Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBreunig, Karl Joachimen_US
dc.contributor.authorAas, Tor Helgeen_US
dc.contributor.authorHydle, Katja Mariaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-12T12:32:27Z
dc.date.available2014-12-12T12:32:27Z
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.identifier.citationBreunig, K.J., Aas, T.H. & Hydle, K.M. (2014). Incentives and performance measures for open innovation practices. Measuring Business Excellence, 18(1), 45-54. doi:10.1108/MBE-10-2013-0049en_US
dc.identifier.issn1368-3047en_US
dc.identifier.otherFRIDAID 1067718en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10642/2218
dc.description.abstractPurpose – To guarantee alignment between ongoing activities and organizational goals, innovation management theory emphasizes management control and explicit innovation strategies as prerequisites for innovation performance. However, the theory on open services innovation emphasizes individual autonomy and incentives to foster open innovations. The aim of this paper is to explore this inconsistency. Design/methodology/approach – An explorative research design involving 25 semi-structured interviews in five large scale-intensive service firms is explored. Scale-intensive service firms are strategically sampled for this study since these firms experience tension between open service innovation characteristics and efforts to standardize. Findings – The authors show how individual autonomy facilitates the internal and external networking required in open innovations. However, individualized incentives do not suffice to motivate, mobilize and direct the collaboration and collective effort needed to ensure successful implementation of open innovation processes. Innovation performance is a collective effort, and the findings suggest that firms’ business strategy works as a collective incentive system. Practical implications – The findings imply that firms should not rely on individualized incentives alone to implement open innovation processes successfully. The implementation of more collectively oriented incentives is also necessary to motivate the collective effort required to succeed with open innovation. Originality/value – The study extends previous work and shows how innovation practices are collective efforts that also involve the mobilization of external resources. The incentives observed have an effect on individual behaviour, while performance measures, to a larger degree, cater to the collective level. The authors present three propositions for further empirical investigationen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherEmeralden_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesMeasuring Business Excellence;18(1)en_US
dc.rights‘This article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
dc.subjectManagement controlen_US
dc.subjectPerformance measuresen_US
dc.subjectInnovation performanceen_US
dc.subjectIncentivesen_US
dc.subjectInnovation practiceen_US
dc.titleIncentives and performance measures for open innovation practicesen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionPostprinten_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MBE-10-2013-0049


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record