TY - JOUR T1 - Examining Open Innovation in Science (OIS): What Open Innovation can and cannot offer the science of science JF - Innovation: Organization & Management Y1 - 2021 A1 - Susanne Beck A1 - Marcel LaFlamme A1 - Carsten Bergenholtz A1 - Marcel Bogers A1 - Tiare-Maria Brasseur A1 - Marie-Louise Conradsen A1 - Kevin Crowston A1 - Diletta Di Marco A1 - Agnes Effert A1 - Despoina Filiou A1 - Lars Frederiksen A1 - Thomas Gillier A1 - Marc Gruber A1 - Carolin Haeussler A1 - Karin Hoisl A1 - Olga Kokshagina A1 - Maria-Theresa Norn A1 - Marion Poetz A1 - Gernot Pruschak A1 - Laia Pujol Priego A1 - Agnieszka Radziwon A1 - Alexander Ruser A1 - Henry Sauermann A1 - Sonali Shah A1 - Julia Suess-Reyes A1 - Christopher L. Tucci A1 - Philipp Tuertscher A1 - Jane Bjørn Vedel A1 - Roberto Verganti A1 - Jonathan Wareham A1 - Sunny Mosangzi Xu AB -

Scholars across disciplines increasingly hear calls for more open and collaborative approaches to scientific research. The concept of Open Innovation in Science (OIS) provides a framework that integrates dispersed research efforts aiming to understand the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of applying open and collaborative research practices. While the OIS framework has already been taken up by science of science scholars, its conceptual underpinnings require further specification. In this essay, we critically examine the OIS concept and bring to light two key aspects: 1) how OIS builds upon Open Innovation (OI) research by adopting its attention to boundary-crossing knowledge flows and by adapting other concepts developed and researched in OI to the science context as exemplified by two OIS cases in the area of research funding; 2) how OIS conceptualises knowledge flows across boundaries. While OI typically focuses on well-defined organizational boundaries, we argue that blurry and even invisible boundaries between communities of practice may more strongly constrain flows of knowledge related to openness and collaboration in science. Given the uptake of this concept, this essay brings needed clarity to the meaning of OIS, which has no particular normative orientation toward a close coupling between science and industry. We end by outlining the essay’s contributions to OI and the science of science, as well as to science practitioners.

ER - TY - RPRT T1 - Manifesto on Engineering Academic Software (Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 16252) Y1 - 2016 A1 - Alice Allen A1 - Cecilia Aragon A1 - Christoph Becker A1 - Jeffrey Carver A1 - Andrei Chiş A1 - Benoit Combemale A1 - Mike Croucher A1 - Kevin Crowston A1 - Daniel Garijo A1 - Ashish Gehani A1 - Carole Goble A1 - Robert Haines A1 - Robert Hirschfeld A1 - James Howison A1 - Kathryn Huff A1 - Caroline Jay A1 - Daniel S. Katz A1 - Claude Kirchner A1 - Katie Kuksenok A1 - Ralf Lämmel A1 - Oscar Nierstrasz A1 - Matt Turk A1 - van Nieuwpoort, Rob A1 - Matthew Vaughn A1 - Jurgen Vinju AB - Software is often a critical component of scientific research. It can be a component of the academic research methods used to produce research results, or it may itself be an academic research result. Software, however, has rarely been considered to be a citable artifact in its own right. With the advent of open-source software, artifact evaluation committees of conferences, and journals that include source code and running systems as part of the published artifacts, we foresee that software will increasingly be recognized as part of the academic process. The quality and sustainability of this software must be accounted for, both a priori and a posteriori. The Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop on “Engineering Academic Software” has examined the strengths, weaknesses, risks, and opportunities of academic software engineering. A key outcome of the workshop is this Dagstuhl Manifesto, serving as a roadmap towards future professional software engineering for software-based research instruments and other software produced and used in an academic context. The manifesto is expressed in terms of a series of actionable “pledges” that users and developers of academic research software can take as concrete steps towards improving the environment in which that software is produced. JF - Dagstuhl Manifestos PB - Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics CY - Wadern, Germany VL - 6 IS - 1 ER -