Keywords
entrepreneurship ecosystem
innovation ecosystem
ecosystem orchestration
open innovation
How to Cite
Abstract
Purpose – This study examines the innovation trajectories adopted by a leading organisation and ecosystem orchestrator in order to structure and enable future innovations.
Theoretical framework – Orchestration theory (network and resource perspectives), ecosystem lenses (knowledge, entrepreneurship and innovation) and open innovation mechanisms explain how a focal incumbent converts science into market value.
Design/methodology/approach – A qualitative single-case study of the largest private healthcare organization in Latin America was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were conducted iteratively with executives, managers and stakeholders, resulting in a conceptual framework for ecosystem orchestration.
Findings – The study reveals that the organisation acts as an orchestrator, bridging the gap between research and market-driven innovations. Inbound and outbound open innovation play a crucial role in strategic collaborations. Infrastructure, intellectual property and technology transfer help to mitigate uncertainties and support scalability.
Practical and social implications of the research – We contribute to the understanding of ecosystem orchestration by integrating knowledge, entrepreneurship and innovation. Established organizations can catalyse innovation through open innovation models. The practical contributions for organisations looking to integrate open innovation models include fostering cross-sector collaboration, supporting intrapreneurs, optimising knowledge flow, mitigating risks and accelerating technology commercialisation. As social contributions accelerate the science-to-solution process in healthcare, they improve outcomes and system efficiency.
Originality/value – This study integrates orchestration and ecosystem perspectives to demonstrate how incumbents can catalyse innovation via inbound and outbound open innovation. It offers a transferable framework for managing the transition from research to market.
References
Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable Construct for Strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451
Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value Creation in Innovation Ecosystems: How the structure of Technological Interdependence affects firm performance in new Technology Generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), (May 2008), 306–333. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.821
Autio, E., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2022). Researching ecosystems in innovation contexts. Innovation and Management Review, 19(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-08-2021-0151
Baik, K., Kim, K. Y., & Patel, P. C. (2019). The internal ecosystem of high performance work system and employee service-providing capability: A contingency approach for servitizing firms. Journal of Business Research, 104, 402–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.028
Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43(7), 1164–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.014
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating Innovation Networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669.
Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11(3), 147–162.
El Houari, F., & Fakhreddine, M. O. I. (2024). Determinants of knowledge transfer activities among university researchers: a systematic review. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-03-2024-0092
Foss, N., & Klein, P. (2012). Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139021173
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
Gomes, L. A. de V., Flechas, A., Facin, A. L. F., Borini, F. M., Stefani, B., & Leal, L. F. (2024). Entrepreneurial judgment governance adaptation for digital transformation in established firms. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 18(1), 200–225. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1490
Harima, A., Harima, J., & Freiling, J. (2024). Ecosystem Orchestration: Unpacking the Leadership Capabilities of Anchor Organizations in Nascent Entrepreneurial Ecosystems. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 48(6), 1404–1450. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587241241824
Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., & Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Herzog, S., Mason, C., & Hruskova, M. (2024). The role of large corporations in entrepreneurial ecosystems–a case study of Munich. European Planning Studies, Early access, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2023.2301295
Järvi, K., Almpanopoulou, A., & Ritala, P. (2018). Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms. Research Policy, 47(8), 1523–1537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.05.007
Khanna, T. (2022). Science-based Entrepreneurship in India: A Policy Glass (as yet) Quarter-Full. India Policy Forum, 19(1), 1–53.
Marinelli, L., Bartoloni, S., Costa, A., & Pascucci, F. (2023). Exploring the relationship between entrepreneurial ecosystem inputs and outcomes: the role of digital technology adoption. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 635–654. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2023-0119
Miller, K., McAdam, R., Moffett, S., Alexander, A., & Puthusserry, P. (2016). Knowledge transfer in university quadruple helix ecosystems: An absorptive capacity perspective. R and D Management, 46(2), 383–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12182
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Vol. 1). Harvard University Press.
Odei, M. A., & Novak, P. (2024). Technological Innovation Outcomes: Does the Internal Ecosystem Play a Key Role? Business Perspectives and Research, 12(4), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1177/22785337221107777
Rådberg, K. K., & Löfsten, H. (2023). Developing a knowledge ecosystem for large-scale research infrastructure. Journal of Technology Transfer, 48(1), 441–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09945-x
Reypens, C., Lievens, A., & Blazevic, V. (2021). Hybrid Orchestration in Multi-stakeholder Innovation Networks: Practices of mobilizing multiple, diverse stakeholders across organizational boundaries. Organization Studies, 42(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619868268
Ritala, P., Agouridas, V., Assimakopoulos, D., & Gies, O. (2013). Value creation and capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: a comparative case study. Int. J. Technology Management, 63(3/4), 244–267.
Scaringella, L., & Radziwon, A. (2018). Innovation, entrepreneurial, knowledge, and business ecosystems: Old wine in new bottles? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 59–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.023
Silva, J. P. N., & Grützmann, A. (2023). The evolution of the disruptive ecosystem: a framework integrating disruption, ecosystems, and business models. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(5), 1255–1270. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejim-07-2021-0368
Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Gilbert, B. A. (2011). Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Em Journal of Management (Vol. 37, Number 5, p. 1390–1412). https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310385695
Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484
Tabas, A. M., Nätti, S., & Komulainen, H. (2023). Orchestrating in the entrepreneurial ecosystem – orchestrator roles and role-specific capabilities in the regional health technology ecosystem. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 38(1), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-05-2021-0257
Valkokari, K. (2015). Business, Innovation, and Knowledge Ecosystems: How They Differ and How to Survive and Thrive within Them. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(8), 17–24. www.timreview.ca
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods. Em Book (4th ed, Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.
If a paper is approved for publication, its copyright has to be transferred by the author(s) to the Review of Business Management – RBGN.
Accordingly, authors are REQUIRED to send RBGN a duly completed and signed Copyright Transfer Form. Please refer to the following template: [Copyright Transfer]
The conditions set out by the Copyright Transfer Form state that the Review of Business Management – RBGN owns, free of charge and permanently, the copyright of the papers it publishes. Although the authors are required to sign the Copyright Transfer Form, RBGN allows authors to hold and use their own copyright without restrictions.
The texts published by RBGN are the sole responsibility of their authors.
The review has adopted the CC-BY Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 allowing redistribution and reuse of papers on condition that the authorship is properly credited.