4.7 Review

Using big data for co-innovation processes: Mapping the field of data-driven innovation, proposing theoretical developments and providing a research agenda

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102347

关键词

Big data; Co-innovation; Open innovation; Bibliometric analysis; Literature review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper is the first systematic literature review on the interconnections between big data and co-innovation. Three thematic clusters were identified, focusing on the role of big data in knowledge creation, driving co-innovation processes through customer engagement, and its impact on co-innovation within service ecosystems. The study also presents eleven research propositions for further theoretical developments and managerial implementations in the field of BD-driven co-innovation.
This is the first systematic literature review concerning the interconnections between big data (BD) and co innovation. It uses BD as a common perspective of analysis as well as a concept aggregating different research streams (open innovation, co-creation and collaborative innovation). The review is based on the results of a bibliographic coupling analysis performed with 51 peer-reviewed papers published before the end of 2019. Three thematic clusters were discovered, which respectively focused on BD as a knowledge creation enabler within co innovation contexts, BD as a driver of co-innovation processes based on customer engagement, and the impact of BD on co-innovation within service ecosystems. The paper theoretically argues that the use of BD, in addition to enhancing intentional and direct collaborative innovation processes, allows the development of passive and unintentional co-innovation that can be implemented through indirect relationships between the collaborative actors. This study also makes eleven unique research propositions concerning further theoretical developments and managerial implementations in the field of BD-driven co-innovation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据