A bibliometric review of open innovation: setting a research agenda

By Krithika Randhawa, Ralf Wilden, Jan Hohberger. 2016

689 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Computer Science Applications, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9d12cc5e15bae0c5944260d1833a91babbf15e5b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Computer Science Applications

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Artificial intelligence in marketing: Topic modeling, scientometric analysis, and research agenda (2020, background): “, the entire network is the level of analysis) that addresses how collaborative, systemic aspects of AI should be managed (Davenport et al., 2020; Randhawa et al., 2016; Rangaswamy et al., 2020).”
Revisiting James March (1991): Whither exploration and exploitation? (2018, background): “…(user innovation) do not show up in our citation analysis, although March (1991) represents a strong foundation for core open innovation articles (Randhawa et al., 2016), hinting at the broad question of how firms can structure exploration and exploitation activities in an open innovation…”
Sharing economy: A review and agenda for future research (2016, methodology): “By combining the strengths of co-citation analysis and content analysis through Leximancer suggested by Randhawa et al. (2016), it analyses this literature in a holistic, objective and systematic manner that reduces the traditional literature review approaches’ subjectivity bias (Collins and…”
The Architecture of Dynamic Capability Research Identifying the Building Blocks of a Configurational Approach (2016, neutral): “(Randhawa et al., 2016), tourism (Scott & Smith, 2005), project governance (Biesenthal & Wilden, 2014), and behavioral research (Smith & Humphreys, 2006) – and in previous analyses of the history of journals based on the articles published therein – e.”
The organisation and experience of work in the gig economy (2019, methodology): “Following Randhawa et al. (2016), we then regrouped the themes to create ensembles that were coherent from a research perspective, including concepts that would constitute a coherent research agenda.”
Open innovation: current status and research opportunities (2017, neutral): “Other reviews (e.g. Randhawa, Wilden, & Hohberger, 2016; Tucci, Chesbrough, Piller, & West, 2016; Vanhaverbeke, Chesbrough, & West, 2014; West, Salter, Vanhaverbeke, & Chesbrough, 2014; West, Vanhaverbeke, & Chesbrough, 2006) have sought to look forward and define a prospective research agenda.”
Social entrepreneurship research: A review and future research agenda (2020, neutral): “…& Gupta, 2017), theory based review (Gilal et al., 2018; Paul and Rosado-Serrano, 2019), meta -analysis (Knoll & Matthes, 2017), bibliometric review (Albort-Morant and Ribeiro-Soriano, 2016; Randhawa et al., 2016), review aiming for model/framework development (Paul & Mas, 2019; Paul, 2019).”