Networks as a nucleus for inter-organisational innovation processes
Innovations can be implemented in-house (by a single enterprise). This can be done if the enterprise has the necessary resources and competences available internally and if the topic of the innovation activity concerns only this single company (e.g. food product development). Another strategy for increasing innovation levels is to use external resources (Chesbrough, 2003). Like it is done in the R&D project Q-PorkChains. In this case, an enterprise makes use of an innovation system which involves the interaction between actors that is needed in order to turn an idea into something new that is to be introduced on the market. This is often necessary if the topic of the innovation activity has a value chain or a value network perspective. These are innovations with an impact on the organisation of these systems. In this case, more than one actor is needed).
Innovations are mainly results of a complex set of relationships among actors like enterprises, public authorities, universities and research institutes (Freeman, 2002; Lundvall, 1992; Klerkx, 2008; Boon, 2008). The term “open innovation” describes the approach of companies that open up their institutional boundaries for other actors to implement innovation activities with the aim of stimulating innovation instead of solely internally innovating. To increase innovation, companies use external resources of the innovation system for their internal sustainable development (Chesbrough, 2003).
The innovation system in regard to a company is determined by the mutual networking of internal requirements within the company and external environmental requirements. In comparison to this, the national innovation system consists of the entirety of innovatively active units in a national economy and the associated external general conditions. However, the national innovation system is not only shaped by its economic units. In addition, state and private institutions and policy areas like science, research, finance, environment, transport etc. are of importance. It is seen as a system of actors, organisations and institutions that are connected to one another and who are involved in the generation, transfer and market introduction of innovations (Klerkx, 2008; Meier zu Köcker and Buhl, 2008; Pleschak and Sabisch, 1996). The definition of the concept of “innovation systems” varies. Despite many different definitions of national innovation systems, Freeman (2002) and Lundvall (1992) came to the conclusion that both a narrower and a broader definition could be used. The narrower interpretation encompasses only the institutions that are the main source of innovations and which serve the acquisition of knowledge and the passing on of knowledge. The broader interpretation also contains the socio-economic system, which is determined by political, cultural and economic influences. Raueiser (2005) follows this approach and defined a national innovation system as the sum of elements and their interactions which influence the process of the use and generation of new technological knowledge in a country. In accordance with this, innovation systems are dynamic social systems that are characterised by positive feedback and imitation and whose central activity is learning (Lundvall, 1992).