March 8, 2012

CFP: Special issue of Research Policy on Open Innovation

On behalf of the special issue editors — Henry Chesbrough, Ammon Salter, Wim Vanhaverbeke and myself — I’m please to announce plans for a special issue of Research Policy entitled “Open Innovation: New Insights and Evidence.”

The special issue is intended to update research on open innovation a decade after Chesbrough’s original Open Innovation book. If everything goes well, the issue will be published in late 2013 after the reviews and revisions have been completed.

In addition, we are hosting a conference for papers intended for the special issue. It will be held in June at Imperial College London, squeezed between Queen Elizabeth’s diamond jubilee and the Summer Olympics.

The full call for papers is at http://bit.ly/openinno2013 , and it includes a range of potential topics. We are looking for new ideas and incremental improvement, support for open innovation and criticism of it, and both theoretical and empirical insights.

The conference will be held on June 25-26, and is scheduled to allow for a one-night stay by most European participants. The hotel (for the presenting author) will be covered by financial support from the UK Innovation Research Centre (University of Cambridge and Imperial College London), the Innovation Studies Centre (Imperial College London) and the Garwood Center for Corporate Innovation (University of California at Berkeley).

We have already confirmed participation by a group of senior innovation scholars:
  • Bruno Cassiman
  • Alfonso Gambardella
  • John Hagedoorn
  • Joachim Henkel
  • Bart Leten
  • Keld Laursen
  • Frank Piller
  • Andrea Prencipe
  • Georg von Krogh
We are hoping for a small, intimate conference of perhaps 25 papers and slightly more participants. However, because of the RP approval cycle, the Olympics and our 2013 target date, we have a very tight schedule:
  • Conference submissions are due April 15. We would love to have a paper but (given the tight deadline) will also make acceptance decisions based on an abstract.
  • Journal papers are due August 31, and while participation in the conference is not a prerequisite, we plan to work with those papers identified through the conference process to help develop them further prior to the Aug. 31 deadline.
Additional details and submission requirements are at the call for papers. I’d be glad to answer any questions that people have, or feel free to contact any of the special issue editors.

We hope to see you in London!

February 23, 2012

Strange crowdsourcing ideas

To make a point at CoDev 2012, Fabian Schlage of Nokia Siemens networks presented a series of unusual examples of crowdsourcing:
  • The first video of the Fukushima meltdown — posted to YouTube before the Japanese government acknowledged a problem
  • FixMyStreet.com, a website for UK citizens to report potholes, graffiti or other infrastructure problems in their neighborhood
  • NASA’s “Be a Martian” game, that utilizes crowdsourcing to process images from the exploration of the Red Planet.
  • The Texas Virtual BorderWatch, which allows Internet viewers to watch webcams and report border crimes in progress.
The NASA plan sounds a little like the European Space Agency’s crowdsourced search for earth extinction asteroids or the “Recaptcha” used to digitize Google Books.

The FixMyStreet sounds a bit dicey with its implied promise that something will actually be done to fix the problem. The Virtual BorderWatch injects itself into one of the most controversial issues in contemporary American society (which may be the intention).

Of these, the YouTube trend seems the most representative. I wonder when Google is going to produce a newscast of crowdsourced YouTube videos for Millennials who will never watch TV network news. Or when CNN or the BBC will decide to partner with such an effort before it puts them out of business.

February 15, 2012

Open Innovation in Latin America (II)

For the past five years or so, some of California’s leading OI scholars have been spreading the message of open innovation to Latin America. This includes the father of OI making frequent speeches in Brazil as well as a lesser known SJSU faculty member bringing OI to Chile.

Today at CoDev 2012 — the PDMA-sponsored “Conference on Open Innovation & Co-Development” — a vice president from Kraft Foods summarized how this consumer products giant has been leveraging open innovation to meet local needs in Latin America. The presentation was by given Ivette Bassa, vice president of Research, Development & Quality for Kraft Latin America, which serves Mexico, Central and South America.

While OI was originally demonstrated by Chesbrough in IT firms such as IBM, Intel and Xerox, the interest in OI at Kraft is an example (beyond the iconic P&G) of the growing interest of open innovation in a broader class of mature consumer goods. (Other speakers at CoDev included executives from Unilever, Clorox and International Flavors & Fragrances).

