Due to constant disruption, companies need to embed innovation into their everyday activities in order to cope with competition and be successful. Corporate Entrepreneurship is playing an important role in fostering innovation and is needed to avoid disruption. However, companies have also different motives when handling CE as well as various ways of implementing it in the organization. This study investigated the motives of CE among large companies and the various implementation efforts. Therefore, the research question is: Which are the motives for CE? and the sub-question is: How does that lead to variation in CE implementation? The focus of the study was large companies which headquarter in Nordic countries and belong in different industries. Therefore, nine semi-structured interviews were performed and after, the data from the interviews were analyzed with thematic analysis. The results showed that the companies have different reasonings about their CE efforts and the CE implementation varied depending on the companies’ motives. However, these factors may not affect directly the organizational maturity. Therefore, companies can have their motives and support their CE efforts in different ways without influence negatively the maturity of the organization.

Title: Mission Impossible? A case study on how to manage the tension between openness and secrecy in the defense industry. Background: This thesis is built upon a unique case exhibiting open innovation within the defense industry. Practicing open innovation is a challenge for all organizations today but as a consequence of the defense industry’s high secrecy, open innovation becomes even more challenging. On one hand, they need to share internal knowledge to practice open innovation but on the other hand, sharing too much can endanger its country’s national security. The tension emerging from the need to open up an organization to practice open innovation while simultaneously maintaining secrecy results in an emergence of paradoxical tension. The literature has highlighted this tension as the paradox of openness. Purpose Research the paradox of openness within the defense industry. Methodology: An abductively qualitative single case study at the Swedish defense company Saab AB. The empirical data were collected from13 semi-structured and unstructured interviews. Findings: Selective revealing, a strong relationship and trust, internal rules and processes, and the understanding of customer capabilities are ways defense organizations can use to manage the paradox of openness in offset agreements. Keywords: Open innovation, The paradox of openness, Differentiation and integration approach, Defense industry, Saab AB, Offset, Transfer of Technology, Brazil.

No description available.

