analytical - rational explanation (definition, concept, history, differentiation, similarity, propagation and expansion) of free innovation
Subject Areas :Ali Asghar Saadabadi 1 , Mohammad Sadegh khayyatian 2 , فاطمه محمدی اترگله 3
1 - Assistant Professor of Shahid Beheshti University
2 - Assistant Professor of Science and Technology Shahid Beheshti University
3 - Master's student in science and technology policy, Research Institute for Basic Science and Technology Studies, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
Keywords: analytic-rational explanation, free innovation definition, free innovation, Publication and expansion of free innovation,
Abstract :
the concept of free innovation in comparison with other innovation has been neglected. Therefore, the analysis of available definitions and a clear, unified definition of free innovation is an inevitable necessity that can help to get a shared understanding and understanding of it for this purpose, the present study seeks to explain the analytical - logical explanation (definition, background, differentiation, similarity, propagation and expansion)of free innovation in this study, at least 41 articles were analyzed in order to obtain theoretical richness to formulate the final model of 2 books, 32 sites approved by the elites. to achieve the selected definition, differentiation and similarity elements, emission constraining factors and solutions to solve the selected diffusion are used by fuzzy delphi method Overall, 16 interviews were conducted over three Delphi rounds with 6 experts to reach the saturation point among the six components proposed for the definition of free innovation, three components were rejected and three components approved by experts, in the end, the chosen definition of free innovation from the opinion of experts is innovation that has been developed by consumers with personal cost, no time and place constraints. among the 17 components of free innovation from other innovation, lack of compensation and financial transactions, lack of protection of schemes, lack of protection from the design, lack of risk due to the distribution of important knowledge were considered by experts. in the fuzzy delphi section finding free zones and diffusion of free innovation finally, legal and legal constraints, the great value of innovation in terms of the general, lack of desire for optimal investment, Lack of self - esteem for free innovators, Cultural and social barriers, thus, free innovation was introduced as the most important limitation of free innovation.
داناییفرد، حسن. سید مهدی الوانی و عادل آذر. (1383). روششناسی پژوهش کیفی در مدیریت: رویکردی جامع. تهران. صفار.
Arora, A., A. Fosfuri, and A. Gambardella. 2001. Markets for technology and their implications fora corporate strategy. Industrial and Corporate Change 10(2): 419- 451.
Baldwin, C. Y. 2008. Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions and the boundaries of firms. Industrial and Corporate Change 17(1): 155-195.
Baltar, Fabiola & Ignacio Brunet (2012). "Social Research 2.0: Virtual Snowball Sampling Method Using Face book", Internet Research, 22(1): 57–74
Benker, Y. 2002. Coase penguim, or, Linux and 'the nature of the firm.' Yale Law Journal 112(3): 369-447.
Baldwin, C.Y and E.vonHippel (2011), 'Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation', Organization Science, 22, 1399-1417.
de Jong, J. P. J., E. von Hippel, F. Gault, J. Kuusisto, and C. Raasch. 2015. Market failur in the diffusion of consumer- developed innovations: Patterns inn finland. Research Policy 44(10):1856-1865.
de Jong, J.P.J.2013. User innovation by Canadian consumers: Analysis of a sample of 2,021 respondents. Unpuplishedpaper commissioned by Industry Canada.
Fichter, K. (Ed.) 2005. Interpreneurship: Nachhaltigkeits innovationen in interaktiven Perspektiven eines vernetzenden Unternehmertums. Univ., Habil.-Schr.-Oldenburg, 2004. Marburg: Metropolis-Verlag.
Fisher, W. W., III. 2010. The implications for law of user innovation. Minnesota Law Riview 94(May): 1417-1477
Glaser, B. & A. L. Strauss. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Ney York. Aldine.
Glaser, B. (1978). The Oretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. California. Sociology Press.
Gambardella, A., C. Raasch, and E. von Hippel. 2016. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare." Management Science, forthcoming
Gault, F.2012.User innovation and the markets. Science & Public Policy39(1):118-128.
Hyysalo, S., and S. usenyuk. 2015. the user dominated tecnology era: Dynamics of dispersed peer-innovation. Research Policy 44(3): 560-576.
Hienerth, C. 2006. The commercialization of user innovations: The development of the rodes kayaking industry. R & D Management 36(3): 273- 294.
Kim,Y.2015.Consumer User innovation in Korea: An international comparison and Policy implication. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 23(1): 69-86.
Kline, S. J., and N. Rosenberg. 1986. An overview of innovation. In The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth, ed. Ralph Landau and Nathan Rosenberg. National Academic Press.
Machlup, F., and E. Penrose. 1950. the patent controvercy in the nineteenth century. Journal of Economic History 10(1): 1-29.
Okoli C., Pawlowski, S.D.; 2004. “The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications”. Information and Management. 42. 15-29
Ogawa, S., and K. Pongtanalert.2011. Visualizing invisible innovation Content: Evidence from Global Consumer Innovation survey. Available at SSRN: http://Papers.ssrn.com/so13/paper.cfm? abstract _id= 1876186.
Romer, P. M. 1990. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98 (5): S71-S102.
Rivette, K. G., and D. kline. 1999. Rembrandts in the Attic: Unlocking the Hidden Value of Patents. Harvard Business School Press.
Riggs, W., and E. von Hippel. 1994. The impact of scientific and commercial values on the source of scientific instrument innovation. Research Policy 23(4): 459- 469.
Schumpeter, J. A.1934. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Harvard University Press. Originally published in German in 1912; first English translation published in 1934.
Sherwin, C. W., and R. S. Isenson. 1967. Project Hindsight: A Defense Department study of the utility of research. Science 156(3782): 1571-1577
teece, D. J. 1996. Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 31(2): 193-224
Tedelis, S., and O.E. Williamson. 2013. Transaction cost economics. In Handbook of Organizational Economics, ed. Robert Gibbons and John Roberts. Princeton University Press.
Teece, D. J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration,collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research policy 15(6): 285-305.
Tidd, J., & Bessant, J.R. 2010. Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change (4th edn). Chichester: Wiley
Von Hippel, E. A., H. J. Demonaco, and J. P. J. deJong. 2016, forthcoming. Market failure in the diffusion of clinician-developed innovations: The case of off-label drug discoveries. Science and Public policy. A valiable at SSRN: http:// papers. ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract id= 2275562.
Von Hippel, E. A,J.P.J. de Jong, and S. Fiowers.2012.Comparing business and household sector innovation in consumer products: Findings from a representative survey in the United Kingdom. Management Science 58(9):1669-1681 .
von Hippel, W., L. E. Hayward, E. Baker, S. L. Dudds, and E. Von Hippel. 2016. Boredom as a spur to innovation. Working paper, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Von Hippel, E., S. Ogawa, and J. P. J. de Jong. 2011. the age of the consumer- innovator. Sloan management Review 53(1): 27-35
