The Innovation Ecosystem as a Source of Value Creation
A Value Creation Lever for Open Innovation
Odile de Saint Julien
First published 2022 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
ISTE Ltd
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
27-37 St George’s Road 111 River Street London SW19 4EU Hoboken, NJ 07030
UK USA
www.iste.co.uk
www.wiley.com
© ISTE Ltd 2022
The rights of Odile de Saint Julien to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022936852
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 978-1-78630-574-9
1.4.5.
1.5.
2.2.3.
2.2.5. The roles of Valkokari’s three ecosystems in
2.3. The innovation process: from discovery to innovation
2.3.1. Discovery, invention, innovation: what are the differences?
2.3.2. Definition of the innovation
2.3.3. The innovation process in the innovation ecosystem
2.4. Ecosystems and innovation
2.4.1. Certain phases of the innovation process
2.4.2. Example 1: “graphene” innovation process
2.4.3. Example 2: “carbyne” innovation process
2.4.4. The links between innovation
2.5.
Chapter 3. Modeling: Combination of Three Ecosystems
3.1.
3.2.1. Example 1: from the atom to the
3.2.2. Example 2: from carbon atoms to carbyne
3.3.
3.4. Foundations of innovation ecosystem
3.4.1. The basis of the modeling: the combination of the three ecosystems ..................................
3.4.2. Affiliation: birth of the iterative network
3.4.3. Transfers: the birth of the integrated value chain
3.5. Modeling the “graphene” innovation ecosystem
3.5.1. “Graphene” innovation ecosystem, its iterative network and its integrated value chain .............................
3.5.2. The roles of the iterative network and the integrated value chain......................................
3.6. Modeling the “carbyne” innovation ecosystem
3.6.1. “Carbyne” innovation ecosystem, its iterative network and its integrated value chain ...........................
3.6.2. The roles of the iterative network and the integrated value chain......................................
3.7.
Chapter 4. The Actors of the Innovation
4.1.
4.2. The actors of the
4.2.1. Four profiles of actors: the “contrib-actors”
4.2.3. The roles of the actors
4.3. Activities of actors in the
4.3.1.
4.3.3.
4.3.4.
4.4. Coexistence
4.4.1.
5.1.
5.2.
5.2.1.
5.2.2.
5.2.3. Complementary capacities:
5.3. Pool and reciprocal interdependencies
5.3.1. The perception of interdependence
5.3.2. Creation of pool interdependence
5.3.3. Creation of reciprocal interdependencies
5.3.4. A combination of pool and reciprocal interdependencies
5.4. Towards a search for coherence
5.5.
Chapter 6. The Iterative Network: Collaboration and Typology
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Networks and ecosystems: a brief overview
6.3. The network: an anchor for collaboration
6.3.1. Definition of collaboration
6.3.2. Expectations of collaboration
6.3.3. Barriers to collaboration
6.4. “Small worlds” and interdependencies
6.4.1. The emergence of “small worlds”
6.4.2. Interdependencies and collaboration...................
6.5. Typology of collaborations...........................
6.5.1. The three types of collaborations
6.5.2. Strong collaboration: pool and reciprocal combination........
6.5.3. Medium collaboration: pool and reciprocal articulation
6.5.4. Weak collaboration: asymmetry between pool and reciprocal
6.6. The innovation ecosystem network: definition and criteria
6.6.1. Definition of the iterative network of the innovation
6.6.2. The “small-world” actors of the network
6.6.3. Dimensions of the iterative
6.6.4.
6.7.
7.2. Traditional value chain, focal
7.2.1.
7.2.2.
7.3. Integrated value chain: an anchoring in knowledge
7.3.1. Definitions of the knowledge value chain
7.3.2. The KVC: a sequence of cognitive tasks
7.3.3. The KVC: a chain of processes
7.3.4. Identification of the knowledge processes of the
7.4. Transfer
7.4.1.
7.4.2.
7.4.3.
7.5. The integrated value chain of the innovation ecosystem
7.5.1. A combination of assets and knowledge
7.5.2. The objectives of transfers in the integrated value chain
7.5.3.
7.5.4.
7.6.
Chapter 8.
8.1.
8.2.
8.2.1.
8.2.2.
8.3.
8.4.
8.4.1.
8.4.2.
8.4.3.
8.5.
Chapter 9. Ecosystems
9.1.
9.2.
9.2.2.
9.2.3.
9.3. Creating
9.3.1.
9.3.2.
9.4.
9.4.1.
9.4.2.
9.4.3.
9.5. A combination of decontextualization and recontextualization of
9.5.1. Decontextualization of
9.5.2.
