Open Innovations

2022/2023

Учебный год

ENG

Обучение ведется на английском языке

4

Кредиты

Кто читает:

Департамент бизнес-информатики

Статус:

Курс по выбору

Когда читается:

4-й курс, 1, 2 модуль

Преподаватель

Текич Желько

Course Syllabus

Abstract

Open innovation (OI) is defined as a distributed innovation process based on purposively managed knowledge flows across organizational boundaries. In essence, it suggests the execution of a wide range of practices related to external knowledge acquisition and commercialization, which range from simple crowd engagement to choosing a new ice cream taste to the involvement of lead users in developing new medical devices, R&D purchases, venturing, licensing agreements and free revealing of inventions. In the OI approach, firms look beyond their boundaries to exploit the creativity and expertise of users, customers, experts, and (online) communities to co-create new products and services. In expanding firm boundaries, open innovation affects how companies – large, SMEs, or even startups – strategize, compete, create, deliver and capture value. Thus, successful management of open innovation plays an important role in the survival and competitiveness of emerging and existing organizations. To prepare students for this context Open Innovation course covers the fundamentals of open innovation ideas, tools, practices, and strategies, aiming to equip students with the understanding, knowledge, and skills required to manage open and user innovation projects and operations in their future workplaces.

Learning Objectives

• The course is designed to help students learn the basics of open innovation – the logic behind it, the existing toolkit, success stories across industries, and how OI shapes a business model and strategy inside a company. To achieve that, the course is conceptualized as a combination of lectures, project work, and interactive exercises. The course Open Innovation is framed by the following questions: • Why open innovation? How it is different from close innovation? • What is the main motivation for organizations to use OI? • How does OI create value for companies? • What OI practices do organizations embrace? • Who are the organizations’ main partners in OI? • What are the challenges in structuring internal processes to systematically benefit from these partnerships? • What are the main drivers and barriers to adopting and using OI from the perspective of a company, an industry, and a country? To produce a holistic view of open innovation management, the course examines it from different perspectives – from the perspective of established (larger and medium) firms, from the perspective of non-commercial organizations as well as from the perspective of high-growth potential firms (startups). Taking into consideration different perspectives and approaches, the course highlights the skills and tools required for successful innovation within different organizations and markets. The course aims to introduce to students a range of OI tools, support usage scenarios of these tools with examples of good practice, and prepare them to understand and manage emerging models of innovation based on open principles in the face of technological changes.

Expected Learning Outcomes

• • Understand, explain and apply fundamental open innovation concepts and practices.
• • Understand and explain the main motivation for organizations to use OI, what OI practices organizations use, who are their main partners in OI, and how they profit from open innovation.
• • Understand, explain and critically discuss the differences between open and closed innovation.
• • Differentiate between the different types of OI tools (co-creation with users, crowdsourcing, Lead Users, Innovation Intermediaries, in-licensing, open source…) and choose the right OI tool for different problem sets.
• • Understand the basics of intellectual property rights and their role in OI.
• • Understand, explain and critically discuss the role of open innovation in managing Digital transformation and AI projects.
• • Analyze and synthesize companies’ open innovation strategies.
• • Effectively communicate innovative initiatives in oral and written form.
• • Productively work in groups.
• • Critically reflect on its own learning.

Course Contents

• What is innovation and why does it matter – intro to the topic and the course
• From closed to open innovation: Innovation as a process and its models
• Open Innovation - cases across industries
• Sources of innovation
• Value appropriation mechanisms, IP rights, and Open innovation
• How technology is commercialized
• Business models and open innovation – user-centricity
• Strategy, big companies, startups, and ecosystems

