InnovationXchange: A case study in innovation intermediation
Lars Håkanson
Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Denmark; UQ Business School, University of Queensland, Brisbane QLD
Petra Caessens
CAT-AgroFood, Wageningen University and Research Centre; Wageningen, The Netherlands
Sam MacAulay
UQ Business School, University of Queensland, Brisbane QLD
PP: 261 - 274
Abstract
Knowledge intermediation can create otherwise unobtainable value when potentially profitable knowledge combinations do not occur because the search costs required to discover them are too high and/or the risks and costs of opportunistic behavior prevents the knowledge disclosure required to identify and/or pursue them.
Based on a case study of the Australian operation of the InnovationXchange (IXC), an innovation intermediary, this paper identifies three sets of core intermediation competences - network spanning capability, organizational memory and credibility and skills as a mediator. It describes the practices employed by IXC to develop and sustain these capabilities, enabling it to: (1) search for and match partners and facilitate knowledge sharing across geographical, industry and disciplinary boundaries at lower cost and more effectively than its clients can do on their own; and to (2) mitigate risks of opportunistic behavior, IP contamination and reputational damage that prevent agents from engaging in direct contact.
The study provides new insights regarding the organizational capabilities required for successful knowledge brokering, and regarding the types of situations where knowledge intermediaries can provide value by facilitating combinations of knowledge that might otherwise go undetected. The results raise some intriguing issues for future research regarding the mechanisms at work when bridging the thought worlds of different industries, functions and disciplines lacking common cognitive schema, vocabularies and priorities.
Keywords
innovation intermediation; knowledge intermediation; InnovationXchange; network spanning
References
Bessant, J. and Rush, H. (1995) Building bridges for innovation: The role of consultants in technology transfer, Research Policy 24: 97-114.
Bowker, G. C. and Star, S. L. (1999) Sorting things out. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
BTG. (2010) Annual report 2010. Business Technology Group. London, UK. Accessed May 18, 2011, from http://www.btgplc.com/document/182
Burt, R. (1992) Structural Holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Burt, R. S. (1997) The contingent value of social capital, Administrative Science Quarterly 42(2): 339-365.
Burt, R. S. (2004) Structural holes and good ideas, American Journal of Sociology 110(2): 349-399.
Burt, R. S. (2005) Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003) Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006) Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1972) A garbage can model of organizational choice, Administrative Science Quarterly 17(1): 1-25.
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 128-152.
Dalziel, M. (2010) Why do innovation intermediaries exist? Paper presented at the DRUID Summer Conference 2010, June 15-18, 2010, London.
Davenport, C., Kearney, G. and Coomber, D. C. (2008) InnovationXchange Network: Toward open source innovation, International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialization 7(4): 335-343.
Dodgson, M., Gann, D. and Saleter, A. (2005) Think, play, do: Technology, innovation and organization. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Dodgson, M. and Steen, J. (2008) New innovation models and Australia's old economy. In: J. Bessant and T. Venables (Eds.) Creating wealth from knowledge, pp. 105-124. Edgar Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
Fernandez, R. M. and Gould, R. V. (1994) A dilemma of state power: Brokerage and influence in the national health policy domain, American Journal of Sociology 99(6): 1455-1491.
Fleming, L. and Waguespack, D. M. (2007) Brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open innovation communities, Organization Science 18(2): 165-180.
Håkanson, L. (2007) Creating knowledge: The power and logic of articulation, Industrial and Corporate Change 16(1): 51-88.
Håkanson, L. (2010) The firm as an epistemic community: The knowledge-based view revisited, Industrial and Corporate Change 19(6): 1801-1828.
Hargadon, A. and Sutton, R. I. (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm, Administrative Science Quarterly 43(4): 716-749.
Holzner, B. (1968) Reality construction in society. Schenkman, Cambridge, MA.
Holzner, B. and Marx, J. H. (1979) Knowledge application: The knowledge system in society. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
Howard Partners. (2007) Study of the role of intermediaries in support of innovation. The Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Australia. Accessed May 15, 2010, from http://www.innovation.gov.au/Section/Innovation/Pages/StudyoftheRoleofIntermediariesinSupportofInnovation.aspx
Howells, J. (2006) Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation, Research Policy 35(5): 715-728.
Klerkx, L. and Leeuwis, C. (2009) Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector, Technological Forecasting & Social Change 76: 849-860.
Lee, S., Park, G., Yoon, B. and Park, J. (2010) Open innovation in SMEs - An intermediated network model, Research Policy 39(2): 290-300.
Lichtenthaler, U. and Ernst, H. (2008) Innovation intermediaries: Why internet marketplaces for technology have not yet met the expectations, Creativity and Innovation Management 17: 14-24.
Lingo, E. and O'Mahony, S. (2010) Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects, Administrative Science Quarterly 55: 47-81.
March, J. and Sevon, G. (1988) Gossip, information and decision making. In: J. March (Ed.) Decisions and organizations. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
Obstfeld, D. (2005) Social networks, the tertiusiungens orientation, and innovation involvement. Administrative Science Quarterly 50(1): 100-130.
Oldham, G. and McLean, R. (1997) Approaches to knowledge-brokering. International Institute for Sustainable Development. Maritoba, Canada. Accessed April 8, 2010, from www.iisd.org/pdf/2001/networks_knowledge_brokering.pdf#search=%22Approached%20to%20knowledge%20brokering%20oldham%22
Ouchi, W. G. (1980) Markets, bureaucracies and clans, Administrative Science Quarterly 25(1): 129-141.
Sapsed, J., Grantham, A. and DeFillippi, R. (2007) A bridge over troubled waters: Bridging organizations and entrepreneurial opportunities in emerging sectors, Research Policy 36(9): 1314-1334.
Schmookler, J. (1966) Invention and economic growth. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934) The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sutton, R. and Hargadon, A. (1996) Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 41(4): 685-718.
Sverrisson, Á. (2001) Translation networks, knowledge brokers and novelty construction: Pragmatic environmentalism in Sweden, Acta Sociologica 44: 313-327.
Szulanski, G. (2003) Sticky knowledge: Barriers to knowing in the firm. London: Sage.
Uzzi, B. (1997) Social structure and competition in Interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness, Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 35-67.
Williamson, O. E. (1975) Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. The Free Press, New York.
Wolpert, J. D. (2002) Breaking out of the innovation box, Harvard Business Review August: 77-83.
eContent Home
