Figure 1 - uploaded by René Rohrbeck
Content may be subject to copyright.
Open innovation ecosystem at Deutsche Telekom.

Open innovation ecosystem at Deutsche Telekom.

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
When, on 21st September 2006, 'The Economist' compared incumbent telecommunication operators with dinosaurs that could soon face extinction, most readers were ready to agree. The mixture of declining revenues and fierce competition was believed to shake the market and soon to dethrone former national champions. However, there are ways to fight that...

Context in source publication

Context 1
... matrix was developed on the basis of the qualitative interviews and then validated by two respondents who had an overview over all instruments. The result is shown in Figure 1. ...

Citations

... In the process of creation OI ecosystems, a significant role is played by interdependence, social exchange, and trust. Creation of OI ecosystem is also discussed by Rohrbeck, Hölzle, and Gemünden (2009), who focus on the large multinational company Deutsche Telecom. In this case, the authors identify eleven OI instruments (foresight workshops, executive forums, customer integration, endowed chairs, consortia projects, corporate venture capitalist, Internet platforms, joined development, strategic alliances, spin-outs, and test markets). ...
Article
More and more self-interested businesses are organizing themselves in interdependent, non-hierarchically controlled networks to jointly create superior value by engaging in open innovation projects. In aligning the heterogeneous actors toward a focal value proposition, it is crucial for the orchestrators of such arrangements to manage their inter-organizational relationships by navigating the interplay of contractual and relational governance mechanisms. Despite the relevance of how contracts and relational governance co-evolve, knowledge on the interaction of contracts and relational governance in specific contexts is still missing. Through a multiple-case study of ten multinational ecosystem orchestrators, we explore how large multinational orchestrators govern the interplay inter-organizational relationship mechanisms in open innovation projects across ecosystems. Based on our findings, we propose a five-dimensional, sequential model of governing the interplay of inter-organizational relationship mechanisms in open innovation projects across ecosystems and discuss our contributions in the context of the current literature.
... Evidently, according to both RBV and KBV, acquiring resources like knowledge helps in pursuing and implementing new strategies quickly. This represents a new source of competitive advantage for firms (Rohrbeck et al. 2009). We also show that, while companies in emerging markets should establish both wide and deep relationships, in the context of developed markets, deep relationships (search depth) are those that allow strategic agility to be leveraged. ...
Article
Full-text available
This research delineates the relationship between strategic agility and performance, and proposes openness as a requisite means to fostering agility and enhancing performance. Methodologically, the research follows the pragmatist paradigm through a mixed-method research design, incorporating three separate studies. These comprise a CEO-based survey on foreign firms operating in emerging markets, a CEO-based survey on firms operating in developed countries, and CEO interviews, all of which are complimented by auxiliary instruments of secondary data and an expert panel. The research finds that strategic agility is vital for firms’ performance in both developed and developing markets. Moreover, we found that while search depth amplifies the above relationship in both contexts, search breadth does it only in the context of foreign firms operating in emerging markets. The value of these findings stems from their elucidation of the role of strategic agility in emerging markets and its comparison to that of firms operating in developed countries; their insights into strategic agility’s relationship with openness; their schematic culmination into a systemically and contextually depicted framework; and their prescriptive managerial implications.
