Week 5 – Open Innovation

Home Forums Weekly Discussions Week 5 – Open Innovation

This topic contains 10 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  Barry Quirke 2 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
  • #2248


    Open Innovation holds great promise (feel free to agree or disagree 🙂 and you’ll see much discussion about Open Innovation 2.0 and even 3.0.
    Our own Martin Curley, Director of Intel Europe is an OI champion and is pushing the concept of OI 2.0 to more broadly involve a wider number of stakeholder groups to create an innovation ecosystem. Exploring the concept of open innovation and the Dublin Declaration as defined (http://www.slideshare.net/DCSF/martin-curley-closing-final) is this a purely aspirational initiative or can we measure the success of open innovation in its 2.0 conceptualisation?



    Open Innovation 2.0 in theory sounds like a great idea but from a practical point of view, I think its a tall order. Beginning with a country like Ireland, and carrying out all 11 actions might be possible but to incorporate the entire E.U. into this one structure (2.0) seems impossible.
    Also, for this to work the entire E.U. would have to be the driving force behind it. In other words either we are all in or all out. Having one country set up defeats the purpose.
    Developing the Innovation literacy for the entire E.U. would more than likely have to start with the larger countries with the bigger economies and the rest will follow suit.



    In my opinion,Open innovation in its current form provide an excellent way to share risk and profitable for a company and rewards the community with innovative products and services. It fulfils a gap between academia,business,public through creativity and profitablity. Involving governement in the paradigm could either help the process by having a positive role in education,legalisation,economy etc. or could be harmful as the process will depend on the government’s elective term. e.g.one governement could be very supportive of a project and if a new governement is elected it could slow down the process if there is a change in their economic or eductaion policies.
    EU as a collaborative politico-economic union help to have a stronger economic impact and better user experience . I agree open innovation 2.0 should be adopted by all and negotiated among countries to share the wealth and benefits among all its member states.
    Opportunities can be duanting as to what to share and race to market to make most profit should not prioritised over common good for the community.
    Also, business model could play an important part for deciding what a company wants to innovate or not. Hence, governments,academia and general public should work closely with the companies to make sure innovative product or service is not affected by the companies’s sole objective to please it’s shareholders.


    Kevin Mc

    According to Enterprise Ireland, we are now Europe’s largest exporter of computer and IT services. If this is true we should be one of the lead countries in the EU on Open Innovation.

    There is a number of initiatives already in place to help promote Open Innovation with Startup Ireland leading the way with their plan to make Ireland a global startup hub by 2020. The Digital Dublin initiative has setup a digital masterplan for Dublin. With Dublin being awarded a Smart Cities grant it offers a great opportunity to new innovations as technology develops.

    The opportunity is there for Ireland to take a lead role. Time to back up our status as Europe’s Silicon Valley



    I think Open Innovation is more a characteristic of the private sector rather than the public sector. Many problems in Ireland, from the beds shortage in hospitals to the way in which social welfare is managed, could certainly benefit from using open innovation as a means to coming up with solutions. But for whatever reason, maybe governments are too concerned with getting elected or there just isn’t enough time while in government to get it going, it seems to not be a reality.
    It does take courage, and risk, and proper leadership to begin thinking truly innovatively.
    The private sector on the other hand are their own bosses, and this is mostly where we see open innovation at its best.

    I think companies need to encourage innovation by doing things such as holding an “Innovation Day” where all staff come together for the day and share ideas with teams outside of their normal day to day dealings. Possibly holding innovation days along with other companies – almost like retreats.
    I remember reading that Steve Jobs used to actually go on retreats with engineers, programmers and other staff as a way of just coming up with ideas.



    I came across this article about Open Innovation in a multinational Spanish banking group, BBVA. (http://irishtechnews.net/ITN3/dont-get-caught-up-in-the-hype-own-your-own-market-first-scarlett-sieber-bbva-svp-open-innovation/). There is a section about – What is open innovation at BBVA? I like the way they challenge developers with a datathon. It shows that the company itself is flexible and knows that technology is changing fast and new apps need to be created quickly. Allowing developers to use their data and to create challenges – it allows the company to really benefit from these types of events. Companies need to move with the times and that, in my opinion, can only be completed with Open Innovation.



    I think Open Innovation could be beneficial to companies – especially in the technology sector where the pace of change is so high. Since there is no time to sit on a product it makes more sense to share innovation to constantly improve. Improvements in technology as a whole across the entire sector and across companies operating in the sector actually brings about more opportunities for everyone. The same does actually apply to many other industries such as the medical sector but I wonder will it apply more to medical technology/devices rather than drugs which can be high value patents.



    I would agree that OI in Ireland does hold great promise, with the government’s ever growing investment in the ICT realm. There is room for improvement though, as highlighted by an study published by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre and DG connect, the state that Ireland rank 16th in Europe when it comes to start-ups. The study delves into 3 areas, Business, Research and Development and Innovation. The importance of innovation, with openness being the main was underpinned by the views of the European Commission vice-president, he said: “This is proof that digital success comes through a willingness to invest, an open mindset for innovation and planning. Europe needs to build these values today to be a global leader in technology.” http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1027573.shtml
    With Dublin being our best region, positioned 16th, this could be a great incentive for us to push towards Open Innovation 2.0 at a European level.



    OI 2.0 is definitely of merit and a great ideology in theory. As Martin has suggested, the area of innovation is an area greatly used by the private sector, more so than their public sector counterparts. The thinking is possibly that the public sector feel they have a certain amount of responsibility to deal with, once this level of responsibility is met, they stop their progress. The theory of OI 2.0 is great but highly aspirational if looked at through the eyes of private sector being the driver, due to the fact that it’s all well & good sharing ideas for progress, etc etc, but when it comes to sharing profits amongst idea sharers, the private sector very much takes the me fein approach of their public brethren!!


    Guillaume Van Aelst

    Open Innovation 2.0 only seems to me to be the best way to initiating innovation.
    What was the Open Innovation 1.0 (if any?) all about anyways?

    The five key elements to OI 2.0;
    – Networking,
    – Collaboration,
    – Corporate Entrepreneurship,
    – Proactive Intellectual Property Management,
    – Research and Development (R&D).
    Are closely corresponding to how companies are/should be carrying out their business nowadays.

    The list of 11 actions make total sense, and should be developed gradually as constant improvements as to not come too much as a shock.
    I am quite surprise I never heard (or paid attention) to this concept before.
    I am an EU believer and given the circumstances of the current worlds we live in (selfishness, greed, carelessness… in relation to global warning for example), I think this is the only-way forward.

    Basically OI 2.0 is all about being opened to innovations instead of fearing it and one of the means to achieve it is to “simply” taking advantage of the (new) technologies available to us.


    Barry Quirke

    OI 2.0 is a very ambitious project which I would like to see come to fruition but I believe there are a number of challenges on the path to a successful conclusion. As Jeffrey has mentioned, rolling this out across the EU is ambitious, but also attaining a critical mass of buy-in across all stakeholders may be problematic. Government’s track record in innovation is uneven to say the least, here in Ireland we can look to the e-voting and PPARS debacles and the difficulties of the Digital Hub as evidence of this patchy success rate in the public sector. One of the strengths of OI 2.0 is the inclusion of the public sector as an active participant in the quadruple helix; rather than drive innovation, the public sector’s role is perhaps best defined as a facilitator of innovation rather than one of its principal drivers.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.