When we talk about Open Innovation, we spoke of the “intentional use of inflows and outflows of knowledge to accelerate internal innovation and expanding markets for external use of innovation, respectively. [This paradigm] assumes that firms can and should use external ideas as well as internal ideas, and internal and external paths to market, as they look to advance their technology. ” – Henry Chesbrough
When we talk about Open Innovation we talk about outside innovators that often are busy focusing on their own economic interests, which often results in fierce competition and little cooperation among them.
Companies that wish use external ideas , apart from knowing what kind of innovation is at stake and what the business model to follow, naturally have a concern whether, who provides these ideas is the possessor of certain skills.
Of course, one of those powers is the technical training, like that which is normally required for R & D. This is necessary to facilitate the communication processes and provide flexibility for innovation teams. There is a common language that is important and a necessary basis of trust.
For example, one of the major difficulties that arise in open innovation, when establishing protocols with universities is the ability to match the look of the business to the academic perspective.
The motivations and basic structures of the partners can lead to misunderstandings or to situations less clear. There may be submerged personal desires that are not exposed and that cause deviations in working together.
Companies also need to consider why the external innovators are attracted to participate in the innovation process.
Some research has shown that the motivations of individuals who engage in open innovation can be surprisingly diverse, but nevertheless summed up in two categories: extrinsic and intrinsic. While competitive markets tend to favor extrinsic, collaborative communities are geared more towards the second.
Although it is not clear that intrinsic motivation facilitates the development of skills it seems to be clear that the environment where both develop benefits the motivation and the level of competence.
There are four dimensions of personal attributes or skills that should be dealt with Open Innovation.
The external and internal elements involved in innovation activities should open with the ability to overcome irregular work and sharp in terms of energy expenditure.
Although a term overused and transversal to any activity, pro -activity, I.e. the ability to translate intentions to behaviors focused on the objectives. This is also a key competence .
The elements must be persistent and combine that attitude with the predisposition to ask many questions, not only for clarify procedures, but also to quickly collect the benefits of working together.
Teamwork requires strong leadership, which specializes in the case of open innovation. The fields of norms and cultures are different and the leader should look for integrative processes and it should exist, in all the team members, a clear awareness of the need for balance.
The aim is to encourage the uptake of open innovation at all levels of the organization and abroad.
No matter the “background” of a leader of a team of innovation!
Technical skills can be very important if we talk about R & D. A team leader needs a broad and deep structures of their ” soft skills “such as skills for communication , conflict resolution , training, motivational skills , critical control , etc. .
The technical skills are good to understand the environment where the team will be working, but not essential for a team leader .