Papers by Marcel Bogers
Practicing e-Government: a global …, 2005
... What impact does e-government have on some of the most important principles of goodgovernance... more ... What impact does e-government have on some of the most important principles of goodgovernance such as principles that safeguard access and transparency, accountability andlegitimacy and effectiveness of policy-and decision-making? Top Complete Chapter List. ...
Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2021
California Management Review (CMR)
How can a family business reduce environmental uncertainty and dependence by developing its busin... more How can a family business reduce environmental uncertainty and dependence by developing its business model, changing the logic of creating and capturing value through its activities?
We address this question by exploring the case of Cimber, a Denmark-based family-owned airline, which has developed different business models since its establishment in 1950. We
build on resource dependence theory to investigate the actions that Cimber took in this process. We find an important role of the family in balancing internal and external influences, in shaping the scope and complexity of the business model, and in creating specific path dependencies in this process.
Abstract In this paper, we address the link between governance uncertainty, which is defined as t... more Abstract In this paper, we address the link between governance uncertainty, which is defined as traditions and institutions by which a country? s authority is exercised and innovation output of affected companies. Governance uncertainty may interfere with organizational ownership, operations, and transfers.
Abstract In new product development (NPD), prototyping is recognized as an important activity of ... more Abstract In new product development (NPD), prototyping is recognized as an important activity of iterative problem solving. In this inductive study, we investigate how collaborative prototyping across functional, hierarchical and organizational boundaries can improve the overall prototyping process. Our combined action research and case study approach provides new insights into how collaborative prototyping can provide a platform for prototype-driven problem solving in early NPD.
Creativity and Innovation Management, Jan 1, 2012
Research from a variety of perspectives has argued that innovation no longer takes place within a... more Research from a variety of perspectives has argued that innovation no longer takes place within a single organization, but rather is distributed across multiple stakeholders in a value network. Here we contrast the vertically integrated innovation model to open innovation, user innovation, as well as other distributed processes (cumulative innovation, communities or social production, and co-creation), while we also discuss open source software and crowdsourcing as applications of the perspectives. We consider differences in the nature of distributed innovation, as well as its origins and its effects. From this, we contrast the predictions of the perspectives on the sources, motivation and value appropriation of external innovation, and thereby provide a framework for the strategic management of distributed innovation.
CEMI Working Papers, Jan 1, 2006
papers.ssrn.com
Abstract: We build on and extend the literature in open innovation and absorptive capacity by sho... more Abstract: We build on and extend the literature in open innovation and absorptive capacity by showing that a firm's functional areas are an important locus of innovation and learning, in contrast to most existing literature, which takes the firm as the unit of analysis. In particular, we argue that the innovative contribution of R&D, manufacturing and marketing all rely on external sources of knowledge, while we also expect important differences between these functional areas and across product and process innovation. By using unique survey data ...
Academy of Management, Montreal Canada, Jan 1, 2010
Journal articles by Marcel Bogers
Journal of Product Innovation Management
"This article reviews research on open innovation that considers how and why firms commercialize ... more "This article reviews research on open innovation that considers how and why firms commercialize external sources of innovations. It examines both the “outside-in” and “coupled” modes of Enkel et al. (2009). From an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation, it suggests a four-phase model in which a linear process — (1) obtaining, (2) integrating and (3) commercializing external innovations — is combined with (4) interaction between the firm and its collaborators. This model is used to classify papers taken from the top 25 innovation journals identified by Linton and Thongpapan (2004), complemented by highly cited work beyond those journals. A review of 291 open innovation-related publications from these sources shows that the majority of these articles indeed address elements of this inbound open innovation process model. Specifically, it finds that researchers have front-loaded their examination of the leveraging process, with an emphasis on obtaining innovations from external sources. However, there is a relative dearth of research related to integrating and commercializing these innovations.
Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring — each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including not-invented-here). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as co-creation, network collaboration and community innovation.
