). ‘Independent inventors and innovation: an empirical study’. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation. 6, 1, 5-15 Google Scholar
  • 57. Weick, C.W. , Martin, J.D. (2006). ‘Full-time and part-time independent inventors: rising with the creative class’. Entrepreneurship and Innovation. 7, 1, 5-12 Google Scholar
  • 58. Whalley, P. (1991). ‘The social practice of independent inventing’. Science, Technology and Human Values. 16, 2, 232-256 Google Scholar
  • 59. Williamson, O.E. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York:Free Press Google Scholar
  • 60. Zahra, S.A. , George, G. (2002). ‘Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension’. Academy of Management Review. 27, 2, 19 Google Scholar
Next article