9.6.
Introduction
In an ecosystem, you can always intervene and change something but there’s no way of knowing what all the downstream effects will be or how they might affect the environment. Richard Lewontin, DEFI-Écologique, undated
Borrowed from biology, the term ecosystem refers to a grouping of individuals and organizations that interact in dependent relationships to create innovations [MOO 96]. The actors are interconnected in the form of a network [BAS 09], linked to a large enterprise [IAN 04] or connected to each other via a digital platform [CEC 12].
Ecosystems have been present in the economy and management for decades, and in recent years they have been developing rapidly [JAC 18]. Well adapted to the imperatives of innovation and growth [GUI 17], they are of major interest to innovation actors and researchers. Economic actors, such as Nicolas Dufourcq, CEO of Bpifrance, or Jean-Lou Chameau, former president of CalTech, appreciate ecosystems for their organizational flexibility and the possible collaborations between economic actors, public agents and the territory [LEA 15].
Faced with this enthusiasm, work on meta-organizations, such as ecosystems, is approached through different concepts [GUL 12], leading to a diversity of definitions that prevents any consensus among researchers [OH 16]. In this logic, researchers study different aspects of ecosystems
according to their field of research. However, two types of ecosystems dominate the literature: business ecosystems and innovation ecosystems.
The most studied is the business ecosystem. Analyses focus on the individual firm and its economic environment [TEE 07] in a logic of seeking resources to exploit in order to create customer value [APP 17]. The innovation ecosystem is concentrated on a value proposition driven by the focal firm of the business ecosystem, around which companies and start-ups from various fields of activity are rounded up [IAN 04]. Its main function is to develop a specific innovation [CLA 14] by integrating new technologies, captured from research institutes, from the crowd and from users via digital platforms.
The focal firm manages the mobility of knowledge, the design and appropriation of innovation, and the stability of the network [DHA 06]. For example, for Venkatraman and Lee [VEN 04], then Iyer and colleagues [IYE 06], the ecosystem is a network whose core is the focal firm. Focused on the co-creation of value, through products and services, for customers and markets, exploitation of resources and knowledge is privileged over exploration of new knowledge. This knowledge comes from scientific or technological ecosystems. In this context, strategies, mostly commercial, are driven by the business ecosystem. It is a source of competitive advantage for companies at an individual level [ADN 12].
Business and innovation ecosystems have the same objective: to create value and economic profitability [BEN 18] for the focal firm and its partners [SMI 13]. The ecosystem is defined as a “community of organizations, institutions, and individuals that impact the enterprise and the enterprise’s customers and supplies” [TEE 07]. The ecosystem represents an economic community of actors in interaction who influence each other through their activities [ADN 10].
Here, the studies focus on the spillover effects of these activities in terms of co-creation of innovation [MAC 13], knowledge transfer [ZAH 12], growth [TEE 14], resource and risk sharing [BEN 18] and access to markets [CLA 14]. From this point of view, only those relationships that favor the increase of this economic performance are studied [WEB 15]. Strategic actions performed by the actors are oriented towards competitive advantage [VAL 15].
Here, only innovations that are economically profitable in the market are developed. This strategic vision limits innovation to improvements of existing products or services through additional features. In an attempt to go beyond the boundaries of incremental innovation, studies of innovation ecosystems are oriented towards networks and research into their impact on the performance of innovation for the focal firm [SHA 20]. Attention is then directed towards focal innovation, on the components and additional features that support it [JAC 18]. New definitions of ecosystems are emerging, such as that of Adner, who defines an ecosystem as “the collaborative arrangements through which firms combine their individual offerings into a coherent, customer-facing solution” [ADN 06].
The emphasis is on the design of a basic product of the Minimum Viable Product1 type and its functionalities. The services associated with it provide strong added value for end users [ADN 12]. Innovation ecosystems present a broad perspective of value creation [PAP 17], where collaboration and cooperation [DAI 17] are key success factors for actors in the ecosystem [SCH 20].
Work is intensifying on the coordination of actors and on the way they interact to create and disseminate innovations capable of optimally satisfying the end customer [KAP 17]. In this context, Adner developed his definition of the ecosystem and gave it a strategic dimension: “the alignment structure of the multilateral set of partners that need to interact in order for a focal value proposition to materialize” [ADN 17]. For the author, the alignment structure is “the extent to which there is mutual agreement among the members regarding positions and flows, ‘with the objective to secure its role’ in a competitive ecosystem” [ADN 17].
