Open innovation in the development of medical technologies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/atoz.v14.94881Palabras clave:
Open innovation, University-industry, Knowledge channels, Market channels, Societal innovation, Social channelsResumen
Introduction: This article analyses how an academic unit in the medical field in a public Brazilian university implemented open innovation partnerships with external agents. It involved the identification of the types of arrangements, external agents, and knowledge accessed externally. Method: These initiatives were analyzed through the identification of two basic constructs, types of arrangements enacted, and types of knowledge accessed. Results: Two types of arrangements were identified, horizontal and vertical, three types of external partners, external academic departments, firms, and public services foundations, and two basic types of knowledge, knowledge creation in project teams, and knowledge about diffusion (dissemination) channels. Conclusions: This study should be improved through its replications in other universities and research institutes to identify the use of open innovation for development and diffusion of technologies. This article presents insights for universities to assess and plan open innovation arrangements. The insights revealed in this article can be used as an instrument for strategic planning of open innovation actions of academic units in universities for the development and diffusion of technologies useful for society. This article contributes by showing in detail how an academic unit of universities enacts arrangements to access external knowledge, and what types of knowledge are accessed externally to complement its internal competencies.
Citas
Alexander, A. T., Miller, K., & Fielding, S. (2015). Open for business: universities, entrepreneurial academics and open innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(06), 1540013. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919615400137
Aliasghar, O., & Haar, J. (2023). Open innovation: are absorptive and desorptive capabilities complementary?.International Business Review, 32(2), 101865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101865
Angelidou, S., Mount, M., & Pandza, K. (2022). Exploring the asymmetric complementarity between external knowledge search and management innovation. Technovation, 115, 102472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102472
Ardito, L., Petruzzelli, A. M., Dezi, L., & Castellano, S. (2020). The influence of inbound open innovation on ambidexterity performance: does it pay to source knowledge from supply chain stakeholders?. Journal of Business Research, 119, 321-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.043
Bäck, I., & Kohtamäki, M., (2015). Boundaries of R&D collaboration. Technovation, 45-46, 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.07.002
Beck, S., Bergenholtz, C., Bogers, M., Brasseur, T. M., Conradsen, M. L., Di Marco, D., Distel, A. P., Dobusch, L., Dörler, D., Effert, A., Fecher, B., Filiou, D. Frederiksen, L., Gillier T., Grimpe, C., Gruber, M., Haeussler, C., Heigl, F., Hoisl, K., ... Xu, S. M. (2022). The open innovation in science research field: a collaborative conceptualisation approach. Industry and Innovation, 29(2), 136-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1792274
Bertello, A., Ferraris, A., Bernardi, P. de, & Bertoldi, B. (2022). Challenges to open innovation in traditional SMEs: an analysis of pre-competitive projects in university-industry-government collaboration. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 18(1), 89-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00727-1
Cassiman, B., & Valentini, G. (2016). Open innovation: are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary?. Strategic Management Journal, 37(6), 1034-1046. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2375
Chesbrough, H., & Brunswicker, S. (2014). A fad or a phenomenon?: The adoption of open innovation practices in large firms. Research-Technology Management, 57(2), 16-25. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.5437/08956308X5702196?scroll=top&needAccess=true
Coccia, M. (2020). Deep learning technology for improving cancer care in society: new directions in cancer imaging driven by artificial intelligence. Technology in Society, 60, 101198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101198
Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2013). Business Research Methods (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593
Cunningham, J. A., Lehmann, E. E., Menter, M., & Seitz, N. (2019). The impact of university focused technology transfer policies on regional innovation and enterpreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44, 1451-1475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09733-0
Dahlborg, C., Lewensohn, D., Danell, R., & Sundberg, C. J. (2017). To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(3), 538-563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9490-7
Devaraj, S., Wolfe, M. T., & Patel, P. C. (2020). Creative destruction and regional health: evidence from the US. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 31(2), 573-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-020-00663-x
Díez-Vial, I., & Montoro-Sánches, A. (2016). How knowledge links with universities may foster innovation: the case of a science park. Technovation, 50-51, 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.001
Dong, J.Q., & Netten, J. (2017). Information technology and external search in open innovation age: new findings in Germany. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 120, 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.12.021