This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on inter-organizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The article concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end-to-end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation."
Journal of Product Innovation Management
This article presents an inductive study that shows how collaborative prototyping across function... more This article presents an inductive study that shows how collaborative prototyping across functional, hierarchical and organizational boundaries can improve the overall prototyping process. Our combined action research and case study approach provides new insights into how collaborative prototyping can provide a platform for prototype-driven problem solving in early new product development (NPD). Our findings have important implications for how to facilitate multi-stakeholder collaboration in prototyping and problem solving and more generally for how to organize collaborative and open innovation processes.
Our analysis reveals two levels of prototyping: the managerial level and what we call the designer level, where the actual practice of prototyping takes place. On this level, collaborative prototyping transforms the act of prototyping from an activity belonging exclusively to the domain of design engineers to an activity integral to NPD with participants from within the organization (different functions and managers) and from outside (consultants and users). In effect, this collapses the discrete steps in the prototyping process (on the managerial level) to an essentially continuous process of iterative problem solving (on the designer level) that is centered around the collaborative prototype, which allows participants to see their suggestions implemented and exposing them to the design constraints.
The study moreover shows how, at various stages of the prototyping process, the actual prototype was used as a tool for communication or development, thus serving as a platform for the cross-fertilization of knowledge. In this way, collaborative prototyping leads to a better balance between functionality and usability, it translates usability problems into design changes, and it detects emerging usability problems through active engagement and experimentation. As such, the collaborative prototype acts as a boundary object to represent, understand and transform knowledge across functional, hierarchical and organizational boundaries.
Our study also identifies some constraints in involving the appropriate stakeholders at the right time. The article specifically elaborates on the role of users in collaborative prototyping, which is important in order to cover all phases of the problem-solving cycle but triggers an interesting challenge due to the “reverse empathy” that a user may develop for the design constraints — parallel to the designer empathy for the user context. Finally, our study shows that despite the continuous nature of the (designer) practice of prototyping, there are certain windows of opportunities (on the managerial level) during which the collaborative prototyping approach actually leads to changes in the product design.
Journal of Teaching in International Business, Oct 3, 2012
This article explores how playing games can be used to teach intangible social interaction across... more This article explores how playing games can be used to teach intangible social interaction across boundaries, in particular within open collaborative innovation. We present an exploratory case study of how students learned from playing a board game in a graduate course of the international and interdisciplinary Innovation and Business master's program in Denmark. We identify several important themes related to the process of learning through playing and the social dynamics of open collaborative innovation, while we also highlight possible caveats of “playing” and practicing open innovation. Our findings imply several opportunities and challenges within education and beyond.
Creativity and Innovation Management, Mar 1, 2012
Research from a variety of perspectives has argued that innovation no longer takes place within a... more Research from a variety of perspectives has argued that innovation no longer takes place within a single organization, but rather is distributed across multiple stakeholders in a value network. Here we contrast the vertically integrated innovation model to open innovation, user innovation, as well as other distributed processes (cumulative innovation, communities or social production, and co-creation), while we also discuss open source software and crowdsourcing as applications of the perspectives. We consider differences in the nature of distributed innovation, as well as its origins and its effects. From this, we contrast the predictions of the perspectives on the sources, motivation and value appropriation of external innovation, and thereby provide a framework for the strategic management of distributed innovation.
We investigate the intra-organizational antecedents of firm-level absorptive capacity (AC). Speci... more We investigate the intra-organizational antecedents of firm-level absorptive capacity (AC). Specifically, we examine how the functional areas of R&D, manufacturing and marketing contribute to the absorption of knowledge coming from different external knowledge sources. The econometric results on a representative sample of Swiss firms show that non-R&D-based AC plays a significantly different role compared to the standard R&D-based one that is typically considered in studies on AC. We also reveal that AC is organized through a specialization of external knowledge absorption across functional areas. In particular, we find: (1) R&D is particularly important as an absorber of knowledge from public research organizations for product innovation; (2) manufacturing is important as an absorber of supplier knowledge for product innovation and of competitor knowledge for process innovation; and (3) marketing helps to absorb customer knowledge for product and process innovation as well as competitor knowledge for product innovation. We further investigate the differences between product and process innovation and find that marketing-based AC is more important for the former, although the overall analysis of these differences is less conclusive. In short, we show how functional areas play a role in the organization of AC and that firms may need an ambidextrous strategy to innovate effectively based on both upstream- and downstream-based AC.