Assessment Elements

• Open innovation in Russia (team project)
  Each team should propose at least 5 open innovation projects done by Russian organizations you would like to analyze within the course. The instructor will select 4 of these 5, which the team should analyze. You are free to select companies within the following limitations: • All projects should come from different companies. • Projects should be from 2015-2022. • First come, first served. To circumvent the repetition of projects in multiple teams, a common database in form of a live google doc will be formed. Each team will enter projects they want to focus on (by entering the name of a company, a link to the reference, and a one-sentence description of the project, as some companies may have multiple OI projects). • Questions to be answered in your presentation for each project: o What was the goal for the project? o What is the main motivation for the organization to use OI? o What OI practices did the organization use? o Who were the organizations’ main partners in OI? o How did OI create value for companies? o What could be the main drivers and barriers to adopting and using OI from the perspective of the company, the industry, and the country? o What did you learn from these examples? o Are there any common patterns? o What could be done differently? The companies should be entered on the list from September 20 (noon) when the database will be open for editing till October 5 (noon). Each day of delay will be penalized by -1 point from the final result of the task. To be delivered: Team presentation (10-12 slides, 8 minutes per team) The assessment criteria (see the meaning of the scale for a full explanation later) • Comprehensiveness, coherence, and quality of the analysis (including Q&A) (40%) • Collection and presentation of evidence from the research to justify arguments (including Q&A) (40%) • Technical and procedural excellence of presentation (20%) Value: 20 points • Project work that is not submitted and/or presented will not be graded (grade = 0). • Individual contribution to a team project is going to be peer-evaluated (see more later) • Points for this task are allocated based on the live presentation in the corresponding time slot (seminar group) during the module. There is no possibility to postpone a presentation/do it in another seminar group. • NO presentation in dedicated time slot = NO points for the task (even if the presentation is submitted). • Q&A session after the presentation is an integral part of the presentation. • Presentation must be submitted in the selected platform by Wed, Oct 12, 23:59. If a presentation is submitted after the deadline (but before the seminar), a team will be penalized with -1 point for each hour of a delay from the final result for the task. • Presentation NOT submitted to the selected platform (i.e., LMS) before the seminar = NO points for the task (even if the team is present at the seminar) Start: Friday, Sep 20 Submission deadline: Wed, Oct 12, at 23:59 *Peer evaluation applies
• In-class discussions, engagement, and homework
  This class requires a high level of motivation and active class participation. This is not simply a lecture attendance, it is ENGAGEMENT and PARTICIPATION in the lectures, with deep preparation, timely and relevant comments and discussion, comments linked to the previous lectures, personal experience or other courses; opinion based on evidence, thinking, responding to the lecturer’s questions.
• Exam
  The exam is taken in a written format based on a selection of open-ended questions online with proctoring (start exam platform). Time allowed: 120 minutes. Candidates should answer ALL questions in PART A and TWO out of THREE questions in PART B.

Interim Assessment

• 2022/2023 2nd module
  0.2 * Open innovation in Russia (team project) + 0.175 * In-class discussions, engagement, and homework + 0.45 * Exam

Bibliography

Recommended Core Bibliography

• Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). The Era of Open Innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(3), 35–41.
• Tidd, J., Bessant, J. R., & Pavitt, K. (2012). Managing innovation : integrating technological, market and organizational change. Chichester [Etc.].
• von Hippel, E. A. (2016). Free Innovation. United States, North America: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.606752F7

Recommended Additional Bibliography

• Baldwin, C., Hienerth, C., & von Hippel, E. (2006). How user innovations become commercial products: A theoretical investigation and case study. Research Policy, (9), 1291. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.eee.respol.v35y2006i9p1291.1313
• Brunswicker, S., & Chesbrough, H. (2018). The Adoption of Open Innovation in Large Firms. Research Technology Management, 61(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2018.1399022
• Chesbrough, H. (2020). To recover faster from Covid-19, open up: Managerial implications from an open innovation perspective. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.04.010
• Chesbrough, H., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/11.3.529
• Chesbrough, H., Lettl, C., & Ritter, T. (2018). Value Creation and Value Capture in Open Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(6), 930–938. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12471
• Hienerth, C., von Hippel, E., & Berg Jensen, M. (2014). User community vs. producer innovation development efficiency: A first empirical study. Research Policy, (1), 190. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.eee.respol.v43y2014i1p190.201