Towards Building Open Innovation Ecosystem in Poland: Challenges and Opportunities
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Nowadays rapidly changing businesses environment (with start-ups and predominance of big companies), shortening technological cycles and accelerating technological convergence raise the need to combine competences with others. An open innovation based Quadruple helix interlinkages ecosystem seems to be appropriate method to boost innovation capabilities in companies, sectors and the whole regions. The research paper aims to discuss the opportunities and challenges related to adapting open innovation models in Polish enterprises. The concept of open innovation and promotion of clusters are important elements of economic policy of the industrial competitiveness of Poland and Europe 2020 strategy. Yet, despite increasing expenditure on innovation in Polish enterprises, innovation collaboration among Triple Helix stakeholders as well as the role of clusters are not growing significantly. In 2016–2018, such collaboration was undertaken only by 36% of innovation-active industrial enterprises, over 40% of which were big companies. Moreover, the share of industrial enterprises collaborating under a cluster initiative in the total number of enterprises amounted only to 3.5%. One of the sectors, where innovative activity was most often undertaken biotech and pharmaceutical related industry (biopharma) (56.2%). The industry faces a high-cost of R&D, limited commercialization and constant technological change. Thus, there is a growing attention for open innovation and external partnership. The study shows that in Poland, open innovation collaboration within the biopharma industry is still in the infancy. Among the financial, legal, institutional barriers socio-cultural factors have had large effects on the behaviour of firms with respect to their engagement in open innovation practices.
Downloads
Article Details
The author of the article declares that the submitted article does not infringe the copyrights of third parties. The author agrees to subject the article to the review procedure and to make editorial changes. The author transfers, free of charge, to SGH Publishing House the author's economic rights to the work in the fields of exploitation listed in the Article 50 of the Act of 4 February 1994 on Copyright and Related Rights – provided that the work has been accepted for publication and published.
SGH Publishing House holds economic copyrights to all content of the journal. Placing the text of the article in a repository, on the author's home page or on any other page is allowed as long as it does not involve obtaining economic benefits, and the text will be provided with source information (including the title, year, number and internet address of the journal).
References
2. Adner, R. (2016), Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable Construct for Strategy, ”Journal of Management”, 43(1).
3. Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E.G., Causino, N. (1996), Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry, “New England Journal of Medicine”, 335, 1734-1739.
4. Brooks, H., Randazzese, L.P. (1999), University-industry relations: the next four years and beyond, in: L.M. Branscomb, and J.H. Keller (eds), Investing in Innovation: Creating an Innovation Policy that works, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets and London, p. 361-399.
5. Bukowski, W., Buhrmester, D., Underwood, M. (2012), Peer relations as a developmental context, in: M.K. Underwood, L.H. Rosen (eds.), Social development: Relationships in infancy, childhood, and adolescence, New York: Guilford Press, p. 153-179.
6. Carayannis, E., Campbell, D. (2019), Conclusion: Smart Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems: How Social Ecology and Environmental Protection are Driving Innovation, Sustainable Development and Economic Growth, in: Smart Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems, p. 51-54.
7. Cattacin S., Zimmer A. (2016), Urban Governance and Social Innovations, in: Brandsen T., Cattacin S., Evers A., Zimmer A. (eds), Social Innovations in the Urban Context. Non-profit and Civil Society Studies, An International Multidisciplinary Series, Springer.
8. Chesbrough, H., (2003), Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
9. Chesbrough, H. (2006), Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation, in H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, J. West, (eds), Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm, Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 1-12.
10. Chesbrough, H., Crowther, A.K. (2006), Beyond high tech: Early adopters of open innovation in other industries, “Journal of R&D Management”, 36 (3), p. 229-236.
11. Cohen, L.R., Noll, R.G. (1994), Privatising Public Research, “Scientific American”, 271, p. 72-77.
12. Cohen, W., Levinthal, D. (1990), Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation, “Administrative Science Quarterly”, 35, p. 128-152.
13. Cova, B., & Dalli, D. (2009), Working consumers: The next step in marketing theory?, “Journal of Marketing Theory”, 9(3), p. 315-339.
14. Dwyer, L., Spurr, R., Forsyth, P. (2005), Estimating the Impact of Special Events on an Economy, “Journal of Travel Research”, 43(4), p. 351-359.
15. De Jong, A., Nguyen, T., Tabir, R. (2008), Capital Structure Around the World: The Roles of Firmand Country-Specific Determinants, ”Journal of Banking & Finance”, 32(9), p. 1954-1969.
16. Dhanaraj, C., Parkhe, A. (2006), Orchestrating Innovation Networks, “Academy of Management Review”, 31(3), p. 659-669.
17. GUS (2020), Działalność innowacyjna przedsiębiorstw w latach 2013-2015 oraz 2016-2018, Główny Urząd Statystyczny, Warszawa, GUS.