I takt med högre krav på minskade koldioxidutsläpp ökar trycket på ett mer hållbart transportsystem som lett till teknologiska omvandlingar inom fordonsindustrin. Industriomvandlingarna kräver nya sätt i hur företag skapar, erbjuder och omsätter värde vilket tillsammans utgör ett företags affärsmodell. När etablerade fordonstillverkare ändrar sina affärsmodeller till följd av de teknologiska omvandlingarna påverkar det i sin tur underleverantörerna och vice versa. Syftet med studien är att identifiera hur underleverantörer inom fordonsindustrin kan anpassa sina affärsmodeller till följd av de förändrade kundkraven beroende på fordonsindustrins teknologiska omvandlingar. De teknologiska omvandlingarna i denna studie är avgränsade till elektrifiering och digitalisering. Studien genomfördes som en fallstudie där 17 underleverantörer inom fordonsindustrin i Stockholms län intervjuades. Sammantaget identifierades fem olika affärsmodellsvarianter, varav två varianter representerar dagens affärsmodeller och tre framtida affärsmodeller, vilka är följande: Nuvarande affärsmodellsvarianter (0 och 1) ● Variant 0 - Kunderna är fordonstillverkare, värdeerbjudandet en komponent som monteras i fordonet, värdeskapandet sker in-house och värdefångsten genom styckförsäljning. ● Variant 1 - Snarlik variant 0 med tillägget att underleverantörerna erbjuder avgiftsfria produktutvecklingstjänster i syfte att anpassa komponenten till kunden där produktutvecklingen sker i samarbete med densamma. Framtida affärsmodellsvarianter (2, 3 och 4) ● Variant 2 - Produktutvecklingen sker i samarbete med kunden och utgör den stora delen av intäkterna i affärsmodellen. ● Variant 3 - Eftermarknadstjänster tillkommer som en stor del av affärsmodellen där intäkterna i huvudsak genereras genom prenumerationer. ● Variant 4 - Erbjuder en komplett tjänst i form av uthyrning av komponenten där eftermarknadstjänster ingår, och ägandeskapet kvarstår hos underleverantören. Studien kommer fram till att dagens underleverantörer som använder affärsmodellsvariant 0 eller 1 kan välja att anpassa sina affärsmodeller på två respektive tre sätt. Underleverantörerna som använder affärsmodellsvariant 0 kan anpassas till variant 1 och 2. Underleverantörer som använder affärsmodellsvariant 1 kan anpassas till variant 2, 3 och 4. Anpassningarna innebär att: ● Tjänster blir en större del av värdeerbjudandet, värdeskapandet och värdefångsten ● Gemensam produktutveckling blir en del av värdeskapandet ● Mjukvaran blir en viktigare del i värdeerbjudandet och värdeskapandet ● Fysiska värdeerbjudanden har en annan uppbyggnad och förändrad funktion / The pressure towards a more sustainable transportation system is increasing as a result of higher demands for reduced carbon dioxide emissions. This has led to technological transformations in the automotive industry. Industrial transformations require new ways in which companies create, offer and capture value, which together represent a company's business models. When established vehicle manufacturers change their business models due to technological transformations, it in turn affects their suppliers and vice versa. The purpose of this study is to identify how suppliers in the automotive industry can adapt their business models due to the changed customer requirements as a result of the automotive industry's technological transformations. The technological transformations in this study are limited to electrification and digitization. A qualitative exploratory case study was conducted on suppliers in the automotive industry in Stockholm County, containing 17 interviews with suppliers. A total of five different types of business models were identified, of which two represent current business models and three future business models, which are the following; Current business model types (0 and 1) ● Type 0 - The customers are vehicle manufacturers, the value proposition is a component that is assembled in the vehicle, the value creation takes place in-house and the value capture through unit sales. ● Type 1 - Similar to type 0 with the addition that the suppliers offer free product development services in order to adapt the component to the customer where the two actors collaborate in product development.Future business model types (2, 3 and 4) ● Type 2 - The product development takes place in collaboration with the customer, which accounts for the large part of the revenue in the business model. ● Type 3 - Aftermarket services are added as a large part of the business model where revenues are generated mainly through subscriptions. ● Type 4 - The suppliers offer a complete service by leasing the component where aftermarket services are included, and the ownership of the component remains with the supplier.The study concludes that today's suppliers are in business model type 0 or 1. These suppliers can adapt their business models in two or three different ways. The suppliers who are in business model type 0 can adapt their business models to type 1 and 2. Suppliers who are in business model type 1 can adapt their business models to types 2, 3 and 4. The adaptions indicates that: ● Services become a larger part of the value proposition, creation and capture ● Joint product development becomes part of the value creation ● The software becomes a more important part of the value proposition and creation ● The physical value proposition has a different structure and changed function