In the wake of Adner, the work of Jacobides and colleagues features a holistic vision. The authors focus on the complementarities of the different actors as well as on their nature and coordination [JAC 18]. However, these notions are little studied in ecosystems. The work of Adner [ADN 17] and Jacobides and colleagues [JAC 18] is complementary: the authors consider the creation of value as inherent to the actors in the ecosystem. Therefore, the combination of resources and skills has an impact on the interrelationships between actors and on the growth of the ecosystem itself.
1 The term “minimum viable product” was developed in 2001 by Robinson, CEO of SyncDev Incorporated: www.syncdev.com/minimum-viable-product/.
Here, the ecosystem supports the improvement of innovation and its outcomes through the clustering of heterogeneous actors and the sharing of resources and core competencies via digital platforms [BAL 17]. Network effects and cooperation allow for increased access to products, services and end customers. If coordination is well orchestrated, long-term ecosystem growth is possible through sustained productivity and stability [ISC 13].
In parallel with this work, in the tradition of Clarysse and colleagues [CLA 14], who highlighted the presence of three ecosystems of differing natures, Valkokari shows the importance of the roles played by these three interacting ecosystems in innovation [VAL 15]: the business ecosystem is at the heart of the development of innovation. It can be service or industrial, depending on the value proposition of the focal firm. For the author, the business ecosystem focuses on the creation of value for the market. In this context, large companies are perceived as key partners. The expected results are economic and support competitive advantage. The innovation ecosystem is dependent on the business ecosystem. It appears as an integrating mechanism between the exploration of new knowledge and its exploitation for value creation in the business ecosystem. For the author, innovation decision-makers, local intermediaries, innovation brokers and funding agencies are the key players in the innovation ecosystem. Finally, the knowledge ecosystem focuses on the creation of new knowledge that can be integrated by the innovation ecosystem into the business ecosystem where it can be exploited for innovation.
R&D centers and technological entrepreneurs play a central role in the knowledge ecosystem. Entrepreneurs are seen as an “alternative mode of exploring new activities” [FER 17]. Valkokari highlights the recursive relationships that are created between the three ecosystems, the multidimensional nature of the interactions and interdependencies between actors. She places great emphasis on the knowledge borne by the actors and the knowledge they develop through innovation.
However, as in most of the work on ecosystems, there remains a lack of consensus on the definition of the innovation ecosystem. Assimilated to the business ecosystem, most work remains focused on the focal firm and its digital platform. However, some actors generate disruptive innovations without being orchestrated by a focal firm.
Many works focus on performance and customer-oriented value creation [APP 17] rather than on the mechanisms of knowledge creation and transfer. The ownership of innovation by each specific “community” of actors –scientists, technologists and business people – is not really addressed. Similarly, the in-depth role of the network in the innovation ecosystem, its extension and stability are not discussed, with the exception of the work of Pellinen and colleagues [PEL 12] or Azzam and colleagues [AZZ 17].
Other studies are interested in the co-evolution of actors’ innovative capacities. However, few studies have reported on how they adapt and create interdependencies within the ecosystem [JAC 18]. While relationships and interdependencies have been extensively studied, the innovation process, which takes innovation from discovery to market, is not particularly addressed in innovation ecosystems. Similarly, the transfer of results, material assets and knowledge from one ecosystem to another, and the creation of value through strategies developed and implemented by these actors, have not been studied in depth.
The aim of this book is to make a modest contribution to these various shortcomings through nine chapters that can be read separately or in combination.
Chapter 1 defines the innovation ecosystem in terms of the nature of the actors who “inhabit” it [MUE 13] through four key examples.
Chapter 2 focuses on the evolution of the innovation ecosystem and the combination of the three ecosystems – scientific, technological and commercial – that compose it.
Chapter 3 presents a modeling of the innovation ecosystem. It shows the relationships between the three ecosystems and its articulations via the iterative network, the integrated value chain and the deployment of the innovation process.
Chapter 4 is devoted to the actors of the innovation ecosystem, their roles, their activities and the links they create to develop innovation.
Chapter 5 relates to the search for coherence between the situations of design and actors’ capacities. It deals with the construction of pool and reciprocal interdependencies that they develop to innovate.
Chapter 6 focuses on the emergence of the iterative network anchored in collaboration. It shows how actors overcome the barriers of collaboration to create “small worlds” that will open up a typology of collaborations orchestrated by pooling and reciprocal interdependencies. This chapter discusses the dimensions and extension of the iterative network within the innovation ecosystem.
Chapter 7 studies the transfers of material assets and knowledge that take place within the innovation ecosystem and between the three ecosystems via an integrated value chain. This chain is anchored in the knowledge borne and developed by the various actors in the innovation ecosystem. It highlights the transfer processes, both in terms of content and context, at work in the innovation ecosystem, as well as the roles of the actors in this integrated value chain.