... We do that by identifying the managerial issues stemming from Open Innovation and positively enhance competitive performance; Multiple case study methodology is adopted; the results indicates a positive relation between different ( Chesbrough, 2003, Chiaroni et al., 2011, Bogers et al., 2018 ( Chesbrough and Appleyard, 2007, Van Alstyne et al., 2016, Kumar et al., 2015, Koch and Windsperger, 2017 . Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Zhang and Zeng, 2009, Ghezzi et al., 2016, Lukac et al., 2012, Mihailovic, 2019, Wang et al., 2016 ( Gassmann and Enkel, 2004, Saebi and Foss, 2015, Rohrbeck et al., 2009 ( Saebi andFoss, 2015, Chesbrough, 2007 ) ‫من‬ ‫مجموعة‬ ‫كزت‬ ‫ر‬ ‫كما‬ ، ‫التنافسية‬ ‫الميزة‬ ‫لتحقيق‬ ‫كأداة‬ ‫االعمال‬ ‫نموذج‬ ‫على‬ ‫المفتوح‬ ‫االبتكار‬ ‫ادبيات‬ ( Teece, 2010, Ghezzi et al., 2016 ‫المفتوحة‬ ‫االعمال‬ ‫لنماذج‬ ‫اإليجابي‬ ‫الدور‬ ‫على‬ ‫أكدت‬ ‫و‬ ، ( Ghezzi et al., 2020, Matějíček and Marešová, 2020, Weiblen, 2014 ‫في‬ ‫النقال‬ ‫متعاملي‬ ‫لدى‬ ‫ذلك‬ ‫وتأكد‬ ، ‫األخرى‬ ‫اسات‬ ‫الدر‬ ‫بعض‬ ‫مثل‬ ( Mihailovic, 2019, Yamasaki andCarlos, 2014, Atallaoui, ( Bogers et al., 2019, Cao, 2009, Cheng et al., 2016, Lichtenthaler, 2008 ‫في‬ ‫األساسيات‬ ‫من‬ ‫الديناميكية‬ ‫اتهم‬ ‫قدر‬ ‫تطوير‬ ‫يعد‬ ‫حيث‬ ‫النقال‬ ‫الهاتف‬ ‫متعاملي‬ ‫على‬ ‫االمر‬ ‫وينطبق‬ ، ‫خدماتهم‬ ‫في‬ ‫االبتكار‬ ‫إدارة‬ ( Wang et al., 2016, Hahn, 2015, Ghezzi et al., 2015 ‫؛‬ ( Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Senior, 2019, Xiaoren et al., 2014, Xie and Wang, 2020, Fasnacht, 2018 ( Chesbrough, 2011, Johnson et al., 2008, Casadesus and Ricart, 2010, Furseth and Cuthbertson, 2013 Barney and Clark, 2007, Wernerfelt, 1984, Barney, 1991 Bogers et al., 2019, Cao, 2009, Cheng et al., 2016, Lichtenthaler, 2008 ( Lukac et al., 2012, Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Bigliardi et al., 2012, Hahn, 2015, Ghezzi et al., 2016, Zhang and Zeng, 2009 ...
... We do that by identifying the managerial issues stemming from Open Innovation and positively enhance competitive performance; Multiple case study methodology is adopted; the results indicates a positive relation between different ( Chesbrough, 2003, Chiaroni et al., 2011, Bogers et al., 2018 ( Chesbrough and Appleyard, 2007, Van Alstyne et al., 2016, Kumar et al., 2015, Koch and Windsperger, 2017 . Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Zhang and Zeng, 2009, Ghezzi et al., 2016, Lukac et al., 2012, Mihailovic, 2019, Wang et al., 2016 ( Gassmann and Enkel, 2004, Saebi and Foss, 2015, Rohrbeck et al., 2009 ( Saebi andFoss, 2015, Chesbrough, 2007 ) ‫من‬ ‫مجموعة‬ ‫كزت‬ ‫ر‬ ‫كما‬ ، ‫التنافسية‬ ‫الميزة‬ ‫لتحقيق‬ ‫كأداة‬ ‫االعمال‬ ‫نموذج‬ ‫على‬ ‫المفتوح‬ ‫االبتكار‬ ‫ادبيات‬ ( Teece, 2010, Ghezzi et al., 2016 ‫المفتوحة‬ ‫االعمال‬ ‫لنماذج‬ ‫اإليجابي‬ ‫الدور‬ ‫على‬ ‫أكدت‬ ‫و‬ ، ( Ghezzi et al., 2020, Matějíček and Marešová, 2020, Weiblen, 2014 ‫في‬ ‫النقال‬ ‫متعاملي‬ ‫لدى‬ ‫ذلك‬ ‫وتأكد‬ ، ‫األخرى‬ ‫اسات‬ ‫الدر‬ ‫بعض‬ ‫مثل‬ ( Mihailovic, 2019, Yamasaki andCarlos, 2014, Atallaoui, ( Bogers et al., 2019, Cao, 2009, Cheng et al., 2016, Lichtenthaler, 2008 ‫في‬ ‫األساسيات‬ ‫من‬ ‫الديناميكية‬ ‫اتهم‬ ‫قدر‬ ‫تطوير‬ ‫يعد‬ ‫حيث‬ ‫النقال‬ ‫الهاتف‬ ‫متعاملي‬ ‫على‬ ‫االمر‬ ‫وينطبق‬ ، ‫خدماتهم‬ ‫في‬ ‫االبتكار‬ ‫إدارة‬ ( Wang et al., 2016, Hahn, 2015, Ghezzi et al., 2015 ‫؛‬ ( Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Senior, 2019, Xiaoren et al., 2014, Xie and Wang, 2020, Fasnacht, 2018 ( Chesbrough, 2011, Johnson et al., 2008, Casadesus and Ricart, 2010, Furseth and Cuthbertson, 2013 Barney and Clark, 2007, Wernerfelt, 1984, Barney, 1991 Bogers et al., 2019, Cao, 2009, Cheng et al., 2016, Lichtenthaler, 2008 ( Lukac et al., 2012, Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Bigliardi et al., 2012, Hahn, 2015, Ghezzi et al., 2016, Zhang and Zeng, 2009 ...
