The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
OPEN VERSUS CLOSED INNOVATION: A MODEL OF DISCOVERY AND DIVERGENCE.
Abstract
When is open innovation superior to closed innovation? Through a formal simulation model we show that an open approach to innovation allows the firm to discover combinations of product features that would be hard to envision under integration. However, when partners have divergent goals, open innovation restricts the firm's ability to establish the product's technological trajectory. The resolution of the trade-off between benefits of discovery and costs of divergence determines the best approach to innovation.
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
(2003) · Cited by 9,368
Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events
Arthur, W. B. (1989) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2234208 · Cited by 7,489
The origins of order; self organization and selection in evolution
(1994) · International Journal of Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0020-711x(94)90119-8 · Cited by 6,649
Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy
Arthur, W. (2026) · doi:10.3998/mpub.10029 · Cited by 4,547
Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy
Shaw, M. J., Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (2000) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259025 · Cited by 4,124
von Hippel, E. (2005) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2333.001.0001 · Cited by 3,768
Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology
(2004) · European Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1108/14601060410565074 · Cited by 2,806
Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes
Levinthal, D. A. (1997) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.43.7.934 · Cited by 2,254
Looking Forward and Looking Backward: Cognitive and Experiential Search
Gavetti, G., & Levinthal, D. (2000) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666981 · Cited by 2,050
Franke, N., & Shah, S. (2003) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00006-9 · Cited by 1,435
Cited by
Towards an information systems perspective and research agenda on crowdsourcing for innovation
Majchrzak, A., & Malhotra, A. (2013) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2013.07.004 · Cited by 470
Opening Strategy: Evolution of a Precarious Profession
Whittington, R., Cailluet, L., & Yakis‐Douglas, B. (2011) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00762.x · Cited by 458
Actor roles and role patterns influencing innovation in living labs
Nyström, A.-G., Leminen, S., Westerlund, M., & Kortelainen, M. (2014) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.12.016 · Cited by 254
Benlian, A., Hilkert, D., & Hess, T. (2015) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1057/jit.2015.6 · Cited by 212
Brunswicker, S., Almirall, E., & Majchrzak, A. (2019) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2019/13561 · Cited by 59
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- ALMIRALL, E., & CASADESUS-MASANELL, R.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2010-01-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27-47
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2142352817
- Cited by
- 533
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 116.12
- 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: OPEN VERSUS CLOSED INNOVATION: A MODEL OF DISCOVERY AND DIVERGENCE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/amr.2010.45577790
- The paper
- ALMIRALL, E., & CASADESUS-MASANELL, R. (2010). OPEN VERSUS CLOSED INNOVATION: A MODEL OF DISCOVERY AND DIVERGENCE. Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.45577790
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.