Chapter 8 returns to innovation and the challenges that actors face in terms of orientation and strategic choices.
Chapter 9 discusses the balancing act between opportunism and reciprocity. It shows the limits of the focal firm and the diversity of value creation fostered by collaboration. It shows how this value creation is articulated between decontextualization of knowledge and its recontextualization in order to generate value shared by all the actors of the innovation ecosystem.
Innovation Ecosystem: Definitions
The mysteries of the trade become no mysteries; but are as it were in the air
Alfred
Marshall, Principles of Economics, Macmillan, London, 1920
1.1. Introduction
The innovation ecosystem is becoming a feature of the literature of practitioners and researchers. Sometimes equated with the innovation cluster or business ecosystem, definitions proliferate. They are difficult to reconcile because the concept is used in many contexts [AUT 14] without a consensus between researchers and practitioners on its definition [OH 16]. The purpose of this chapter is to present innovation and then the conceptual definitions of three types of ecosystems, and then to refine the understanding of the innovation ecosystem through four concrete examples.
The characteristics of the innovation ecosystem, extracted from these four examples, are analyzed in a second section to define what an innovation ecosystem is and its major attributes. The strengths, weaknesses and boundaries of the innovation ecosystem conclude this chapter.
1.2. Definitions of innovation
Considered for several decades as the key to the economic growth of nations and companies, innovation plays a central role in value creation and
The Innovation Ecosystem as a Source of Value Creation: A Value Creation Lever for Open Innovation, First Edition. Odile de Saint Julien © ISTE Ltd 2022. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2 The Innovation Ecosystem as a Source of
competitive advantage. The latter depends on the organization’s ability to create more value than its competitors [POR 85]. Increases in value creation depend, in turn, on the organization’s ability to innovate successfully [ADN 06].
Over time, the definition of innovation introduced by Schumpeter in 1934 has developed considerably [KHA 15] and takes on different definitions depending on the discipline. For the majority of authors, innovation is an engine of growth: “Innovation is widely considered as the life blood of corporate survival and growth” [ZAH 94].
In a broader sense, innovation encompasses such elements as products, services, organizational structure, strategic plans and technologies:
Innovation is conceived as a means of changing an organization, either as a response to changes in the external environment or as a pre-emptive action to influence the environment. Hence, innovation is here broadly defined to encompass a range of types, including new product or service, new process technology, new organization structure or administrative systems, or new plans or program pertaining to organization members [DAM 98].
For some authors, innovation is a positive change process for organizations:
Innovation represents the core renewal process in any organization. Unless it changes what it offers the world and the way in which it creates and delivers those offerings, it risks its survival and growth prospects [BES 05].
For others, innovation is at the heart of knowledge:
Innovation is the creation of new knowledge and ideas to facilitate new business outcomes, aimed at improving internal business processes and structures and to create market driven products and services. Innovation encompasses both radical and incremental innovation [PLE 07].
Whatever the definition of innovation, in terms of the discipline of these authors, all agree that:
Innovations result from a complex, interactive, and interdependent process involving multiple actors and influences within dynamic systems, rather than arising exclusively from the internal research and development activities of commercial enterprises [PEL 16].
The ability to generate innovations, for society, individuals and companies alike, is crucial for the improvement of everyone’s well-being and for the growth of both the nation and the organizations. However, innovation cannot be improvised. To innovate, actors mobilize, associate, group, cooperate and collaborate in different forms, such as innovation clusters, business ecosystems or innovation ecosystems, to generate continuous innovation, more quickly, in a less costly and less risky manner.
1.3. Innovation clusters, business ecosystems, innovation ecosystems: what are the differences?
1.3.1. The innovation cluster: in favor of continuous innovation
Innovation clusters are a specific form of innovation ecosystem [POR 09]. They are defined as private and public agglomerations of companies, universities and institutions geographically and economically located in a territory [SMO 17]. The innovation cluster is made up of a group of heterogeneous actors, anchored in a given territory, who work in a specific or related sector of activity and who share the same field of competence with a view to producing related or complementary goods [DAI 11].
Interactive network collaboration is formalized in pairs between these three types of actors. These interactions, known as “triple helix” interactions [ETZ 00], allow for unique economic effects resulting from collaborative synergies that act upon the dynamics and sustainability of productivity through continuous innovation of goods and services [POR 90].