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
Eppinger, E. (2021). How open innovation practices deliver societal benefits. Sustainability, 13(3), 1431. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031431
Fernandes, S., Cesario, M., & Barata, J. M. (2017). Ways to open innovation: main agents and sources in the Portuguese case. Technology in Society, 51, 153-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.09.002
Fong, P. S. W. (2003). Knowledge creation in multidisciplinary project teams: an empirical study of the processes and their dynamic interrelationships. International Journal of Project Management, 21(7), 479-486. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(03)00047-4
Goebel, K., Losekann, S. D., Polla, P. T. B., Montenegro, K. B. M., & Ávila, A. R. (2024). Offering technologies for innovation: strategies and challenges. Innovation & Management Review, 21(1), 44-59. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-10-2021-0186
Greco, M., Grimaldi, M., & Cricelli, L. (2017). Hitting the nail on the head: exploring the relationship between public subsidies and open innovation efficiency. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 118, 213-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.022
Grimaldi, M., Greco, M., & Cricelli, L. (2021). A framework of intellectual property protection strategies and open innovation. Journal of Business Research, 123, 156-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.043
Haeussler, C., & Assmus, A. (2021). Bridging the gap between invention and innovation: Increasing success rates in publicly and industry-funded clinical trials. Research Policy, 50(2), 104155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104155
He, V. F., Krogh, G. von, Sirén, C., & Gersdorf, T. (2021). Asymmetries between partners and the success of university-industry research collaborations. Research Policy, 50(10), 104356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104356
Huggins, R., Prokop, D., & Thompson, P. (2020). Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45, 718-757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09720-5
Inomata, D. O., Passos, K. G. F. dos, Pintro, S., Sena, P. M. B., & Bedin, J. (2020). Compartilhamento de conhecimentos e aprendizagem colaborativa em tempo de pandemia. AtoZ: novas práticas em informação e conhecimento, 9(2), 206-215. https://doi.org/10.5380/atoz.v9i2.76168
Janeiro, P., Proença, I., & Goncalves, V. da C. G. (2013). Open innovation: factor explaining universities as service firm innovation sources. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 2017-2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.027
Jugend, D., Fiorini, P. de C., Armellini, F., & Ferrari, A. G. (2020). Public support for innovation: A systematic review of the literature and implications for open innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 156, 119985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119985
Leckel, A., Veilleux, S., & Dana, L. P. (2020). Local open innovation: a means for public policy to increase collaboration for innovation in SMEs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153, 119891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119891
Linneberg, M. S., & Korsgaard, S. (2019). Coding qualitative data: a synthesis guiding the novice. Qualitative Research Journal, 19(3), 259-270. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-12-2018-0012
Lopes, A. P. V. B. V., & Carvalho, M. M. de. (2018). Evolution of the open innovation paradigm: towards a contingent conceptual model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 132, 284-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.02.014
Mattos, C. A. de, Kissimoto, K. O., & Laurindo, F. J. B. (2018). The role of information technology for building virtual environments to integrate crowdsourcing mechanisms into the open innovation process. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 129, 143-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.020
Mehmood, T., Alzoubi, H. M., Alshuridecj, M., Al-Gasaymeh, A., & Ahmed, G. (2019). Schumpeterian entrepreneurship theory: evolution and relevance. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 25(4), 1-10. https://www.abacademies.org/articles/Schumpeterian-entrepreneurship-theory-evolution-and-relevance-1528-2686-25-4-301.pdf
Milici, A., Ferreira, F. A. F., Pereira, L. F., Carayannis, E. G., & Ferreira, J. J. M. (2023). Dynamics of open innovation in small-and medium-sized enterprises: a metacognitive approach. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(2), 495-508. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2020.3042458
Nancarrow, S. A., Booth, A., Ariss, S., Smith, T., Enderby, P., & Roots, A. (2013). Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work. Human resources for Health, 11(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-11-19
Nascimento, M. R. (2021). Ecossistemas de conhecimento sobre indústria 4.0 no Brasil: uma análise bibliométrica. AtoZ: novas práticas em informação e conhecimento, 10(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5380/atoz.v10i3.81513
Nguyen, T. P. T., Huang, F., & Tian, X. (2023). Intellectual property protection need as a driver for open innovation: empirical evidence from Vietnam. Technovation, 123, 102714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102714
O'Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2008). Multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, or dysfunctional? Team working in mixed-methods research. Qualitative Health Research, 18(11), 1574-1585. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308325535.
