Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Transaction cost economics and open innovation
View graph of relations

Transaction cost economics and open innovation: implications for theory and practice

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Transaction cost economics and open innovation: implications for theory and practice. / Remneland-wikhamn, Björn; Knights, David.
In: Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 21, No. 3, 09.2012, p. 277-289.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Remneland-wikhamn, B & Knights, D 2012, 'Transaction cost economics and open innovation: implications for theory and practice', Creativity and Innovation Management, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 277-289. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00639.x

APA

Vancouver

Remneland-wikhamn B, Knights D. Transaction cost economics and open innovation: implications for theory and practice. Creativity and Innovation Management. 2012 Sept;21(3):277-289. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00639.x

Author

Remneland-wikhamn, Björn ; Knights, David. / Transaction cost economics and open innovation : implications for theory and practice. In: Creativity and Innovation Management. 2012 ; Vol. 21, No. 3. pp. 277-289.

Bibtex

@article{d371c23dd2bf4989be44cf53f00f849e,
title = "Transaction cost economics and open innovation: implications for theory and practice",
abstract = "Transaction cost economics (TCE) has had a strong impact on theories of economic exchange but also on open innovation, even though the relationship is often implicit rather than explicit. In this paper, we highlight what we consider to be the problematic use of TCE in the context of open innovation, suggesting that it has a limited descriptive power and potentially does normative damage to open innovation practice. A case study of the Volvo Group will be drawn upon to illustrate these claims. The case questions the belief that hierarchical control eliminates transaction costs. Also, it suggests that an overemphasis on calculative reduction of transaction costs together with a focus on governance and rationality leave little space for an innovative climate, thus diverting attention away from the creative potential of transactions. Indeed the self-fulfilling prophecy character of subscribing to the assumptions of TCE may not merely limit but actually undermine innovation.",
author = "Bj{\"o}rn Remneland-wikhamn and David Knights",
year = "2012",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00639.x",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "277--289",
journal = "Creativity and Innovation Management",
issn = "0963-1690",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transaction cost economics and open innovation

T2 - implications for theory and practice

AU - Remneland-wikhamn, Björn

AU - Knights, David

PY - 2012/9

Y1 - 2012/9

N2 - Transaction cost economics (TCE) has had a strong impact on theories of economic exchange but also on open innovation, even though the relationship is often implicit rather than explicit. In this paper, we highlight what we consider to be the problematic use of TCE in the context of open innovation, suggesting that it has a limited descriptive power and potentially does normative damage to open innovation practice. A case study of the Volvo Group will be drawn upon to illustrate these claims. The case questions the belief that hierarchical control eliminates transaction costs. Also, it suggests that an overemphasis on calculative reduction of transaction costs together with a focus on governance and rationality leave little space for an innovative climate, thus diverting attention away from the creative potential of transactions. Indeed the self-fulfilling prophecy character of subscribing to the assumptions of TCE may not merely limit but actually undermine innovation.

AB - Transaction cost economics (TCE) has had a strong impact on theories of economic exchange but also on open innovation, even though the relationship is often implicit rather than explicit. In this paper, we highlight what we consider to be the problematic use of TCE in the context of open innovation, suggesting that it has a limited descriptive power and potentially does normative damage to open innovation practice. A case study of the Volvo Group will be drawn upon to illustrate these claims. The case questions the belief that hierarchical control eliminates transaction costs. Also, it suggests that an overemphasis on calculative reduction of transaction costs together with a focus on governance and rationality leave little space for an innovative climate, thus diverting attention away from the creative potential of transactions. Indeed the self-fulfilling prophecy character of subscribing to the assumptions of TCE may not merely limit but actually undermine innovation.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00639.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00639.x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 21

SP - 277

EP - 289

JO - Creativity and Innovation Management

JF - Creativity and Innovation Management

SN - 0963-1690

IS - 3

ER -