This case study explores the origins of Nokia’s decline in the mobile technology market, as an unsuccessful attempt to introduce an open-source strategy into the business. Nokia created a hybrid model, which codified conflicting principles taken from closed and open mode of collaboration. A series of implementation problems resulted in Nokia struggling to attract open-source partners, growing issues with managing in-house staff and ultimately failing to develop a new mobile operating system fast enough to stay competitive.
Key learning outcomes:
At the completion of the case study, students will understand the complexity of open innovation implementation when paradigmatic differences between businesses and/or partners are not resolved.
AntonelliC (2006) The business governance of localized knowledge: An information economics approach for the economics of knowledge. Industry and Innovation13(3): 227–261.
2.
BattilanaJLeeM (2014) Advancing research on hybrid organizing. The Academy of Management Annals8(1): 397–441.
3.
BattilanaJDoradoS (2010) Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy Of Management Journal53(6): 1419–1440.
4.
BrunssonN (2003) Organized hypocrisy. In: CzarniawskaBSevónG (eds) The Northern Lights - Organization Theory in Scandinavia. Malmö: Liber and Copenhagen Business School Press, pp. 201–222.
5.
ChesbroughH (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
6.
ChesbroughH (2006a) New puzzles and new findings. In: ChesbroughHVanhaverbekeWWestJ (eds) Open Innovation. Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 15–34.
7.
ChesbroughHW (2006b) Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
8.
ChesbroughH (2011) The case for open services innovation: The commodity trap. California Management Review53(3): 5–20.
9.
CiesielskaM (2010) Hybrid Organization. Frederiksberg: CBS Press.
10.
CiesielskaMIskoujinaZ (2012) Trust as a success factor in open innovation. The case of Nokia and Gnome. In: JemielniakDMarksA (eds) Managing Dynamic Technology-Oriented Business: High-Tech Organizations and Workplaces. Information Science Reference. Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference, pp. 11–29.
11.
CiesielskaMPetersenG (2013) Boundary object as a trust buffer. The study of an open source code repository. Tamara Journal for Critical Organization Inquiry11(3): 5–14.
12.
CiesielskaMWestenholzA (2016) Dilemmas within commercial involvement in open source software. Journal of Organizational Change Management29(3): 344–360.
13.
DozYKosonenM (2008) The dynamics of strategic agility: Nokia’s rollercoaster experience. California Management Review50(3): 95–118.
14.
EnbergCLindkvistLTellF (2006) Exploring the dynamics of knowledge integration. Acting and interacting in project teams. Management Learning37(2): 143–165.
15.
JaaksiA (2007) Experiences on product development with open source software. In: FitzgeraldFJScacchiWSillittiA (eds) Open Source Development, Adoption and Innovation. Boston, MA: Springer/IFIP, pp. 85–96.
16.
JayJ (2013) Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal56(1): 137–159.
17.
JemielniakD (2014) Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
JonesO (2006) Developing absorptive capacity in mature organisations: The change agent’s role. Management Learning37(3): 355–376.
19.
MeyerJWRowanB (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83: 340–363.
20.
MunozPLuL (2011) Interorganizational networks and open innovation environments: Addressing emerging paradoxes. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation12(4): 227–237.
21.
LavioletteEMRedien-CollotRTeglborgA (2016) Open innovation from the inside: Employee-driven innovation in support of absorptive capacity for inbound open innovation. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation17(4): 228–239.
22.
RobertsonPCasaliGLJacobsonD (2012) Managing open incremental process innovation: Absorptive capacity and distributed learning. Research Policy41(5): 822–832.
23.
RuuskaILehtonenPMartinsuoM. (2009) Knowledge integration across intra-organizational project boundaries: A case study in a service development portfolio. Paper presented at the 25th EGOS European Group for Organization Studies Colloquium, 2–4 July 2009, Barcelona, Spain.
24.
SchrollAMildA (2011) Open innovation modes and the role of internal R & D: An empirical study on open innovation adoption in Europe. European Journal of Innovation Management14(4): 475–495.
25.
SwanJScarbroughH (2005) The politics of networked innovation. Human Relations58(7): 913–943.
26.
UlhøiJP (2004) Open source development: A hybrid in innovation and management theory. Management Decision42(9): 1095–1114.
27.
WeberS (2004) The Success of Open Source. Cambridge, London: Harvard University Press.