Ottonicar, S. L. C., & Valentim, M. L. P. (2021). A indústria 4.0 e a inovação aberta em aceleradoras de startups. AtoZ: novas práticas em informação e conhecimento, 10(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.5380/atoz.v10i3.81882
Pihlajamaa, M. (2023). What does it mean to be open? A typology of inbound open innovation strategies and their dynamic capability requirements. Innovation, 25(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2021.1907192
Popa, S., Soto-Acosta, P., & Martinez-Conesa, I. (2017). Antecedents, moderators, and outcomes of innovation climate and open innovation: an empirical study in SMEs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 118, 134-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.014
Rauter, R., Globocnik, D., Perl-Vorbach, E., & Baumgartner, R. J. (2019). Open innovation and its effects on economic and sustainability innovation performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(4), 226-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2018.03.004
Rayna, T., Striukova, L., & Darlington, J. (2015). Co-creation and user innovation: the role of online 3D printings platforoms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 37, 90-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2015.07.002
Ribeiro, B., & Shapira, P. (2020). Private and public values of innovation: a patent analysis of synthetic biology. Research Policy, 49(1), 103875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103875
Shaikh, I., & Randhawa, K. (2022). Managing the risks and motivations of technology managers in open innovation: bringing stakeholder-centric corporate governance into focus. Technovation, 114, 102437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102437
Shepherd, D. A., & Suddaby, R. (2016). Theory building: a review and integration. Journal of Management, 43(1), 59-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316647102
Singh, S. K., Gupta, S., Busso, D., & Kamboj, S. (2021). Top management knowledge value, knowledge sharing practices, open innovation and organizational performance. Journal of Business Research, 128, 788-798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.040
Suh, Y., & Jeon, J. (2019). Monitoring patterns of open innovation using the patent-based brokerage analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 595-605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.037
Suhada, T. A., Ford, J. A., Verreynne, M. L., & Indulska, M. (2021). Motivating individuals to contribute to firms’ non-pecuniary open innovation goals. Technovation, 102, 102233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102233
Sun, Y., Liu, J., & Ding, Y. (2020). Analysis of the relationship between open innovation, knowledge management capability and dual innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 32(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1632431
Tukoff-Guimarães, Y. B., Kniess, C. T., Penha, R., & Ruiz, M. S. (2021). Patents valuation in core innovation: case study of a Brazilian public university. Innovation & Management Review, 18(1), 34-50. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-03-2019-0027
Urbinati, A., Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2020). The role of digital technologies in open innovation processes: an exploratory multiple case study analysis. R&D Management, 50(1), 136-160. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12313
Van Der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: the importance of collective team identification. Academy of management Journal, 48(3), 532-547. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.17407918
Viana, L., Jabour, D., Ramirez, P., & Cruz, G. da. (2018). Patents go to the market? University-industry technology transfer from a brazilian perspective. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 13(3), 24-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242018000300024
Vieira, F. C., Bonfim, L. R. C., & Cruz, A. C. da (2021). The process of opening innovation networks: open innovation at Embrapa Florestas. Innovation & Management Review, 19(2), 123-139. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-05-2020-0057
Villasalero, M. (2014). University knowledge, open innovation and technological capital in Spanish science parks: research revealing or technology selling?.Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(4), 479-496. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-07-2014-0083
West, J., & Bogers, M. (2017). Open innovation: current status and research opportunities. Innovation, 19(1), 43-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2016.1258995
West, J., Salter, A., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Chesbrough, H., (2014). Open innovation: the next decade. Research Policy, 43(5), 805-811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.001
Wirsich, A., Kock, A., Strumann, C., & Schultz, C. (2016). Effects of university–industry collaboration on technological newness of firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(6), 708-725. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12342
Yang, M., Vladimirova, D., & Evans, S. (2017). Creating and capturing value through sustainability: the sustainable value analysis tool. A new tool helps companies discover opportunities to create and capture value through sustainability. Research-Technology Management, 60(3), 30-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2017.1301001
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 AtoZ: novas práticas em informação e conhecimento
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
La revista AtoZ es una revista científica de acceso abierto y los derechos de autor de artículos y entrevistas pertenecen a sus respectivos autores/encuestados. Los autores otorgan a la AtoZ el direito de incluir el material publicado (revisado por pares/pos-print) en em sistemas/herramientas de indización, agregadores o curadores.
Los autores tienen permiso y se les anima a depositar sus artículos en sus páginas personales, depósitos y/o portales institucionales anteriormente (pre-print) y posteriormente (post-print) a la publicación en esa Revista. Se pide, si possible, que se apunte la referencia bibliográfica del artículo (incluyendose la URL) en base a la AtoZ.
La AtoZ es sello verde por Diadorim/IBICT.
Todo el contenido de la revista (incluyendo las instrucciones, modelos y política editorial) a menos que se indique otra cosa, están bajo una Licencia de Atribución de Bienes Comunes Creativos (CC) 4.0 Internacional.
Cuando los artículos son publicados por esta revista, se pueden compartir (copiar y redistribuir el material en cualquier soporte o formato para cualquier propósito, incluso comercial) y adaptar (remezclar, transformar y crear a partir del material para cualquier propósito, incluso si es comercial). Debe dar el crédito correspondiente, proporcionar un enlace a la licencia e indicar si se realizaron cambios.
La AtoZ no cobra cualquier tasas por la sumisión y/o procesamiento y/o la publicación de artículos.