The actors, members of the cluster, engage in price competition and product differentiation. They are thus in competition. They may cooperate, for example, in the acquisition of supplies or in R&D. Competition policy is imposed as a unified framework that defines and constrains innovation
[RAV 20]. External actors, such as universities, bring knowledge of new technologies to the cluster. Business associations create a favorable business environment for the diffusion of innovations.
Interrelationships between the different actors of the cluster are vertical, such as vendor–buyer relationships. They are also horizontal, such as relationships between providers of similar services or users of similar technologies. These interrelationships encompass economic and social relations. Territoriality favors geographical proximity, which in turn favors communication and value creation [GUI 17].
Continuous co-creation of innovations and their dissemination are supported. This cluster is qualified as an innovation ecosystem because the grouping of companies within it becomes a self-managed and self-sufficient network that generates strong synergies [NAP 14]. Shaped by partners with varied profiles, free to join or leave the network, the cluster is considered the most practical model of formalized innovation ecosystem to implement [MAR 11].
Like an innovation ecosystem, the members of a cluster combine and recombine their resources and skills with agility. These reconfigurations, which are permanent, help them to adapt to markets and allow the deployment of large-scale, high-risk collective innovation projects [HUH 11]. These clusters function as growth poles for the regions in which they are located [DEL 14]. In mature clusters, made up of actors deeply rooted in the network, it is not uncommon for some key companies to reinvest money in new innovation projects led by the cluster [LIN 13].
1.3.2. The business ecosystem: an anchor in the value proposition
Moore defines the business ecosystem as “an economic community supported by a foundation of interacting organizations and individuals – the organisms of the business world” [MOO 96].
Studies on business ecosystems focus on building competitive advantage for companies [ADN 12]. The focus is on collaborations between customers and suppliers [IAN 04]. Analyses focus on the focal firm and the partner enterprise specialized in a field of activity [SMI 13].
The business ecosystem integrates different levels of commitment of the partner actors to the core business. The nucleus of the ecosystem, the core business1 [MOO 96], is formed by the focal firm, around which suppliers, distributors and customers gravitate.
The author defines the focal firm as “an ecosystem leader which brings value to the community by engaging members to act with a shared vision to adapt their investments and find mutually supportive roles” [MOO 93].
Unlike the innovation cluster, the business ecosystem is a grouping of heterogeneous actors from various sectors of activity [HEI 12]. They develop new collaborative practices to promote and bring out new forms of innovation [DAI 17], mainly customer-oriented solutions2 [APP 17]. This customer-oriented strategy means that, in many cases, the business ecosystem boils down to a strategic partnership between a focal firm and complementary asset providers [VAL 15]. In this approach, on the model of business networks, the business ecosystem is a grouping of companies specializing in different fields of activity that simultaneously creates and captures value for the focal firm, partners and customers by combining their diversified resources.
Given the diversity of the partners, the business ecosystem can develop around several focal firms. Each will have a determining influence on the process of co-evolution of the partner enterprises [DAI 11]. The actors share a “common destiny” [IAN 04] where the individual performance of the actors, enrolled in the ecosystem, is dependent on the overall performance of the business ecosystem. However, partner enterprises do not systematically follow cooperative strategies alone: “They must maintain their ability to alternate between collective and competitive strategies [ ] putting in place and maintaining a particular strategy can only stabilize the company’s environment for a very limited period of time” [PEL 05].
This leads the actors in the business ecosystem to combine cooperative and competitive strategies within the ecosystem in order to, by example, occupy the place of a focal firm [MIR 12]. Teece considers that in building a perennial competitive advantage, the dynamic capacities of the actors are affected [TEE 07]. The author invites actors to be vigilant in terms of
1 Main activity.
2 Customer-oriented solution: solution adapted to the needs and expectations of the customer.
monitoring the ecosystem so that it can react with agility and adapt to changes in the environment.
To increase this monitoring and coordination of actors, focal firms rely on digital platforms [DAI 11]. The challenge of these platforms is to share resources and skills between all the actors in the ecosystem. As we will see in Chapter 4, they participate in the creation and capture of value. The disparity of actors, a shared destiny [IAN 04], the presence of one or more focal companies, a common objective, shareable resources and skills, and “coopetition” strategies mean that these ecosystems represent strong economic and territorial issues [GER 12]. Business ecosystems have a strong impact at both the micro and macro levels. They are essential actors in sustainable economic development [PIL 14].
1.3.3. The innovation ecosystem: co-creation for innovation
In an era of nonlinear innovation processes and exponential development of digitalization [BAL 17], innovation becomes open [CHE 14]. It favors co-creation through collaborative strategies [SMO 17].