Bakgrund & problem: Traditionell sluten innovation utgör en utmaning för SME som kännetecknas av resursbegränsningar, i synnerhet inom fordonsindustrin. Den öppna innovationen (OI) anammas i större utsträckning av SME på grund av dess kollaborativa karaktär. En framgångsrik tillämpning av öppen innovation kräver en utveckling av ekonomistyrsystem (MCS). Styrsystemen måste anpassas för att främja samarbete, synkronisera insatser och säkerställa att innovations initiativen är i linje med organisationens mål. Följaktligen blir förmågan att utforma och implementera MCS som stödjer öppen innovation allt viktigare för företag att upprätthålla konkurrenskraft och driva innovation i dagens dynamiska affärsmiljö. Syftet: Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka hur ett SME inom fordonsindustrin tillämpar och styr öppen innovation. Metod: Denna studie tillämpades en kvalitativ ansats med semistrukturerade intervjuer för att analysera hur fallföretaget tillämpar och styr OI. Med hänsyn till studiens beskrivande och förklarande karaktär ansågs denna metod vara lämplig. Empiriska data samlades in från anställda med olika hierarkiska positioner inom företaget. Slutsats: Resultat visar att SMEs tillämpar både ingående och utgående kunskapsflöden för att åtgärda inneboende hinder. Dock råder det gap ett gap i definitionen av OI samt bristande empiriska studier för somliga OI aktiviter. Styrmedel, främst kulturella normer och styrsystem, spelar en central roll för att främja innovation i SMEs. Det finns däremot utmaningar med att styra interorganisatorisk innovation på grund av komplexiteten med interorganisatoriska relationer (IOR) och avsaknaden av litteratur som bemött och utforskat styrning av dessa aktiviteter. Implementering av gränssättande styrsystem förespråkas för att motverka opportunistiskt beteende, förbättra interorganisatoriska samarbeten och på så sätt främja utbytet av OI. / Background & problem: Traditional closed innovation constitutes a challenge for SMEs characterized by resource constraints, particularly in the automotive industry. As a result, Open innovation (OI) is increasingly embraced by SMEs due to its collaborative nature. However, the successful application of open innovation requires the development of management control systems (MCS). Management Control Systems need to be adapted to foster collaboration, synchronize efforts and ensure that innovation initiatives are in alignment with the organization's objectives. Consequently, the ability to design and implement MCS that support open innovation is becoming increasingly important for companies to maintain competitiveness and drive innovation in the current dynamic business environment. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze how an SME in the automotive industry applies and manages open innovation. Method: This study employed a qualitative methodology, employing semi-structured interviews, to analyze how the case company applies and manages OI. Given the descriptive and explanatory nature of the study, this method was deemed suitable. Empirical data were gathered from employees occupying various hierarchical positions within the company. Conclusion: The results indicate that SMEs use both in-bound and out-bound knowledge flows to address inherent barriers. However, there is a gap in the definition of OI and a lack of empirical studies on some OI activities. Policy instruments, mainly cultural norms and management systems, play an essential role in fostering innovation in SMEs. However, there are challenges in managing interorganizational innovation due to the complexity of interorganisational relationships (IOR) and the lack of literature addressing and exploring the governance of these activities. The implementation of boundary systems is advocated to counter opportunistic behavior, improve interorganizational collaborations and thus promote the exchange of IOR.

The possibility of co-creation exists for all media, but game design has developed a culture that is unusually open to co-creation. This dissertation investigates significant cases of co-creation in mainstream games in order to explore how games can be co-created as alternative or critical media by their players. The core argument in the dissertation is that players co-create the design of a game only if certain conditions are met, namely: (1) player creation of a text or communication infrastructure that modifies the properties of the game and from which play emerges; (2) that this is done for a considerable group of players who share a particular practice of play; (3) that this is done not only by playing the game but by changing how others play it in a distinct creative activity, and (4), with the potential to subvert or contest the original design of the game. This situation where player creators have influence over the design of the game (but little power to enforce their interests) is problematic from the perspective of alternative or critical media, as alternative, local, production is seen as one reason for why a medium can have an alternative message. The industrial production of games as cultural commodities does limit the potential of co-creative game design for subversion because it reduces the level of participation in the creation process, thus keeping player creators relatively disempowered. Player creators do have influence on the design of the game, while at the same time having very little power to enforce their interests and design visions. The influence of player creators comes from the consumer power of millions of players who use co-created assets and who want to them to continue exiting, and this creates a mutually dependent relationship (and even partnership), between co-creators and commercial owners. The dissertation concludes that co-creative game design, despite limitations related to the industrial production of games as cultural commodities, is already happening, and shows a potential for turning games into alternative media.