... We do that by identifying the managerial issues stemming from Open Innovation and positively enhance competitive performance; Multiple case study methodology is adopted; the results indicates a positive relation between different ( Chesbrough, 2003, Chiaroni et al., 2011, Bogers et al., 2018 ( Chesbrough and Appleyard, 2007, Van Alstyne et al., 2016, Kumar et al., 2015, Koch and Windsperger, 2017 . Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Zhang and Zeng, 2009, Ghezzi et al., 2016, Lukac et al., 2012, Mihailovic, 2019, Wang et al., 2016 ( Gassmann and Enkel, 2004, Saebi and Foss, 2015, Rohrbeck et al., 2009 ( Saebi andFoss, 2015, Chesbrough, 2007 ) ‫من‬ ‫مجموعة‬ ‫كزت‬ ‫ر‬ ‫كما‬ ، ‫التنافسية‬ ‫الميزة‬ ‫لتحقيق‬ ‫كأداة‬ ‫االعمال‬ ‫نموذج‬ ‫على‬ ‫المفتوح‬ ‫االبتكار‬ ‫ادبيات‬ ( Teece, 2010, Ghezzi et al., 2016 ‫المفتوحة‬ ‫االعمال‬ ‫لنماذج‬ ‫اإليجابي‬ ‫الدور‬ ‫على‬ ‫أكدت‬ ‫و‬ ، ( Ghezzi et al., 2020, Matějíček and Marešová, 2020, Weiblen, 2014 ‫في‬ ‫النقال‬ ‫متعاملي‬ ‫لدى‬ ‫ذلك‬ ‫وتأكد‬ ، ‫األخرى‬ ‫اسات‬ ‫الدر‬ ‫بعض‬ ‫مثل‬ ( Mihailovic, 2019, Yamasaki andCarlos, 2014, Atallaoui, ( Bogers et al., 2019, Cao, 2009, Cheng et al., 2016, Lichtenthaler, 2008 ‫في‬ ‫األساسيات‬ ‫من‬ ‫الديناميكية‬ ‫اتهم‬ ‫قدر‬ ‫تطوير‬ ‫يعد‬ ‫حيث‬ ‫النقال‬ ‫الهاتف‬ ‫متعاملي‬ ‫على‬ ‫االمر‬ ‫وينطبق‬ ، ‫خدماتهم‬ ‫في‬ ‫االبتكار‬ ‫إدارة‬ ( Wang et al., 2016, Hahn, 2015, Ghezzi et al., 2015 ‫؛‬ ( Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Senior, 2019, Xiaoren et al., 2014, Xie and Wang, 2020, Fasnacht, 2018 ( Chesbrough, 2011, Johnson et al., 2008, Casadesus and Ricart, 2010, Furseth and Cuthbertson, 2013 Barney and Clark, 2007, Wernerfelt, 1984, Barney, 1991 Bogers et al., 2019, Cao, 2009, Cheng et al., 2016, Lichtenthaler, 2008 ( Lukac et al., 2012, Rohrbeck et al., 2009, Bigliardi et al., 2012, Hahn, 2015, Ghezzi et al., 2016, Zhang and Zeng, 2009 ...
