Oops, I did it again! Knowledge leaks in open innovation networks with start-ups

Abstract

PurposeLittle is known, about the role played by start-ups in open innovation networks. Start-ups – due to their nature of new and emerging companies – can largely benefit from the knowledge that can flow intentionally or unintentionally from external partners during open innovation practices. When open innovation networks are not set among peers on both sides the authors expect to have more unintended knowledge flows. Such knowledge “leaks” – as the authors named them – in open innovation networks are totally unexplored in literature. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to focus “whether and how knowledge leaks occur in open innovation networks with start-ups”.Design/methodology/approachThe research design of this study relies on social network analysis methods and techniques to disentangle the role of start-ups in open innovation networks – in a major Italian aerospace cluster – vis-à-vis the three types of knowledge considered in this study. Then the authors confirmed knowledge leaks to occur through a multiplexity analysis. In the second stage of the research, the authors decided to strengthen the results, making them more vivid and thorough, relying on four case studies.FindingsThe paper sheds light on a totally unexplored phenomenon, theorizing on the role of start-ups in open innovation networks and suggesting intriguing implications both for theory and managers on whether and how knowledge leaks occur.Research limitations/implicationsThe main limitations arise from the specific research context, in fact the study has been conducted in an aerospace cluster. So future studies might consider to explore knowledge leaks in non-cluster settings and in low tech industries.Practical implicationsThe results have practical implications both for policy makers and for managers. First of all, the research confirms how open innovation often originates from a combination of different knowledge types acquired through the collaboration with heterogeneous players, start-ups included. Hence, managers may design open innovation strategies balancing their portfolio of collaborations to maximize the absorption of relevant knowledge and start-uppers may consider to engage in open innovation practices to accelerate knowledge absorption. Nevertheless, the study warns managers against the risk of knowledge leaks, especially in cases like start-ups where the eagerness to participate or the prestige associated with participating in open innovation networks with key players may hamper the control over knowledge leaks.Social implicationsThis opens up for possible interventions for policy makers too. First of all, policy makers may consider incorporating the concept of knowledge leaks in their campaign in favour of open innovation. Second, the study may help policy makers in designing programmes for knowledge transfer partnerships amongst the various players of a cluster in a more conscious way, especially warning new to business companies, like start-ups, about possible leaks. Finally, there is also the need of developing professional figures like consultants capable of supporting start-ups in their open innovation practices.Originality/valueFindings reported in the paper confirm multiplexity and heteromorphism in knowledge exchanges and shed the light on a completely unexplored field (i.e. open innovation and start-ups), focussing on knowledge leaks. Relevant implications for policy makers and managers are included in the study.