Kraft is certainly a large mature company, with $49 billion in revenues — #2 in the world (after Nestle) in the food category — with sales in 170 countries and operations in 75 countries. Of its brands, 40 are more than 100 years old, 70 have more than $100 million in revenue and 12 have more than $1 billion in revenue.

The Latin America division accounts for $5 billion of those revenues, combining PMI Food and Nabisco Latin America. It includes the familiar Kraft and Nabisco brands (Ritz, Oreo, Philadelphia, Trident) as well as local brands (Trakinas, Bubbaloo). The RD&Q organization within the LA division has 300 employees in Miami and its three major markets (Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela). Six of these are assigned to work on open innovation, knowledge management and IP.

The company scouts outside the firm for possible inputs for the technology development that will enable it to solve specific problems. The Latin America-specific search seemed to be oriented towards products that meet local tastes (e.g. the Sonho de Valsa bonbon) and leverage local supply (sourcing wheat for Club Social from Brazil rather than the US).

Its "Inventing Delicious” framework is organized around three high-level questions
  1. What do we know?
  2. What do others know?
  3. What is our IP strategy?
One of the key insights for Kraft is that in Latin America, the most likely source for external innovation partners are outside firms (something I also heard during my 2008 visit to Chile). Bassa estimated that 80% of innovation capabilities are in government agencies, public or private universities.

Bassa presented a number of examples of ideas submitted or developed with suppliers, including ideas that arose out of the parent company’s October 2011 “Kraft Foods Supplier Innovation Summit.” One of her examples was a product idea that was test marketed by releasing it as a promotional item (that became a permanent product). Two examples were co-development efforts with equipment suppliers to improve the production process — in both cases where Kraft itself applied for a patent from the joint efforts.

In Latin America, the company uses a range of methods to search for external ideas. It has innovation scouts, participates in local forums and trade associations, has a group that works with each national government, and leverages the university ties developed through recruiting.

When searching for outside ideas, a key concern for Kraft was how to search broadly for information while minimizing the disclosure of proprietary information. (This also seemed to be a key concern of attendees, and part of the value added provided by exhibitors such as Nine Sigma and InnoCentive). Part of the solution is to train people how to frame questions to focus on a technical need that can be sourced externally, part is to gain IP in certain areas, and part is to calibrate the risks to the degree of trust and familiarity with external partners.

February 2, 2012

Open innovation in San Diego

Later this month, the Product Development and Management Association will be co-sponsoring CoDev 2012, the 11th Annual MRT/PDMA International Conference on Open Innovation & Co-Development. The conference is being held February 13-15 in a nice hotel near UCSD, at the northern end of San Diego. (The venue alone is going to put visitors from back East into a good mood.)

The conference chair is Cheryl Perkins, who I met in 2006 when she was Chief Innovation Officer of Kimberly Clark and I gave an open innovation orientation to senior managers of Kimberly Clark. Soon after that, she left K-C and started her own open innovation consulting firm, InnovationEdge.

For me what was most interesting were the pre-conference workshops and the managerial interest that they imply:

  1. Business Models Changing the Landscape of Open Innovation
  2. Identifying, Prioritizing & Managing the "Critical Few" Metrics of Open Innovation
  3. Complex Deal Structures - Finding the Right Approach for Successful Partnerships and Mutual Gain
  4. Leading Innovation - Creating a Growth Engine
The first two seem directly aligned to two key research opportunities in open innovation: business models and metrics.

On Feb. 15, I will be delivering the final of the five keynote presentations. More later.

January 9, 2012

Open innovation in telecom

On another website, someone remarked they were working on an article on “open innovation initiatives in the telecom industry.” I said to myself: “Wait a minute, hasn’t someone already done that?”

It’s that a new study isn’t needed, but as a reviewer I would sure expect the author to know this before submitting. Worse case, a research design that doesn’t add to what’s already known could be hard to publish.

Sure enough, I found four papers: two in journals, two in book chapters.

There may be others, but these are clearly positioned in their titles as being about open innovation in a telecom setting. (OK, so the Maula et al requires you to go to the title page to see that the 3rd author was then a Nokia employee.)