European Journal of Innovation Management, Jan 1, 2011
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the paradox that arises when firms simultan... more Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the paradox that arises when firms simultaneously share and protect their knowledge in an alliance with other organizations. The goal of this paper therefore is to explore this tension field in such a coupled open innovation process and to identify which strategies can be developed to cope with this tension.
Design/methodology/approach – The study was initially guided by a literature review and exploratory interviews, and it ultimately develops an inductive framework based on a multiple case study approach. The paper presents eight cases of a focal firm involved in a particular R&D collaboration. The case studies are based on a variety of data sources, including a number of semi-structured interviews.
Findings – This paper unravels the tension field of knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations, with the knowledge characteristics at the core and with the knowledge embodiment and relational dimension as mediating factors. These forces are in turn influenced by the collaboration characteristics and environment. Moreover, the case studies show different ways to cope with the tension between knowledge sharing and protection, such as an open knowledge exchange strategy and a layered collaboration scheme with inner and outer members. Licensing is moreover presented as a concrete way to implement such coping strategies.
Originality/value – This paper provides an holistic perspective on the knowledge paradox in R&D collaborations as a coupled process of open innovation. Moreover, it describes two concrete strategies to cope with the tension field as well as the role and implications of licensing as a particular mechanism to overcome the open innovation paradox.
Uploads
Papers by Marcel Bogers
We address this question by exploring the case of Cimber, a Denmark-based family-owned airline, which has developed different business models since its establishment in 1950. We
build on resource dependence theory to investigate the actions that Cimber took in this process. We find an important role of the family in balancing internal and external influences, in shaping the scope and complexity of the business model, and in creating specific path dependencies in this process.
Journal articles by Marcel Bogers
Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring — each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including not-invented-here). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as co-creation, network collaboration and community innovation.
This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on inter-organizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The article concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end-to-end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation."
Our analysis reveals two levels of prototyping: the managerial level and what we call the designer level, where the actual practice of prototyping takes place. On this level, collaborative prototyping transforms the act of prototyping from an activity belonging exclusively to the domain of design engineers to an activity integral to NPD with participants from within the organization (different functions and managers) and from outside (consultants and users). In effect, this collapses the discrete steps in the prototyping process (on the managerial level) to an essentially continuous process of iterative problem solving (on the designer level) that is centered around the collaborative prototype, which allows participants to see their suggestions implemented and exposing them to the design constraints.
The study moreover shows how, at various stages of the prototyping process, the actual prototype was used as a tool for communication or development, thus serving as a platform for the cross-fertilization of knowledge. In this way, collaborative prototyping leads to a better balance between functionality and usability, it translates usability problems into design changes, and it detects emerging usability problems through active engagement and experimentation. As such, the collaborative prototype acts as a boundary object to represent, understand and transform knowledge across functional, hierarchical and organizational boundaries.
Our study also identifies some constraints in involving the appropriate stakeholders at the right time. The article specifically elaborates on the role of users in collaborative prototyping, which is important in order to cover all phases of the problem-solving cycle but triggers an interesting challenge due to the “reverse empathy” that a user may develop for the design constraints — parallel to the designer empathy for the user context. Finally, our study shows that despite the continuous nature of the (designer) practice of prototyping, there are certain windows of opportunities (on the managerial level) during which the collaborative prototyping approach actually leads to changes in the product design.