Since 2000, the concept of co-creation has been gaining momentum. It focuses on two major axes: the co-production of value and use value [ROS 09]:
– in terms of use value, co-creation is a form of collaborative creativity [ROS 09];
– in terms of co-production of value, the concept is associated with business strategies where the interactive relationships between value producers and value users are studied [SMO 17].
Here, value co-creation is understood as “an active, creative and social process based on collaboration between producers and users, which is initiated by the firm to generate value for customers and compete to pass others in the category” [ROS 09]. From a business perspective, users benefit from increased customization. Companies strengthen their competitive advantage by transforming the knowledge of these users into value. The concept of co-creation is used to study the frequency and quality of relationships between the organization and its customers or between the
focal firm and its partners to understand how knowledge is created, shared and transferred from one entity to another [RAN 16].
The innovation ecosystem evolves “as networks of sustainable linkages between individuals and organizations, which emerge from a shared vision of desired transformation and provide an economic context to catalyze innovation and growth” [RUS 15]. According to this definition, innovation ecosystems are oriented towards the co-creation of innovation, which is then possible if the context is favorable to its development [WES 05].
Innovation ecosystems are places of co-creation of value [ADN 17] involving a wide variety of actors. It is likened to a network of interconnected organizations. The network creates a context conducive to innovation. It integrates both production actors and users. The objectives are based on the creation and appropriation, by the actors, of the value generated by the innovation [AUT 14].
The ecosystem is organized around a value proposition driven by the focal firm [ADN 10]. To co-create innovation, the actors are interconnected to a shared digital platform [CUS 02] developed by the focal firm. These actors actively participate in the development of the use of the innovation in order to make it their own. This inclusion of actors in the use of innovation differentiates the innovation ecosystem from other ecosystems centered on networks such as clusters or industrial networks, both of which are focused on production [GAW 08].
The innovation ecosystem covers upstream (production) and downstream (use) activities. This holistic vision is consistent with the original biological meaning of the term ecosystem [MOO 96]. It integrates both horizontal and vertical relationships that distinguish it from the constructions of the industrial value chain or the supply chain [IAN 04]. Here, it contains a set of collaborative and cooperative arrangements [DAI 17]. The actors combine product/service offerings into a coherent, end-user-oriented solution [APP 17]. They co-create value that no single actor could generate alone [ADN 06]. The concept of the value chain is thus extended to that of the innovation ecosystem. It includes any actor contributing to the value proposition [IAN 04].
Definition
Key actors
Collaboration/strategy
Cluster Business ecosystem
Groupings of actors geographically and economically located in a given territory
Specific or related sector of activity
Self-managed, self-sufficient network
Production of related or complementary goods
Private companies
Public companies
Entrepreneurs, artisans
Universities Governmentaleconomic institutions
Associations, commercial companies
Focal firm or digital platform
Value proposition
Various partners
Varied and complementary sectors of activity
Networks of organizations, of suppliers of complements, of technologies
Customer networks
Common destiny
Focal firm(s)
Partner enterprises that revolve around the focal firm
Customers, suppliers, industrialists, entrepreneurs, various agencies, governments, associations, Commercial enterprises
Innovation ecosystem
Places of co-creation of value where actors and material assets and knowledge are grouped together
Network of interconnected organizations and/or individuals, communities
User networks
Actors grouped around a focal firm or a digital platform
Focal firm(s) Entrepreneurs, industrialists, R&D laboratories, technology suppliers, customers, users, individuals, communities, financial institutions, commercial companies Government agencies
Price competition and product/service differentiation
“Triple helix” interactions
Set of “coopetition” agreements
Customer satisfaction oriented strategy
Strategic partnership between core business and partners around the value proposition
Set of “coopetition” agreements
Monitoring/coordination via digital platform
Co-creation through open innovation strategy
Set of collaboration agreements
Combining individual offers into a customeroriented solution
Logic of action
Co-creation, co-development
Continuous innovation and sustained dissemination
Strong synergies
Permanent reconfigurations of assets
Agile adaptation to markets
Development of new innovation practices to generate customeroriented solutions
Creation and capturing of value for core business and partners
Performance of each partner linked to the overall performance of the ecosystem
Upstream activities (production)
Downstream activities (users)
Value co-creation based on open innovation strategies with the inclusion of stakeholders in the use as opposed to appropriation of innovation
Table 1.1. Differentiation between clusters, business and innovation ecosystems
In addition to the traditional value chain of suppliers and distributors [MOO 96], the innovation ecosystem integrates, in a non-exhaustive way, entrepreneurs, customers, financial institutions, industrialists, commercial enterprises, research laboratories, technology suppliers, competitors, any actor creating value for the ecosystem and the market. The innovation ecosystem presents itself as the widest construction based on networks.