在現今之行動通訊產業中，面對技術融合、顧客需求多樣化、快速創新的衝即，整個產業結構已發生了根本上的影響。傳統行動通訊產業中的線性價值鏈已不復見，而是重新聚合成全新的價值網，而這個新的價值網跨越了原本各自獨立的產業界線，並經由不同的連結方式，形成新的產業形態，展現出新的面貌。其中，更可以明顯發現，透過許多不同領域能力之結合，可以造就出許多新事業、新市場的誕生。據此，企業為了追求快速創新，便不可能僅憑一己之力，於內部發展出各式各樣之能力。反之，企業必須由外部擷取他人之力，再與內部核心能力結合，與外部關係人建立共生關係，最終達成多贏之局面。據此，Chesbrough (2003) 認為，企業過去「封閉式創新」的作法已不合時宜，未來必須走向「開放式創新」。 本研究在文獻探討的部分，將焦點放在三大議題：開放式創新、經營模式與平台型經營模式。同時，選擇全球行動通訊產業的領導廠商 – NTT DoCoMo為個案公司，從1999年至2007年之公司資料中，歸納出個案公司的三大議題：發展歷程、經營模式與合作關係。 最後，本研究歸納出以下結論：第一：平台型經營模式有利於企業有效且及時地連結外部環境之資源，以實踐開放式創新；第二：企業在追求快速創新之目標時，其所採用之創新模式可依據下述兩種要素來區分：合作關係之廣度與資源投入之程度。而面對不同核心程度之能力時，須採用不同之模式；第三：平台型經營模式由眾多構面組成，而面對不同的構面，企業須採用不同的模式來發展；第四：成功的平台型經營模式必須具備吸引力與主導力。 / Today, the mobile communication industry is faced with the impact of technology fusion, diversified customers’ demand and fast innovation; this industry already changed fundamentally. The linear value chain of traditional mobile communication industry is no more, instead, there is a whole new value net, which is connected in different way to become a new industry. From the result, through the combination of capabilities from different areas, it can lead to many new businesses and markets. According to the above, for the purpose of fast innovation, companies are impossible to develop various capabilities all by themselves inside; instead, companies have to introduce other capabilities from outside and combine with their core capabilities. Through the establishment of ecosystem, it will lead to the all-win situation. According to the above, Chesbrough argues that the traditional close innovation is no more, it is the age of open innovation. In this research, the literature review focuses on three issues: open innovation, business model and platform business model. Meanwhile, this research chooses the global leading company in mobile communication industry – NTT DoCoMo as the case company and the case study focuses on three issues: history, business model and collaborative relationships. This research reaches three conclusions. First, platform business model can help companies connect with the environment effectively and timely. Second, open innovation includes two different concepts: open and closed at the same time and these different concepts should be applied to different capabilities. Third, business model is composed of many aspects, and different aspects should be developed by different concepts. Forth, open business model’s paradigm is platform business model and two of platform business model’s fundamental forces are attraction and predomination.

The role of open innovation is becoming increasingly important for organizational competitiveness, while digital technologies provide new opportunities for organizational innovativeness. Regardless of domain and industry, digital technologies have reshaped structure, business logic and organizational dynamics. In that spirit, the forestry industry moves from the traditional model to the open paradigm, embracing the significance of purposive external exploration and internal exploitation of knowledge and technologies. Although the importance of digital technologies has been highlighted by academia, their enabling role in the open innovation process is insufficiently explored. Moreover, little research showcases the systematic way to organize for open innovation in the digital world. This process towards openness creates new opportunities as well as challenges. In order to investigate these emerging challenges and opportunities for open innovation in a digital world, we conducted a qualitative exploratory case study in the Cluster of Forest Technology in northern Sweden. Our results illustrate that challenges such as trust, power asymmetries, knowledge flow and coopetitive activities need to be managed. This study contributes to the existing literature by providing a way to address these challenges, seize more opportunities and bridge the gap between open innovation and digital technologies.

Constant development of new technologies in a rapidly changing and globalized world decreases product life cycles. Time-to-market is crucial for commercial success. This development requires resources to create new knowledge and skills within organizations and together in networks with other firms. Open innovation is an alternative for developing innovative products and services that takes advantage of external knowledge and give access to new market channels. Even though services is vital for economic growth and fits well with the open innovation model, there is little research on open service innovation. The purpose of the thesis is to extend knowledge on how service innovations emerge and evolve in open innovation nets in industrial networks. It also aims to follow the development from idea to a commercial service. The thesis describes organization for service innovations to emerge and develop in open service innovation nets. It also explains the actors involved and their different innovator roles in the development from idea to commercial services. The present research provide insights how the organization of the development work might differ between incremental and radical service innovation. there is a range of organizing templates (archetypes) that fit different types of development work. Where previous research on open service innovation has focused on radical service innovation present research suggests that open service innovation also can be a strategy for incremental service innovation. Present research shows how actors take on multiple innovator roles in the innovation process of open service innovation. The more radical changes, the more roles each actor takes on. Present research add a new innovator role to previous research, The Constitutional Monarch. The Constitutional Monarch has a central position in all archetypes, but as the name implies, has no decision power. The research also sheds light on how the hub firm deploys not one but a portfolio of network orchestration processes dependent on the archetype used for open service innovation. / The development of new technologies in a rapidly changing and globalized world decreases product life cycles, time to market is crucial. Firms can no longer rely solely on internal knowledge in new product-/service development. They require external resources to create new knowledge and skills within their organizations. Developing innovative products and services that takes advantage of external knowledge and give access to new market channels is labeled open innovation. Even though the open innovation model is well known and widely spread, there is little research on open service innovation. The aim of the thesis is to understand and describe how service innovations emerge and evolve in open innovation nets (groups) in industrial networks, and to follow the development from idea to a commercial service. The thesis describes organization for service innovations to emerge and develop in open service innovation nets. It also explains the actors involved and their different innovation roles in the development of service innovations in open service innovation nets. The present research provide insights how the organization of the development work might differ between incremental and radical service innovation. It suggests that open service innovation can be a strategy not only for radical but also for incremental service innovation. The thesis also present a new innovator role to add to existing research, The Constitutional Monarch. The Constitutional Monarch has a central position as third-party facilitator catalyzing the innovation process but has no decision power.