Design/methodology/approach – The study was initially guided by a literature review and exploratory interviews, and it ultimately develops an inductive framework based on a multiple case study approach. The paper presents eight cases of a focal firm involved in a particular R&D collaboration. The case studies are based on a variety of data sources, including a number of semi-structured interviews.
Findings – This paper unravels the tension field of knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations, with the knowledge characteristics at the core and with the knowledge embodiment and relational dimension as mediating factors. These forces are in turn influenced by the collaboration characteristics and environment. Moreover, the case studies show different ways to cope with the tension between knowledge sharing and protection, such as an open knowledge exchange strategy and a layered collaboration scheme with inner and outer members. Licensing is moreover presented as a concrete way to implement such coping strategies.
Originality/value – This paper provides an holistic perspective on the knowledge paradox in R&D collaborations as a coupled process of open innovation. Moreover, it describes two concrete strategies to cope with the tension field as well as the role and implications of licensing as a particular mechanism to overcome the open innovation paradox.
We address this question by exploring the case of Cimber, a Denmark-based family-owned airline, which has developed different business models since its establishment in 1950. We
build on resource dependence theory to investigate the actions that Cimber took in this process. We find an important role of the family in balancing internal and external influences, in shaping the scope and complexity of the business model, and in creating specific path dependencies in this process.
Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring — each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including not-invented-here). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as co-creation, network collaboration and community innovation.
This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on inter-organizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The article concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end-to-end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation."
Our analysis reveals two levels of prototyping: the managerial level and what we call the designer level, where the actual practice of prototyping takes place. On this level, collaborative prototyping transforms the act of prototyping from an activity belonging exclusively to the domain of design engineers to an activity integral to NPD with participants from within the organization (different functions and managers) and from outside (consultants and users). In effect, this collapses the discrete steps in the prototyping process (on the managerial level) to an essentially continuous process of iterative problem solving (on the designer level) that is centered around the collaborative prototype, which allows participants to see their suggestions implemented and exposing them to the design constraints.
The study moreover shows how, at various stages of the prototyping process, the actual prototype was used as a tool for communication or development, thus serving as a platform for the cross-fertilization of knowledge. In this way, collaborative prototyping leads to a better balance between functionality and usability, it translates usability problems into design changes, and it detects emerging usability problems through active engagement and experimentation. As such, the collaborative prototype acts as a boundary object to represent, understand and transform knowledge across functional, hierarchical and organizational boundaries.
Our study also identifies some constraints in involving the appropriate stakeholders at the right time. The article specifically elaborates on the role of users in collaborative prototyping, which is important in order to cover all phases of the problem-solving cycle but triggers an interesting challenge due to the “reverse empathy” that a user may develop for the design constraints — parallel to the designer empathy for the user context. Finally, our study shows that despite the continuous nature of the (designer) practice of prototyping, there are certain windows of opportunities (on the managerial level) during which the collaborative prototyping approach actually leads to changes in the product design.
Design/methodology/approach – The study was initially guided by a literature review and exploratory interviews, and it ultimately develops an inductive framework based on a multiple case study approach. The paper presents eight cases of a focal firm involved in a particular R&D collaboration. The case studies are based on a variety of data sources, including a number of semi-structured interviews.
Findings – This paper unravels the tension field of knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations, with the knowledge characteristics at the core and with the knowledge embodiment and relational dimension as mediating factors. These forces are in turn influenced by the collaboration characteristics and environment. Moreover, the case studies show different ways to cope with the tension between knowledge sharing and protection, such as an open knowledge exchange strategy and a layered collaboration scheme with inner and outer members. Licensing is moreover presented as a concrete way to implement such coping strategies.
Originality/value – This paper provides an holistic perspective on the knowledge paradox in R&D collaborations as a coupled process of open innovation. Moreover, it describes two concrete strategies to cope with the tension field as well as the role and implications of licensing as a particular mechanism to overcome the open innovation paradox.