However, unlike value networks or value constellations [NOR 93], it is distinguished from other forms of ecosystems by the emphasis placed on open innovation strategies [CHE 14] and on the appropriation of innovation by all actors [AUT 14]. Table 1.1 summarizes the main characteristics that, according to studies, differentiate clusters, business ecosystems and innovation ecosystems.
These differentiating features show that innovation ecosystems share many characteristics with business ecosystems. We propose to refine our understanding of innovation ecosystems through four concrete, deliberately simplified examples.
1.4. Towards an understanding of the innovation ecosystem through four concrete examples
1.4.1. The university innovation ecosystem
This first example focuses on an academic discovery issuing from energy research laboratories. In 2004, the team of André Geim and Konstantin
Novoselov, researchers at the University of Manchester, successfully extracted graphene from graphite. These two physicists, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2010 for their “innovative experiments on the two-dimensional material called graphene”, have paved the way for research in this field. Graphene is a single monoplane of carbon atoms forming a honeycomb structure [NET 09]. It is the finest natural crystal in the world. Its high resistance and remarkable electrical conductivity make it a material of the future in many fields such as energy or nanoelectronics.
Scientists from Columbia University in the United States, Seoul National University in Korea, and the Korean Research Institute of Standards and Science have come together around graphene technology. They pooled their knowledge to co-create a new light source [KIM 15]. To achieve this discovery, the scientists “suspended” graphene filaments on a silicon substrate, which they connected to electrodes to feed energy to each graphene atom [KIM 15]. From this discovery of graphene filaments came the graphene light bulb. This invention-product was made possible by this collaboration between academics.
Figure 1.1. University innovation ecosystem
Invention-product: graphene bulb
The graphene bulb3 displays a powerful and inexpensive luminous energy that makes it promising for the future, especially in the energy field where it may well develop into an innovation for the lighting of tomorrow. Figure 1.1 illustrates this university innovation ecosystem.
We present, in Table 1.2, its characteristics.
Key actors
Collaboration/ strategy
Logic of action
“Graphene” university innovation ecosystem
Scientists from Columbia University
Scientists from the Korean Seoul National University
Scientists from the Korean Research Institute of Standards and Science
Co-development of graphene filaments as a light source
Invention-product co-creation: graphene bulb
Collaborative strategies
Integration of the knowledge about graphene developed by the two Nobel Prize winners to advance scientific discoveries in graphene
Production of new material assets: graphene filaments (discovery) and the graphene bulb (product invention)
Production of new knowledge about graphene and its applications in the field of clean and sustainable energy
Table 1.2. Characteristics of the “graphene” innovation ecosystem
IMPORTANT.– First definition of innovation ecosystem: an innovation ecosystem is a group of scientists belonging to different research laboratories; they share their knowledge and scientific know-how in order to make a discovery and then an invention-product; the creation of a twofold value. It is expressed in the form of a scientific discovery: graphene filaments and a product-invention materialized in the form of a graphene bulb; at this stage, we are in the presence of a discovery and an inventionproduct resulting from this discovery. There is no innovation yet.
This first definition shows the absence of the focal firm with a value proposition for innovation around which various partners gravitate. Here, the innovation ecosystem is rooted in discovery. We note the absence of a digital platform as an “actor” in the coordination of the actors. It exists, but its
3 https://techventures.columbia.edu/news-and-events/latest-news/worlds-thinnest-light-bulb% E2%80%94graphene-gets-bright-columbia-engineering.
12 The Innovation Ecosystem as a Source of Value Creation
objective is to promote the sharing of scientific knowledge to support collaboration between the actors of this research project. We note that the actors of the discovery and those of the invention-product are the same. There was no recourse to other external actors to design the inventionproduct. We also note the absence of individual contributions from the partners to develop a customer-oriented solution. At this stage, there is neither a customer nor a market because there is no innovation in the sense of an invention that meets its market [ROG 95].
1.4.2. The university–industrialist innovation ecosystem
This second example focuses on the co-creation of an invention-product in the field of innovative materials based on a scientific discovery. Based on earlier work on carbyne [CHA 10], scientists at the University of Vienna, led by Thomas Pichler, developed a new process to stabilize carbon chains. They produced a chain with a record length of over 6,400 atoms [SHI 16].
Like all carbon allotropes, such as graphene, nanotubes or fullerenes, carbyne has strong characteristics that make it a light material and 40 times stronger than diamond. Carbyne4 has properties of high capacity of acoustic absorption, preventing the propagation of sonar’s vibratory signals. It is undetectable, which is particularly important for the defense sector [CHA 10].