Thesis
Full-text available
ملخص أظهرت العديد من الدراسات فعالية استراتيجيات الابتكار المفتوح حيث ركزت بشكل كبير على آثار الاستعانة بمصادر خارجية في الحصول على المعرفة الابتكارية، التعاون مع مؤسسات الطرف الثالث والتسويق الخارجي للتكنولوجيا؛ كما ركّز العديد من الكتاب على نموذج الاعمال كأداة تحليل لقياس مدى تحقيق الممارسات والآثار المختلفة لفلسفة الابتكار المفتوح في المؤسسات، وتتناول العديد من الادبيات الأنظمة البيئية والقدرات الديناميكية في إطار مناقشة تبني الابتكار المفتوح. من هذا المنطلق تحاول هذه الاطروحة أن تدرس العلاقة بين استراتيجيات الابتكار المفتوح وتحسين الأداء التنافسي، يتم ذلك بتحديد القضايا الإدارية الرئيسية النابعة من ممارسات وتطبيقات الابتكار المفتوح التي تساهم في تحسين الأداء التنافسي، تم الاعتماد على منهج دراسة حالة متعددة، وضحت النتائج وجود تأثير إيجابي لأنشطة الابتكار المفتوح على الأداء التنافسي، كما أظهرت تأثيرات إيجابية لاستراتيجية حجر الزاوية وللأنماط الابتكار المفتوح البيئية على نموذج الاعمال المفتوح، ودور معدّل للقدرات الديناميكية في هذه العلاقة. ABSTRACT Various studies have shown the effectiveness of Open Innovation strategies; basically they focused on the impact of outsourcing innovation knowledge, collaborations with third parties and external commercialization of technology. Other scholars emphasize on Business Model as an analyze tool to achieve different open innovation practices and implications, literature discusses ecosystems and dynamic capabilities in the context of adopting Open Innovation strategies. This study tries to assess the relationship between Open Innovation strategies and the competitive performance. We do that by identifying the managerial issues stemming from Open Innovation and positively enhance competitive performance; Multiple case study methodology is adopted; the results indicates a positive relation between different Open Innovation strategies, and the competitive performance, and also by the open Business Model, The keystone strategy and the open innovation ecosystem modes appear to have a positive impact on the open business model, dynamic capabilities positively moderates the relation.
... In the open innovation domain, the innovation ecosystem concept has attracted increased attention in recent years (Rohrbeck et al., 2009;Radziwon and Bogers, 2019;Randhawa et al., 2021), and has been proposed as an important area of future research . Instead of a firm-centric approach to open innovation (Chesbrough, 2003), which has dominated the open innovation field , an ecosystem perspective highlights the innovation process as involving crossboundary interactions between a diverse set of actors . ...
... Hence, open innovation studies have adopted the innovation ecosystem concept as a lens for analyzing how focal firms develop relations with external but interdependent stakeholders (cf. Rohrbeck et al., 2009;Randhawa et al., 2021;Zhao and Yi, 2021). One valuable aspect of the ecosystem perspective is that it emphasizes not only the optimization of a single firm's business model but also how value is distributed among multiple participants (Ritala et al., 2013). ...
... Second, we build on the emerging, but still underresearched, scholarly area connecting the open innovation and innovation ecosystem domains (e.g., Rohrbeck et al., 2009;Radziwon and Bogers, 2019;Randhawa et al., 2021), by adding an in-depth qualitative case study of BioVentureHub and its engagement with the surrounding innovation ecosystem. With the empirical analysis, we provide in-depth knowledge of how such an open innovation initiative was structured and governed in practice, responding to recent calls from for instance Randhawa et al. (2021) and Bogers et al. (2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper uses process theory as a theoretical lens to analyze AstraZeneca's enactment of an open innovation initiative with the purpose of strengthening the firm's surrounding innovation ecosystem. Based on empirical data collected over 7 years, we develop a process model of open innovation enactment and explain how the initiative gradually transformed while maintaining its guiding principles, which were set from the start. In applying a process perspective, we highlight open innovation initiatives as dynamic and evolutionary – but not deterministic – developments. As such, we provide a comprehensive and more nuanced understanding of not only what open innovation is but also how it becomes. This study also contributes to the innovation ecosystem literature by theorizing how firms orchestrate innovation ecosystems through open innovation initiatives over time.
... Meanwhile, competition in the innovation ecosystem motivates enterprises to effectively use external knowledge resources and respond flexibly to changes in external markets, which arguably has a positive effect on innovation performance (Bengtsson & Kock, 2000;Dorn et al., 2016). Rohrbeck et al. (2009) also indicate that enterprises work cooperatively and competitively to support new products, satisfy customer needs, and eventually incorporate the next round of innovations. Although the importance of innovation ecosystem coopetition for enterprises' innovation has been identified, it is unclear on whether and how innovation ecosystem coopetition affects disruptive green innovation. ...