18. Harris, F., Lyon, F. (2013), Transdisciplinary environmental research: Building trust across professional cultures, “Journal of Environmental Science and Policy”, 3, p. 109-119.
19. Herzog, P., Leker, J. (2010), Open and closed innovation – different innovation cultures for different strategies, “International Journal of Technology Management”, 52 (3-4), p. 322-343.
20. Florida, R., Cohen, W. (1999), Engine or infrastructure? The University Role in EconomicDevelopment, in: Branscomb, L., Kodama, F., Florida, R. (eds.), Industrializing Knowledge, University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States, MIT Press.
21. Fasnacht, D. (2018), Open Innovation Ecosystems: Creating New Value Constellations in the Financial Services, in: Open Innovation Ecosystems, Chapter: 5, Springer, p. 131-172. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329037798
22. Kozierkiewicz, B. (2020), Life Sciences Clusters in Poland: Drivers, Structure and Challenges, in Runiewicz-Wardyn, M. (ed.), Social Capital in the University-Based Innovation Ecosystems in the Leading Life-Science Clusters: Implications for Poland, Warszawa, Poltext.
23. Krause, W., Schutte, C., du Preez, N. (2012), Open Innovation in South African Small and Medium- Sized Enterprises, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers & Industrial Engineering (CIE42), Cape Town, South Africa, CIE & SAIIE 2012, p. 201-210.
24. Laursen, K., Salter, A. (2006), Open for Innovation: The Role of Openness in Explaining Innovation Performance Among U.K. Manufacturing Firms, ”Strategic Management Journal” 27(2), p. 131-150.
25. Lundvall, B.-Å., Borrás S. (1998), The Globalising Learning Economy: Implications for Innovation Policy, European Commission Report, Brussels.
26. Mazza, M., Costagliola, C., Di Michele, V., Magliani, V., Pollice, R., Ricci, A. (2007), Deficit of social cognition in subjects with surgically treated frontal lobe lesions and in subjects affected by schizophrenia, “European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience”, 257, p. 12-22.
27. Malerba, F., Orsenigo, L. (1993), Technological regimes and firm behaviour, “Industrial and Corporate Change”, 2 (1), p. 45-71.
28. Mazzucato, M. (2018), Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities, “Journal of Industrial and Corporate Change”, 27(5), p. 803-815.
29. Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H. (1995), The knowledge-creating company. How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
30. Open Innovation 2.0, European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/openinnovation-20.
31. Pomponi, F, Tafuri, S., Fratocchi, L. (2015), Trust development and horizontal collaboration in logistics: A theory based evolutionary framework, “Supply Chain Management”, 20(1).
32. Rahman, H., Ramos, I. (2010), Open Innovation in SMEs: From Closed Boundaries to Networked Paradigm, “Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology”, Volume 7, Report by Committee of Regions, EC, 2016.
33. Runiewicz-Wardyn, M. (2020), Social Capital in the University-Based Innovation Ecosystems in the Leading Life-Science Clusters: Implications for Poland, Warszawa, Poltext.
34. Runiewicz-Wardyn, M. (2016), Innovations and Emerging Technologies for the Prosperity and Quality of Life, Warszawa, PWN.
35. Runiewicz-Wardyn, M. (2013), Knowledge Flows, Technological Change and Regional Growth in the European Union (Contributions to Economics), Springer.
36. Roper, S., Vahterb, P., Lovec, J. H. (2013), Externalities of openness in innovation, “Research Policy”, Volume 42, Issue 9, November 2013, p. 1544-1554.
37. Stenninger, S. (2014), Open Innovation and Barriers to Adoptation: A Case Study in the Construction Industry, Charlmers University of Technology, https://odr.chalmers.se/ bitstream/20.500.12380/204671/1/204671.pdf
38. Sznyk, A., Karasek, J. (2016), Raport innowacyjność w sektorze ochrony zdrowia w Polsce, Warszawa, Instytut Innowacyjna Gospodarka.
39. Torkkeli, M.T., Kock, C.J., Salmi, P.A. (2009), The “Open Innovation” paradigm: A contingency perspective, “Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management”, 2(1), p. 176-207.
40. Trzmielak, D. (2013), Innowacje i komercjalizacja w biotechnologii, Warszawa.
41. Weresa, M. (2018), Działalność B+R i innowacyjna a konkurencyjność polskiej gospodarki, in: Polska. Raport o konkurencyjności 2018. Rola miast w kształtowaniu przewag konkurencyjnych Polski, Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH, Warszawa.
42. Witzeman, S., Slowinski, G., Dirkx, R., Gollob, L. (2006), Harnessing External Technology for Innovation, “Research Technology Management”, 49(3), p. 19-27.
43. Zhang, J., Patel, N. (2005), The Dynamics of California’s Biotechnology Industry, San Francisco, Public Policy Institute of California.
44. Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (2018), Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Learning and Teaching, 5th International Conference, LCT 2018, Held as Part of HCI International 2018, Las Vegas.