Recognizing the potential of their discovery, the scientists know that it could be incorporated into the design of innovative new materials. However, they did not have the resources to carry out this design work. So, they turned to industrialists in the field of innovative materials who work with the defense industry. Faced with this promising discovery, in terms of innovation in light and resistant materials, scientists and industrialists joined forces to share their knowledge and diverse know-how in order to develop an invention-product: an innovative material, light, resistant and undetectable to sonar waves.
This collaboration, between scientists and industrialists, has favored the valorization of this scientific discovery by giving birth to the first
4 https://fr.sputniknews.com/sci_tech/201604141024224886-production-carbyne-autrichescientifiques/; https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1801/1801.07670.pdf.
applications of carbyne in the field of materials. Figure 1.2 illustrates this university–industrialist innovation ecosystem.
We present, in Table 1.3, the characteristics of this university–industrialist innovation ecosystem.
IMPORTANT.– Second definition of the innovation ecosystem: an innovation ecosystem is a grouping of scientists belonging to a research laboratory and industrialists specialized in particular sectors such as innovative materials; they all share their scientific and industrial knowledge to integrate this discovery on carbyne into the design of an invention-product: a light, resistant material undetectable by sonar; the creation of value is twofold. It is expressed in the form of a scientific discovery: stabilization of carbon atom chains, and a product-invention materialized in the form of a new light, resistant and undetectable material; at this stage, we are in the presence of a discovery led by scientists and an invention-product led by industrialists in collaboration with scientists. There is no innovation yet.
Figure 1.2. University–industrialist innovation ecosystem
14 The Innovation Ecosystem as a Source of Value Creation
“Carbyne” university–industrialist innovation ecosystem
Scientists from the Austrian laboratory
Key actors
Collaboration/ strategy
Manufacturers specializing in innovative lightweight and resistant materials
Industrialists specialized in materials undetectable by sonar
Discovery by the Vienna laboratory of the stabilization of carbon atom chains (carbyne)
Co-creation of invention-product: light, resistant material undetectable by sonar
Collaborative strategies
Integrating prior knowledge of carbyne to advance scientific discovery
Logic of action
Production of new material assets: stabilization of carbyne (discovery) and innovative material (product invention)
Generation of new knowledge on carbyne and its applications in the field of innovative materials
Table 1.3. Characteristics of the “carbyne” innovation ecosystem
This second definition still shows the absence of the focal firm with a value proposition for innovation around which partners gravitate. Here, the innovation ecosystem is also rooted in discovery. There is still no digital platform to coordinate the actors. It is present to promote the sharing of scientific and industrial knowledge between the actors in the research project.
Unlike the “graphene” innovation ecosystem, here the actors in the discovery and those in the invention-product are not the same. The scientists called upon external “collaborators”, the industrialists, to carry out the design of the applications of carbyne. As before, the industrial partners did not bring individual contributions to develop a customer-oriented solution. Here, the collaboration is based on the technological challenge at hand. At this stage, there is not yet innovation in the sense of a marketable invention in a given market.
1.4.3. The university–industrialist–commercial innovation ecosystem
This third example focuses on valorization by industrialists, in the form of invention-products designed on the basis of the scientific discoveries on graphene and carbyne. The properties of graphene and carbyne offer
opportunities for remarkable industrial products [BAR 19] for the manufacture of polymers. Commonly referred to as plastics, polymers are used in the manufacture of many products.
Graphene and carbyne, by virtue of their properties of high strength, conductivity and flexibility [MIR 20], fall into three main categories of polymers: thermoplastics, thermosets and elastomers. Thermoplastics are food containers, the various preservation containers for medicines, cosmetics, household products and detergents, etc. Thermosets include vehicle bumpers, electrical boxes (electrical switchboards, circuit breakers), automotive or military body parts, airplane wings, carbyne-based submarine hulls, electronic components such as transistors, etc. Thermosets also include solid polymers used in the manufacture of amorphous organic glass and semi-crystalline polymers used in the manufacture of materials that can withstand high temperatures without deforming. Elastomers are used in the automotive, aeronautics, aerospace, transportation and many other industries. Elastomers include industrial rubbers, seals of all types, plastic food wraps, packaging, etc.
In view of the multiple opportunities offered by graphene and carbyne [NES 20], industrialists, who are also marketers, are gathering around these technologies to design and market disruptive innovations by integrating
Figure 1.3. University–industrialist–commercial innovation ecosystem