Article
Disruptive green innovation stands out in an important way to achieve corporate sustainable development. Although the general importance of innovation ecosystem has recently been emphasized, little research has considered the influence of innovation ecosystem coopetition on disruptive green innovation. Combining resource‐based view and resource orchestration theory, this study sheds light on the relationships among innovation ecosystem cooperation and competition, environmental resource orchestration, and disruptive green innovation under the moderating role of big data analytics capability. Using data collected from 295 manufacturing enterprises in China, the results show that both innovation ecosystem cooperation and competition have positive effects on environmental resource orchestration,and that environmental resource orchestration has a positive effect on disruptive green innovation. Furthermore, environmental resource orchestration is found to partially mediate the relationship between innovation ecosystem cooperation and disruptive green innovation, and to fully mediate the relationship between innovation ecosystem competition and disruptive green innovation. Moreover, we find that big data analytics capability has a moderating effect on the relationship between innovation ecosystem cooperation and environmental resource orchestration, whereas it does not moderate the relationship between innovation ecosystem competition and environmental resource orchestration. This study opens avenues for understanding the relationship between innovation ecosystem coopetition and disruptive green innovation, which enriches literature on both innovation ecosystem and green innovation. Likewise, this study has important implications for practitioners who attempt to promote market disruption and sustainable development with the help of ecosystems.
... Regional innovation ecosystems are built using several intermediary mechanisms or space-based organisations, such as science parks and incubators, creating a vital nurturing environment to support new firms (Stam, 2015). Several studies have analysed knowledge ecosystems and how to organise and coordinate these systems (Clarysse et al., 2014;Järvi et al., 2018;Leten et al., 2013;Ritala et al., 2013;Rohrbeck et al., 2009;Still et al., 2014). Others have focused on the role of firms (Leten et al., 2013;Lingens et al., 2021;Ritala et al., 2013;Rohrbeck et al., 2009). ...
... Several studies have analysed knowledge ecosystems and how to organise and coordinate these systems (Clarysse et al., 2014;Järvi et al., 2018;Leten et al., 2013;Ritala et al., 2013;Rohrbeck et al., 2009;Still et al., 2014). Others have focused on the role of firms (Leten et al., 2013;Lingens et al., 2021;Ritala et al., 2013;Rohrbeck et al., 2009). In knowledge ecosystems, stakeholders such as universities, public and private research institutions, and industrial firms must collaborate (Clarysse et al., 2014;Valkokari, 2015;van der Borgh et al., 2012). ...
Article
Full-text available
Large-scale research infrastructures (RIs), such as MAX IV and European Spallation Source (ESS) in Lund, Sweden, are considered critical for advancing science and addressing social challenges. These research facilities are central to research, innovation, and education; in playing a key role in developing and disseminating knowledge and technology. In this study, we develop a conceptual framework of a knowledge ecosystem for large-scale RIs. The study is explorative, with primary data from interviews with key informants from different stakeholders in academia, industry, and policy. Secondary data were obtained from reports from national agencies that develop and operate research facilities and from industrial and regional governmental reports, internal reports, newsletters, and information from the facilities’ websites. We find that academia, industry, and policy, together with four themes, have an effect on the value proposition of these facilities, on geographical distances (nodes), catalysts, platforms, and hubs. Therefore, they will affect the structure and design of a knowledge ecosystem. Our framework explains knowledge ecosystem structure and design.
... Since its original conception in 2003, the definition of open innovation has been broadened to include distributed innovation across organizational boundaries, and, today, several closely aligned research streams exist, such as Open Innovation in Science [95], or Open Collaborative Innovation including Open Source Innovation [96] and Community Innovation [97]. The field has many crosslinkages to external knowledge search and ecosystem research [33], [98]- [100]. Accordingly, the field offers several beneficial insights that interact with strategic foresight, for example, how to leverage external sources and networks for innovation, and identify promising inbound and outbound knowledge flows [101]- [103]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Strategic foresight activities in both research and practice aim to identify superior courses of action in situations of future uncertainty and change. While the field has existed for more than 70 years and has its own concepts and methodologies, over time it has incorporated and used many of the theories and methods found in cognate fields, particularly in strategy and innovation management. The reverse is also true as these various areas of study have begun to adopt the frameworks of a maturing foresight field. However, these interfaces are frequently encapsulated and restrained by paradigmatic rigidity. The objective of this article is to raise awareness and build bridges across these parallel but often unconnected fields of research endeavor. In particular, we review traces of foresight in cognate literatures and highlight "forward-looking search" as a promising way to formulate a joint conversation. The papers of the IEEE-TEMS special issue on foresight in strategy and innovation management are introduced, with their particular contributions that echo our call to build bridges across closely associated fields.
