Open
Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology by Henry Chesbrough,
Foreward, John Seely Brown April 25, 2003; hardcover; $35.00; ISBN: 1578518377
An interview with Henry Chesbrough,
author of
Open Innovation
Q: What is Open Innovation, briefly?
Open Innovation means that valuable ideas can come from inside
or outside the company and can go to market from inside or outside the company
as well. This approach places external ideas and external paths to market on the
same level of importance as that reserved for internal ideas and paths to market
in the earlier era. Put differently, Open Innovation means that no one can
afford the Not-Invented-Here syndrome.
Q: How did you come to identify it as a new form, or method
of thinking?
I conducted an extensive three year study of industrial research
at the Xerox Corporation. I wasn’t satisfied with what was written about how
Xerox had mismanaged its Palo Alto Research Center (PARC). I came to learn that
Xerox managed PARC according to the best research practices of the day. Where
the error arose was from the mindset and logic behind those practices. Xerox
managed as though it had a monopoly on the smart ideas and smart people in its
field. Most of the spin-offs from PARC created their value by linking to and
exploiting knowledge that Xerox did not have. As I examined the R&D practices of
other leading companies, I became increasingly convinced that a new mindset and
logic were in use, and that they fit much better with the environment most
companies operate it today.
Q: Has the business world been gradually shifting into this
model of innovation without even realizing it?
Yes and no. The younger, smaller companies have definitely
changed the way they play the innovation game. You don’t see many newer firms
creating their own classic research centers, off in the middle of nowhere. They
are far more likely to look outside, to universities, to other companies, or to
alliances, for ideas to take to market. In the older, larger companies, the
picture is more mixed. Yet even here, large companies today are putting up new
research facilities next to universities and other clusters of knowledge to get
new ideas in, instead of locating them far from others to keep internal ideas
from leaking out.
Q: What is the biggest impact of changing the way we think
about innovating technology?
Perhaps the biggest impact comes from realizing that (as Bill
Joy of Sun once put it) “Not all the smart people in the world work for us.”
Once you acknowledge that, the innovation task shifts to locating and connecting
to the smart people, wherever they are, and finding ways to leverage their
expertise with your own capabilities. It works the other way too. Not all the
smart people sell for you, either. That means that your ideas may earn
additional money by sharing them with others, rather than restricting the sale
of all of your ideas to your own sales and marketing staff.
Q: Why will people change? Why will they be willing to
embrace a new way of doing things, which is traditionally a very difficult thing
to do?
Change is indeed difficult, and it will be here too. Öpen
Innovation will not only require a rethinking of “R&D”, it will also require a
new approach to sales, marketing and distribution as well. What will drive
people towards Open Innovation is the widely shared sense that the old way is
indeed broken. People sense that the old way is inefficient. Worse, they realize
that it is ineffective. And they watch in amazement as exciting new ideas emerge
from rather unlikely places, from companies who spend far less on internal R&D.
Then they’re ready to say, “Next time, let’s us be the ones who introduce that
new idea.”
Q: Tell us about some companies that are successfully using
Open Innovation in their businesses.
I list a number of companies in the book. Two that exemplify
fascinating aspects of the concept are Intel and Procter & Gamble. I described
P&G above, so let me say a bit about Intel. Intel competes in a very
technologically intensive industry. Yet they do very little internal research,
for a company of its size and stature. They have a very well thought out program
for funding external research, and carefully evaluate the results of the
external work to see whether and when it is ready to transfer back into Intel.
They also have a large corporate venture capital program, that invests in
external startup companies. To Intel, these are really another kind of
laboratory, for Intel to learn from, where real companies make real products to
sell to real customers for real money. For many years, in fact, the Intel
research program and the corporate venture capital program reported into the
same guy, Les Vadasz.
Q: How can internal research departments reach out and
connect with the body of knowledge that now exists in whatever their field of
discipline is?
This question contains an important clue about why this will be
hard, the term “field of discipline”. For a long time, companies’ research
departments mirrored the academic departments of universities. Companies had
physics departments, materials science departments, operations research
departments, and so forth. These people were deeply knowledgeable, but had
little ability to relate that knowledge to other areas of knowledge. Today’s
researchers need to be far broader, even at the cost of being a little less
deep. The domain of systems integration will become an increasingly critical
skill. It is in the integration area where companies will not only connect to
external knowledge, but where they will harness that knowledge to create new
products, services and solutions that solve customers’ problems.
Q: Traditionally innovation has been considered the
intellectual space of large R & D departments within big corporations. Are they
likely to be threatened by your approach?
I actually think most R&D departments will welcome the ideas in
Open Innovation. There is a widely shared sense in R&D groups that I talk with
that things cannot continue as they have in the past. I would go so far as to
say that there is a hunger for a new path forward. Without a new approach,
corporate R&D is likely to be cut back more and more. Open Innovation provides
an approach that can support a renewed corporate commitment to R&D, albeit with
less internal focus and greater external connection.
Q: Will Open Innovation change things for the consumer of
technology? Will the average purchases know there is anything different about
the way the product arrives in the marketplace?
Procter & Gamble’s experience with Open Innovation would say
that consumers will see more choices in their lives – not just different colored
toothpaste, but new kinds of choices, like electronic toothbrushes instead of
manual brushes, or new ways of cleaning floors, windows, clothes, and kids. I
would not be surprised to see a P&G robot in the market in the next three years
as a cleaning helper, and I promise you such a robot would not come solely from
P&G’s own research.
Q: Would innovation have shifted in this way without the
development of the Internet?
Yes. The Internet certainly creates a smaller village for all of
us, but these trends have been underway for at least twenty years. In my
research at Xerox, for example, the biggest and most valuable ideas I studied
all pre-dated the Internet. Having said that, the Internet and email certainly
reduce the cost, and especially the time, it takes to implement Open Innovation
concepts in your company.
Q: Tell us what’s ahead for innovators. What does the next
ten or twenty years in technology development look like to you?
One trend will be innovation as recombination and integration,
rather than as the initial discovery of a “new to the world” idea. Another trend
will be that the ideas we all work with will come from all over the world, and
relatively fewer of them will come from the US. A third trend is that there will
be far greater trade in the market for ideas, and companies become active
buyers, as well as active sellers, of ideas. A final trend is that the concepts
and language of “business models” will move into the R&D process, rather than
being the sole concern of “the suits” in marketing or business development.
Q: Finally, if readers could take away one idea from OPEN
INNOVATION, what would you like that to be?
Our supply of useful knowledge is bigger and better than ever,
and today is widely distributed. This levels the playing field for companies of
all sizes, and increases the rewards for companies that can identify, connect
to, and leverage this knowledge.
Henry Chesbrough is an Assistant Professor and the Class of
1961 Fellow at Harvard Business School. He worked for many years in Silicon
Valley, including a 7 year stint at Quantum where he worked in disk drive
development. He and his wife and two daughters divide their time between Boston
and the Bay Area of California.
State and
Federal Combined
Labor Law Posters
Labor law posters combine state, federal and OSHA required labor law notices on one
laminated poster. Order
Now.
Get
free marketing, sales, advertising
and management ideas
delivered to your inbox.
The information compiled on this site is
Copyright 1999-2009 by Attard Communications, Inc. and by the individual authors.
Business Know-How is a woman-owned business and a registered trademark of Attard Communications, Inc.
Phone: 631-467-8883.
Open
Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology 
