• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 2009.02a
• /
• pp.123-154
• /
• 2009

본 논문에서는 Chesbrough의 개방형 혁신 이론을 간략하게 소개하고, 그것이 기술경영 이론에서 지니는 정확한 위치와 의의를 진단함으로써 그가 정말 기여한 부분은 어디인지를 평가한다. 개방형 혁신이란 기업이 연구, 개발, 상업화에 이르는 일련의 혁신 과정을 개방하여 외부 자원을 활용함으로써 혁신의 비용을 줄이고 성공 가능성을 제고하며 부가가치 창출을 극대화하는 기업 혁신의 방법론으로 요약될 수 있다. 이 글의 결론은 개방형 혁신이 현상적으로도 최근의 현상이 아닐 뿐 아니라, 이론적으로도 기존의 내용과 다른 것이 없다는 것이다. 즉, 그의 개방형 혁신은 이름은 새롭지만 그 내용을 보면 새로운 혁신 방법론은 아니라는 평가이다. 그가 기여한 것은 기존에 이미 연구된 여러 주제들을 개방형 혁신이라는 하나의 이름으로 묶어줌으로써 기업 전략을 위한 통일된 프레임웍을 제공한 것에 있다. 이런 점에서 그는 기술혁신 방법론에 대한 일종의 "아키텍처 혁신"을 시도한 셈이라고 볼 수 있다. 그리고 최근에 활발해진 개방형 혁신의 배경으로서 지식 환경의 변화를 강조한 것도 그의 기여라고 볼 수 있겠다.

• Science & Technology Policy
• /
• v.18 no.5
• /
• pp.2-23
• /
• 2008

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2015.05a
• /
• pp.164-173
• /
• 2015

Since Henry Chesbrough coined the term "open Innovation", active theoretical and empirical research has been conducted in many sectors. In Korea, private business sector took an active role in open innovation research and its adaptation. However, many public research institutes failed to follow the private sector's suit because they compete each other for limited fund from Korean government. The present research analyzed Korea Institute of Science and Technology(KIST) Open Research Program which pioneered open innovation research by sharing KIST research fund with third party entities and proposed a way to apply the KIST case to other public sectors.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 2009.02a
• /
• pp.157-180
• /
• 2009

Chesbrough는 개방형 혁신이 촉진될수록 기업의 성과가 높아진다고 밝힌 바 있다. (Chesbrough 2006). 그리고 Laursen 외 (2006)는 영국 제조업 분석에서 기술집약도와 개방형 혁신의 폭이 역U형의 관계가 있다고 실증분석을 통해서 밝힌 바 있다. 그리고 윤진효 외(2008)도 한국의 성서 및 구미 클러스터 기업들을 대상으로 한 개방형 혁신과 성과간의 관계 실증분석에서 일반적으로 개방형 혁신이 커질수록 기업성과가 향상된다고 밝힌 바 있다. 그런데 Laursen 외 (2006)의 Working paper나 윤진효 외(2008) 모두 OECD 등의 기준에 의해 기업의 개방형 혁신과 성과간의 관계가 첨단산업과 비첨단산업별로 상이하게 나타나고 있음을 밝힌 바 있다. 본 연구는 부정확한 산업분류를 정교화하여 연구개발 집약도별로 기업군을 나누고 동 군별로 개방형 혁신과 기업성과간의 관계를 한국 기업들을 대상으로 실증 분석하고자 한다. 가설검증을 통해서 연구개발 집약도에 따라, 개방형 혁신과 기업성과간의 관계를 규명하고 기업의 개방형 기술혁신 전략을 제시하고자 한다.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.49-56
• /
• 2013