... Prior innovation ecosystem studies have focused on various industries: design in Great Britain (Sunley et al. 2008), telecommunications in Germany (Rohrbeck et al. 2009), healthcare in the US (Kapoor and Lee, 2013), biofuel in the US (Weil et al. 2014), high-tech manufacturing in China Xu et al. 2018), aerospace in the US (Mazzucato and Robinson 2018), and the global jewellery industry (Dąbrowska et al. 2019). We follow calls to investigate industries other than high-tech manufacturing (Kapoor and Furr 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
Burgeoning research on innovation ecosystems offers a variety of conceptual approaches. Recent systematic literature reviews and syntheses provide a rich, diverse, but somehow abstract view of IEs. Our study advances the literature by tak- ing the perspective of those involved in IEs. We aim to identify how various actors contribute to co-innovation in innovation ecosystems. In order to do so, our aim is to establish the various types of actors (who?), the distinct roles (what?), the different stages (when?), and the diverse engagement in co-innovation processes (how?). The study investigates the Polish Gaming Innovation Ecosystem as a globally successful example of a knowledge-intensive and highly creative innovation ecosystem. Data was collected over 3 years (between 2015 and 2017), in three waves of interviews (38) and non-participatory observations (5). We find that Gaming Innovation Eco- system participants identify a total of 12 types of collective actors, 9 types of indi- vidual actors, and 1 community of individuals. Furthermore, we find four distinctive roles that actors may play in the co-creation processes, that is: direct value creation, supporting value creation, encouraging entrepreneurship, and leadership. Finally, we structure the co-innovation process into five stages: co-discovery, co-development, co-deployment, co-delivery and co-dissemination. We identify the diverse scope and varied intensity of actors’ engagement, depending on the co-innovation phase, as perceived by our informants.
... This collaborative bonding is suggested to create transformation in an economy, which will facilitate the industry in improving its knowledge, skills, technology, dynamism and rapid transformation in a globally competitive environment (Henderson et al., 1998;Wang et al., 2015). It will contribute to boosting customer satisfaction (Frasquet et al., 2012) and profitability (Rohrbeck et al., 2009) and exclude the size out of the equation (Goel et al., 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
Academia-industry collaboration has an essential role in enhancing the level of innovation in university and industry and encouraging economic development. It has been cited useful many learning models like organizational learning and transformational learning. However, previous studies lacked empirical quantitative analysis of collaboration determining factors. This study explores the econometric investigation of how different business, institutional and economic factors explain university-industry collaboration at a national level for the 139 countries between 2007 and 2018. Feasible generalized least square method has been used to explore this panel data analysis, whereby the effects of variables are different for different income groups. The estimation outcomes will provide strategic policy roadmap in developing a multisectoral collaborative environment.
... The concept of open business models is related to the dynamics of open innovation. However, for the process of developing open innovation in an enterprise to be successful and achieve the assumed results, it is particularly important to proper alignment the currently used business model, to make a comprehensive review of all phases of commercialization of product or service, take into account the non-linearity of the innovation process, define what the innovation will mean for the enterprise, and define limits and moderators the innovation process in the enterprise [52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The shared mobility services market is growing and changing very rapidly. Many novelties are introduced to the systems, ranging from improvements to the services already offered to services referred to as innovative. Since the following years are to bring significant development of mobility as a service (MaaS) systems, data sharing, and cooperation on the mobility market, the article is dedicated to check whether the current business models of the industry are ready for the open innovations implementations. The article aimed to analyze the business models of shared mobility systems along with their presentation in the form of CANVAS models and to investigate whether the models contain aspects of open innovation. Moreover, the article presents its own value-added open business model prepared for the whole shared mobility market. The paper also identifies a set of open innovations that can be implemented by all types of shared mobility operators. It proposed the basis that operators can use when developing their own open business models. The developed research is an original contribution to filling the research gap concerning the approach to open innovation by operators of all types of shared mobility services available on the market. The results show that car-sharing service providers are the biggest opponents of open innovation. On the other hand, the most ‘open’ systems are bike-sharing services. The conducted research may support operators in the process of transforming their businesses into more accessible for users. It also helps to develop the open innovation concept to create more sustainable shared mobility systems along the lines of collaborative economy assumptions.