The main thought behind the concept of Open Innovation, mainly shaped by Henry Chesbrough, is that companies in a world of diversified information and talent cannot entirely rely on their own research in order to be innovative, but are increasingly reliant on the integration and application of external information and competencies.  Understood in this way, Open Innovation constitutes a further development of the lead user concept by Eric von Hippel (1988, 2005) advocating the integration of competent customers into the innovation process. The potential of externally generated innovation lies in the competence to aggregate decentralized information and resources within an open process to decisions out of that innovations more likely can arise. This is not only true for the integration of lead users, but also for cooperative networks of companies forming a virtual organization. 

Within the concept of virtual organizations Littmann/Jansen distinguish between intra-organizational, extra-organizational, inter-organizational as well as customer- and product-orientated virtualization. This approach may provide a sharper distinction in the virtualization of organizations. Recent literature pro-nounces the potential with respect to innovation that is possible to achieve for networked companies. Miles/Miles/Snow developed an exemplary model of “Collaborative Entrepreneurship”, describing how a fictional community of networked firms uses continuous innovation to create economic wealth.

Chesbrough/Teece have examined the virtuosity of virtuality in terms of the innovativeness of a company being one of its major competencies in order to create value.  They argue that while autonomous innovations can be handled by virtualization, systemic innovations need to be developed internally in order to prevent a company from loosing its core competencies. Otherwise being open to others could be a reckless risk and lead not to the desired results of such cooperation.

The main thought behind the concept of Open Innovation, mainly shaped by Henry Chesbrough, is that companies in a world of diversified information and talent cannot entirely rely on their own research in order to be innovative, but are increasingly reliant on the integration and application of external information and competencies.  Understood in this way, Open Innovation constitutes a further development of the lead user concept by Eric von Hippel (1988, 2005) advocating the integration of competent customers into the innovation process. The potential of externally generated innovation lies in the competence to aggregate decentralized information and resources within an open process to decisions out of that innovations more likely can arise. This is not only true for the integration of lead users, but also for cooperative networks of companies forming a virtual organization. 

Within the concept of virtual organizations Littmann/Jansen distinguish between intra-organizational, extra-organizational, inter-organizational as well as customer- and product-orientated virtualization. This approach may provide a sharper distinction in the virtualization of organizations. Recent literature pro-nounces the potential with respect to innovation that is possible to achieve for networked companies. Miles/Miles/Snow developed an exemplary model of “Collaborative Entrepreneurship”, describing how a fictional community of networked firms uses continuous innovation to create economic wealth.

Chesbrough/Teece have examined the virtuosity of virtuality in terms of the innovativeness of a company being one of its major competencies in order to create value.  They argue that while autonomous innovations can be handled by virtualization, systemic innovations need to be developed internally in order to prevent a company from loosing its core competencies. Otherwise being open to others could be a reckless risk and lead not to the desired results of such cooperation.