Há um crescente interesse das grandes empresas em se aproximarem das startups como forma de desenvolver inovação aberta. Entre as 500 maiores empresas do ranking Forbes Global 500, 262 já têm iniciativas de engajamento com startups de alguma maneira: seja investindo, seja acelerando, incubando, realizando eventos ou buscando outros tipos de relacionamento. Nessa relação, a grande corporação pode se beneficiar da estrutura leve, da propensão a tomar riscos, da velocidade de operação e de tomada de decisão das startups, enquanto as startups podem se aproveitar do acesso à grande base de consumidores, do capital, da credibilidade e da estrutura voltada à eficiência da grande corporação, gerando ganhos mútuos. Para que uma grande empresa tenha sucesso nesse relacionamento, ela precisa saber quais são os seus objetivos, os seus resultados esperados, escolher a melhor forma de engajamento e criar uma operação equilibrada e integrada ao ecossistema empreendedor. Ter clareza de como cumprir essas etapas não é uma tarefa fácil. No mercado brasileiro, o desafio é ainda maior. O tema é recente e não há uma fonte de dados que consolide e analise as principais iniciativas de relacionamento entre startups e grandes empresas e as melhores práticas no país. Por meio de pesquisas exploratórias com dados secundários, este estudo identificou, mapeou e categorizou 137 programas de engajamento entre grandes corporações e startups no país. As informações encontradas foram confrontadas com o levantamento teórico e enriquecidas com informações coletadas em entrevistas com executivos responsáveis por algumas das principais iniciativas existentes no Brasil. Desta forma foi possível construir uma visão do mercado brasileiro e entender o nível de maturidade nessa área. Foi possível também identificar os objetivos das corporações, os modelos de relacionamento praticados, o perfil de interesse em startups, as formas como selecionam esse tipo de negócios, como operam os programas, os riscos envolvidos e as formas de mensuração de resultados. / There is increasing interest from the big companies to be closer to the startups as a way of fostering the open innovation. Among the 500 major companies of the Forbes Global 500 ranking, 262 are already running startup engagement programs in any way: investing, accelerating, incubating, running events or any other kind of relationship. In this relationship, the big company can benefit from the innovation focus, the willingness to take risks, the speed of operation and decision taking of the startups, meanwhile the startups can benefit from the access to the big consumer base, the capital, the credibility and the efficiency of the big corporations. To be successful in this journey the big company have to be clear about what are their objectives, the expected results and chose the best model of engagement to create a program that has to be balanced and integrated with the startup ecosystem. Being clear about how to achieve that can be challenging. The topic is recent and there is little literature about that. In Brazil, the challenge is even greater. There is no data source with consolidated data and information about the main startup engagement programs and its best practices. Trough exploratory research with open data this paper have sourced and categorized 137 startup and big companies engagement programs in the country. The gathered data was analyzed taking in consideration the related bibliography and enriched with information collected from interviews with executives responsible for some of the main initiatives in Brazil. This way it was possible to build a consolidated view of the market and its level of maturity. It was also possible to identify the main objectives of the big companies, the engagement models adopted, the startup target profile, the way they select the startups and run the programs, the risks and how they measure the results