از منبع باز به شیوه های نوآوری باز : مورد مطالعه در شرایط بحران بدهی در یونان

“Open” practices have been at the forefront of research, business and political agendas for some time. Traditionally, research has focused on analysing critical factors for the deployment of Open Source (OS) Software and has highlighted the roles of “Collective Intelligence” and “participation in voluntary communities” in facilitating OS development. Nevertheless, there is little literature examining the role these Open Innovation (OI) practices may play in influencing the private-collective model of innovation and its application in economies-in-crisis to create public-good innovations. To address this gap, this paper uses the case of Greece. Data were gathered from interviews conducted with public policy makers and private sector top executives. The findings underline the importance of using OS as software to deal with cost reduction during debt crisis; but more importantly reveal a shift from OS to utilising the aforementioned OI practices to support the creation of public-good innovations through the private-collective model of innovation, and the difficulties faced in encouraging this initiative due to insufficient national innovation policy, and different philosophies, structures, and cultures followed by the organisations. The study calls for changes in the national policy supported by the private-collective model to leverage innovation.

Over the last years there has been a focus on the development, implementation, and adoption of Open Source (OS) Software1 by both researchers and practitioners [1]. The market for OS is growing at an annual rate of 22.4% and is predicted to be worth US$8.1 billion by 2013 [2], whereas the predictions by Gartner [3] suggest that by the end of 2012, at least 80% of all commercial software solutions will include substantive OS components. The extant literature has illustrated the industry-strength of OS as a software tool [4], [5], [6] and [7], highlighting the role of Open Innovation (OI) practices of “Collective Intelligence” [8] and [9] and “participation in voluntary communities” [6], [10] and [11] in facilitating OS development. Furthermore, research has examined the positive impact of these OI practices on the economy and society [12], and the impact of OI on national systems of innovation [12] and [13] as well as on opportunities presented by OI for countries to enhance and participate in innovation using different models [11], [14] and [15]. Among these models, the private-collective model of innovation [15], [16] and [17] is based on the creation of a consortium of innovators where public subsidy is absent and private resources are used for the creation of innovations pro bono publico. Innovators retain partial ownership of the innovation but do not have the right to sell/control it after it has been released [15], [16] and [17]. Nevertheless, apart from exceptions discussing the applicability of the private-collective model of innovation [11] and [17], there is little literature examining the role of these OI practices in influencing the private-collective model of innovation and its application in economies in crisis to create public-good innovations. Harnessing OI practices is becoming a necessity, particularly in periods of national debt crises where triggering innovation is a key to achieving growth and subsequently to dealing with the consequences of financial crises [19], [20] and [21]. To address this gap, a qualitative case study strategy [22], [23] and [24] in the Greek context using semi-structured interviews with top executives and top public policy makers in private and public organisations was used. Greece has been at the centre of the European debt crisis for many months and risks defaulting on its public debt and leaving the Eurozone. The debt crisis has had an impact on both the IT/IS expenditure and investments on innovation [25], [26] and [27], which have been diminished under a government that is struggling to deal with the state finances. However, a more sustainable solution lies in establishing measures and policies that will help stimulate growth in the ailing economy, and build the cornerstones of a strong economy: this solution may rest on innovation policies and good governance, facilitated by collective know-how and participation in voluntary communities to stimulate innovation at a national level [13], [14] and [17]. This paper argues for the importance of utilising OS as a software tool to deal with the insufficient IT investments during the crisis; but more importantly, following the literature on the private-collective model of innovation [11], [14], [15], [16] and [17], it underlines a necessary shift in the current use of OS as a software tool to the utilisation of the OI practices of Collective Intelligence and participation in voluntary communities (consortia) that facilitate innovation and thus promote growth [19], [20] and [21]. Furthermore, our findings highlight the difficulties in applying such practices and the specific model of innovation due to inadequate national innovation policy, as well as the current philosophy, structure and culture of both public and private organisations. The study calls for changes in the national policy to leverage innovation through the model. To secure the sustainability of such policy, commitment as well as political will and the creation of a roadmap may be needed, which will determine the participation incentives in those communities, the way such a policy will be implemented in Greece, the way these communities will come into being and how they will be led, and who will maintain those initiatives after development. Therefore, policies should be directed towards utilising Collective Intelligence as part of the private-collective innovation model to transform public administration, thereby generating new ideas and innovations which will enable growth. The awareness of the strategic value of OI practices is the key aim of this research. The paper is structured as follows: after a brief review of the literature regarding OS and OI (Section 2), the research methodology of the paper is presented (Section 3). The findings of the case study are discussed next in comparison to the extant literature (4 and 5), and the paper concludes (Section 6) by highlighting its contribution to literature and suggesting future research avenues.

Starting from the application of OS as a tool to deal with insufficient investments in IT, this paper examined the OI practices of a) participation in voluntary communities (consortia) of innovators, and b) Collective Intelligence within the private-collective model of innovation and their applicability in economies in crisis, using the case of Greece. The findings suggested the importance of using OS as a tool to deal with the increased costs of software; but more importantly, the necessary shift from OS to the utilisation of the aforementioned OI practices to support the creation of public-good innovation through the private-collective model of innovation. The study contributes to the literature on OS and OI focusing on the private-collective model of innovation [11], [14], [15], [16] and [17] in that it examines the application of the framework in an economy in crisis and discusses the difficulties associated with putting such an initiative into practice. The study also contributes to the literature examining OI and national systems of innovation [13], [47], [74] and [75] by suggesting that these difficulties are related not only to the culture, philosophy, and structure of private and public organisations, but also to the constantly changing policies and the inappropriate national innovation system which does not value participation in volunteering communities and collaboration to enhance Collective Intelligence. A new model or policy then, based on the private-collective model, will leverage innovation and growth through Collective Intelligence. To secure the sustainability of such an initiative, commitment by top managers and public policy makers is needed. Furthermore, this research has made empirical contributions to research in the form of the case used. Greece is at the centre of this research and at the centre of the European debt crisis. The findings may provide preliminary implications about how to facilitate the strategic deployment of OI practices during periods of debt crises, and this has further implications in promoting innovation and growth. The arguments of this study could be developed and extended through further research. This encouragement for more testing of our knowledge in this context has the potential to build robust theories [90]. One possible future study could involve the longitudinal study of the long-term impact of OS and OI practices in the Greek economy or other economies which are currently in debt. Our case study included organisations in Greece, which is representative as a data source but does not mean that the results are generalisable. Given the fact that OI is also dependent on market conditions, it would be fruitful to see studies in other countries, particularly those that are not in debt crisis, and maybe cross-country comparisons to test the validity of our results. Finally, from a methodological point of view, future research can enrich the existing data and validate the findings of this research. This is because our study is exploratory and hence any new data from interviewing or surveying – for instance, using participants from various organisational levels – would perhaps enable researchers to identify more factors, conditions, and frameworks under which the OI practices of voluntary communities and Collective Intelligence through the private-collective model of innovation could enable innovation to flourish. It is within our intentions to provide both academics and practitioners with food-for-thought to improve the effectiveness of the aforementioned OI practices to achieve innovation and growth and deal with the repercussions of tight budgets and debt crises.