KakaoTalk, a Korean mobile instant messenger service launched by KAKAO Inc., has grown remarkably popular in a short period of time, with its number of subscribers exceeding 100 million as of July 2013. Today, KakaoTalk is an everyday communication tool among most Korean mobile users. Although KAKAO has been the subject of many business and consumer studies, the KakaoTalk platform strategy has not been studied thoroughly. In this study, we analyze its platform strategy through the lens of several widely utilized frameworks such as Platform Leadership (Gawer & Cusumano 2002, 2008), Winner-take-all dynamics (Eisenmann et al. 2006), and Open Service Innovation (Chesbrough 2011). Our results show that Eisenmann et al (2006)'s "Winner-Take-All" platform best explains how KakaoTalk dominated its rivals, Mypeople by Daum Communications and Line by Naver Corporation. In surpassing its rivals, KAKAO delivered a solution to the 'essential problem' that mobile social communication should be upgraded from mobile companies' paid "Short Message Service" (SMS). By doing so, KakaoTalk fulfilled the first requirement of Gawer & Cusumano (2008)'s "Coring" strategy, which explains how a new platform is created. KakaoTalk also satisfied the second requirement of "Coring" by providing economic incentives for KakaoTalk members to interact through its Games and Items store. Actively accepting its customers' ideas and upgrading its services, KAKAO reinforced its platform leadership to its customers and put Chesbrough (2011)'s "Outside In - Open Service" innovation strategy into practice.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.99-123
• /
• 2010

We develop Open Innovation Analysis Method in the Patent analysis field and applies it to analyze Deagu-Gyung-buk Cases. After Chesbrough researches the open innovation situation about U. S. company Cases, many researchers began to study about Open Innovation of Companies. And Hippel participated in User Innovation research about Medical equipments and extreme sporting equipments. He pointed out that user innovation occurred new products. I call it User based Open Innovation. But the methods for Open Innovation are limited such as Case study, Survey analysis, and Quality study. So, we need to develop objective analysis method for open innovation of any firm. In this study, we want to develop new objective analysis method for open innovation and apply it to analyze rocal cases and global comparative studies. We will develop the Chesbrough's patent analysis method about open innovation.We apply this new open innovation analysis method to analyze medical equipment and fuel cell industries in Daegu and Gyung-buk Province. faembedded structure of the cooperative research network of innovation We also will apply this method to analyze Samsung and Nokia Mobile industry, and Hyundae and Toyota automobile industry.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.8 no.9
• /
• pp.172-184
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study analyzes services and the markets creating the profit of the national home network industry and the promotion strategy will be proposed. First, the technologies and products of the home network industry are analyzed, and the value chain of this industry is grasped. Second, the home network industry is classified into the communication common carrier, the construction carrier, the content/solution carrier, and the electronic business carrier. Third, The business model of the home network industry reconstructed based on the researches of Morris et al.(2005) and Chesbrough and Rosenbloom(2002), and the strategies are analyzed. We performed the industrial analysis as the company environment analysis, factor analysis of the value creation, business strategy analysis and so on.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.203-230
• /
• 2009

Can we use the open innovation paradigm in Korean economy? Can Korea move from imitative national innovation system to Creative national innovation system without open innovation paradigm? We are looking for preliminary answers about these questions. In this paper, first of all, we review the theoretical factors of open innovation originated from professor Chesbrough, try to find out the limit of the theory, and propose the possibility of extending of open innovation from company to industrial sector, region and cluster, and national innovation system. We also review the user innovation models from Von Hippel and open business models. Second, we review the Korea open innovation cases according to the categories like as company, sector, cluster and regional innovation system, and national innovation system. Third, we prepose the theoretical and realistic implications, and next research agenda about Korea open innovation.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.163-185
• /
• 2013

Chesbrough(2003, 2006) studied Open Innovation about not only IT advanced firms such as Intel or IBM, but also P&G or 3M which are traditional manufacturing firms. As West(2006) described, we can analyze open innovation in several levels such as firm level, industry level, sector, or cluster. Most of all, we could know that according to belonging industries, open innovation effect of firms are different based of technology life cycle, or modular or non modular architecture(JHJ YUN, 2010; JHJ YUN, 2009). In this research, we will study open innovation of Korea aeroplane industry. Korea Aerospace Industries, Ltd is the flagship company in Korean aeroplane industry. We will study the open innovation relationship between Korean Aerospace Industries, Ltd and supplying firms based on Case study and Interview method. Our research question is this. Do supplying firms for Korea Aerospace Industries, Ltd adopt open innovation strategy? If then, what kind of aspects do the open strategies have?