The Open Innovation Paradox: Knowledge Sharing and Protection in R&D Collaborations

By Marcel Bogers. 2010

459 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Computer Science Applications, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ce1c0d19f98e6cb66ffbd1f366106f1411385103

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

Open Innovation in a dynamic cournot duopoly (2014, unknown): “It stimulates innovation by distributing the cost and risk, offering access to new contact networks through “ intermediaries ” (Mortara, 2010) and information pools, and also internalizes the unintended byproducts of innovation process, spillovers (Bogers, 2011).”
Stakeholder engagement for responsible innovation in the private sector: critical issues and management practices (2015, background): “This creates the paradox of open innovation (Bogers, 2011), which consists in the conflict between the potential benefits of collaboration and the prospects of knowledge leakage and misappropriation of the results of the process (Gould, 2012).”
The Organizational Innovation System: A systemic framework for radical innovation at the organizational level (2016, background): “…(Salter et al., 2015) or Research and Development (R&D) (Bruns et al., 2010)) or on specific aspects linked to innovation (e.g. knowledge sharing (Bogers, 2011) or absorptive capacity (Patterson and Ambrosini, 2015; Spithoven et al., 2010)), resulting in a lack of models explaining how an open…”
The open innovation research landscape: established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis (2016, unknown): “…views (cf. Rothaermel and Hess 2007; Markard and Truffer 2008; Felin, Foss, and Ployhart 2015; Geels et al. 2016) as well as address possible paradoxes within OI, such as in the context of ambidexterity or appropriability (cf. Gupta, Smith, and Shalley 2006; Bogers 2011; Laursen and Salter 2014).”
R&D Partnerships and Innovation Performance: Can There Be Too Much of a Good Thing? (2016, background): “disclosure and the risk of opportunistic behavior by the partners (Foray and Steinmüller 2003; Bader 2008; Bogers 2011).”
Explicating Open Innovation: Clarifying an Emerging Paradigm for Understanding Innovation (2014, background): “Coupled open innovation involves two (or more) partners that purposively manage mutual knowledge flows across their organizational boundaries through joint invention and commercialization activities (Bogers, 2011; Bogers, Bekkers, and Granstrand, 2012).”
Ready to Be Open? Explaining the Firm-Level Barriers to Benefiting from Openness to External Knowledge (2017, unknown): “…partners, with others claiming that patents represent a useful “currency” for partnering and hence may favor openness (e.g. see Alexy et al, 2009; Bogers, 2011; Hertzfeld, Link and Vonortas, 2006; Murray and Stern, 2007), our focus in this paper is on informal safeguards, specifically the use…”
Open innovation in SMEs: Exploring inter-organizational relationships in an ecosystem (2017, background): “This is in line with inbound and outbound open innovation (Chesbrough and Bogers, 2014; Dahlander and Gann, 2010) and has important implications for dealing with the paradoxes of knowledge sharing/protection and appropriability (Bogers, 2011; Laursen and Salter, 2014).”
How does social software change knowledge management? Toward a strategic research agenda (2012, background): “Third, while knowledge protection may seem simple or technically feasible on paper, it may offset competitive advantages the firm seeks to build through knowledge management (Bogers, 2011).”
A framework of intellectual property protection strategies and open innovation (2021, background): “The nature of the link between IP protection and OI is considered somewhat paradoxical (Bogers, 2011), and the two seem to be in contrast with each other (Bigliardi et al., 2020) since IP protection mechanisms (IPPMs) may act as either enablers or disablers of OI (Alexy et al., 2009).”