Open Innovation is becoming the new mantra everywhere.
The article here points out the other side of Open Innovation as well. The author states that
But there are costs, too. A company can lose control of its own technology, as it leaks out to partners. It can make it less likely, rather than more, that a new product is genuinely new and original. It’s hard on employee relations; is it a prelude to outsourcing or bypassing? And collaboration can be anything but efficient.
The positive side also is articulated thus, "Some of the benefits: getting new ideas, finding hot new partners or employees, killing the “not invented here” syndrome, conducting some early market research, pre-selling before the product launch – and, of course, saving money."
The definition of open innovation really takes the cherry. "The bluntest definition possible: open innovation is what happens when big companies collaborate on a large scale with outsiders – university researchers, suppliers, small tech start-ups – to get new products or services to market."
Mark the word BIG COMPANIES. Last year when I asked a gathering of Big Company executives on a sales pitch," we know when elephants cant stamp they start dancing, when they cant dance do they become more social or open" - the big company executives did not answer. But the real hidden intentions of big companies really is cover risks of small guys eating suddenly what they have created for so many years.
This will be short term, in my opinion, only co-creation with mutual trust has long term sustainability.