The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Startups and open innovation: a review of the literature
Abstract
Purpose: Startup companies represent a powerful engine of open innovation (OI) processes. The purpose of this paper is to represent a first step in building a map of the state-of-the-art knowledge of the “startups in an OI context” phenomenon. Through the selection and analysis of relevant literature, this study aims at deepening our understanding of the theme and at providing directions for future research. Design/methodology/approach: By using an explicit method for the review (Pittaway et al., 2004) the authors selected a set of papers, which cover the knowledge domain object of this study. In total, 41 articles about “startups and OI” have been selected and the full papers have been analysed. Findings: The analysed literature has been synthesized in seven sub-topics, which have been evaluated as the most relevant in explaining the phenomenon of startups in relation to OI. Implications for research, for managers and for policy makers conclude the paper. Practical implications: The review produced valuable knowledge for both managers and policy decision-makers. The paper allows a better understanding of the role of startups in OI processes. This improved understanding can help managers of large firms as well as policy makers involved in OI in making their decisions. Besides, implications of OI strategies for startup managers have been singled-out. Originality/value: Startup companies are intrinsically open organizations, necessarily engaged in innovation processes. Research at the intersection between the themes of OI and startups is gaining momentum. This review of the literature represents the first attempt to organize the scientific knowledge related to the intersection between the startups and OI phenomena systematically.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
Business models, business strategy and innovation
Teece, D. J. (2010) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003 · Cited by 8,335
von Hippel, E. (2007) · Das Summa Summarum des Management · doi:10.1007/978-3-8349-9320-5_10 · Cited by 5,098
Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts
von Hippel, E. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.7.791 · Cited by 4,650
Zander, U., & Kogut, B. (1995) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.6.1.76 · Cited by 3,266
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003) · Hispana · Cited by 2,767
Dahlander, L., & Gann, D. M. (2010) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.013 · Cited by 2,435
Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science
Hippel, E. V., & Krogh, G. V. (2003) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.14.2.209.14992 · Cited by 2,145
Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives
Huizingh, E. K. R. E. (2011) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2010.10.002 · Cited by 1,889
Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence
Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., & Neely, A. (2004) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00101.x · Cited by 1,747
Metadata
- Authors
- Spender, J.-C., Corvello, V., Grimaldi, M., & Rippa, P.
- Venue
- European Journal of Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2017-01-09
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 4-30
- ISSN
- 1460-1060 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2564069891
- Cited by
- 432
- References
- 63
- FWCI
- 54.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Startups and open innovation: a review of the literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/ejim-12-2015-0131
- The paper
- Spender, J.-C., Corvello, V., Grimaldi, M., & Rippa, P. (2017). Startups and open innovation: a review of the literature. European Journal of Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejim-12-2015-0131
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.