@incollection{CorazzaThienen2023,
  author    = {Corazza, Giovanni Emanuele and Thienen, Julia von},
  title     = {Invention},
  series = {The Palgrave encyclopedia of the possible},
  booktitle = {The Palgrave encyclopedia of the possible},
  editor    = {Glăveanu, Vlad Petre},
  publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-030-90912-3},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_14},
  pages     = {806 -- 814},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {This entry addresses invention from five different perspectives: (i) definition of the term, (ii) mechanisms underlying invention processes, (iii) (pre-)history of human inventions, (iv) intellectual property protection vs open innovation, and (v) case studies of great inventors. Regarding the definition, an invention is the outcome of a creative process taking place within a technological milieu, which is recognized as successful in terms of its effectiveness as an original technology. In the process of invention, a technological possibility becomes realized. Inventions are distinct from either discovery or innovation. In human creative processes, seven mechanisms of invention can be observed, yielding characteristic outcomes: (1) basic inventions, (2) invention branches, (3) invention combinations, (4) invention toolkits, (5) invention exaptations, (6) invention values, and (7) game-changing inventions. The development of humanity has been strongly shaped by inventions ever since early stone tools and the conception of agriculture. An "explosion of creativity" has been associated with Homo sapiens, and inventions in all fields of human endeavor have followed suit, engendering an exponential growth of cumulative culture. This culture development emerges essentially through a reuse of previous inventions, their revision, amendment and rededication. In sociocultural terms, humans have increasingly regulated processes of invention and invention-reuse through concepts such as intellectual property, patents, open innovation and licensing methods. Finally, three case studies of great inventors are considered: Edison, Marconi, and Montessori, next to a discussion of human invention processes as collaborative endeavors.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{AdelhelmBraunMuelleretal.2011,
  author    = {Adelhelm, Silvia and Braun, Andreas and M{\"u}ller, Elisabeth and Vladova, Gergana},
  title     = {Philo : PharmaInnovationsLotse ; ihr Weg zum erfolgreichen Open Innovation Management},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-103-5},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-50895},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {161},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Vorliegender Leitfaden ist eines der Ergebnisse des Forschungsprojekts „Open Innovation in Life Sciences" (OIL), das von Mai 2008 bis April 2011 an der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam durchgef{\"u}hrt wurde. Er nimmt f{\"u}r sich in Anspruch, gerade Innovationsmanager in kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen (KMU) der Pharmaindustrie bei der Einf{\"u}hrung des Open Innovation Managements zu unterst{\"u}tzen. Zielsetzung des Forschungsprojekts war es, (1) die Chancen und Risiken von Open Innovation unter besonderer Ber{\"u}cksichtigung der Anforderungen von Pharma-KMU zu analysieren und (2) daraus abgeleitet ein Konzept zur Implementierung von Open Innovation bei Pharma-KMU zu entwickeln. Der Ausgangspunkt des Projektes war die Erkenntnis, dass die Life Sciences-Branche im Allgemeinen und die Pharmaindustrie im Besonderen durch eine steigende Komplexit{\"a}t der Innovationsprozesse und eine zunehmende Tendenz zu Kooperationen gekennzeichnet ist. Vor diesem Hintergrund er{\"o}ffnet gerade der Open Innovation-Ansatz f{\"u}r die Pharmabranche neue Gestaltungs- und damit Wachstumsm{\"o}glichkeiten. Open Innovation - definiert als die planvolle {\"O}ffnung der Innovationsprozesse und die strategische Einbindung des Unternehmensumfelds - wird dabei als zentraler Erfolgsfaktor f{\"u}r die Innovationsf{\"a}higkeit beschrieben.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{UllrichVladova2016,
  author    = {Ullrich, Andre and Vladova, Gergana},
  title     = {Weighing the Pros and Cons of Engaging in Open Innovation},
  series = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
  publisher = {Carleton University Graphic Services},
  address   = {Ottawa},
  issn      = {1927-0321},
  pages     = {34 -- 40},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The positive aspects of open innovation projects are widely discussed in innovation management research and practice by means of case studies and best practices. However, enterprises, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) also face miscellaneous challenges in open innovation practice, leading to uncertainty and even renunciation of open innovation project participation. Thus, it is essential for SMEs to find the right balance between possible positive effects and negative consequences - the latter being the less studied "dark sides" of open innovation. However, appropriate methods of finding this balance are still lacking. In this article, we discuss the assessment of open innovation project participation by presenting a weighing and decision process framework as a conceivable solution approach. The framework includes an internal, external, and integrated analysis as well as a recommendation and decision phase. Piece by piece, we investigate the current situation and the innovation goals of the enterprise as an initial point for a decision for or against engaging in open innovation. Furthermore, we discuss the development of a software tool that automatically applies this framework and allows self-assessment by SMEs.},
  language  = {en}
}