Analysis of the Scientific Research on Open Innovation in Web of Science and Drawing a Scientific Map

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis of scientific research indexed in the Web of Science citation database in the field of open innovation. By employing bibliometric techniques, the research aims to construct a scientific map that visually represents the intellectual structure, key themes, and influential authors within this subject area.
Methods: This applied research was conducted by using bibliometric techniques. The advanced search feature was utilized to extract data from the Web of Science (WoS), using the keyword "open innovation." A total of 6,429 bibliographic records were retrieved. After collecting and cleaning the data, it was imported into specialized scientific software. VOSviewer, UCINET, and BibExcel were employed to draw scientific maps.
Results: Based on the data obtained from the Web of Science, a scientific map of the field of open innovation was drawn. It was found that the scientific structure of open innovation consists of 9 main thematic clusters. The first cluster with 13 keywords is the largest cluster and key research areas within the indexed publications include research and development, and absorption capacity, which exhibit the highest frequency. The United States (U.S.), Italy, and the United Kingdom (U.K.) emerged as the leading countries in terms of scientific output in this field. The University of California demonstrated the highest productivity. Over 96.9% of the scientific publications are written in English, followed by Spanish.
Conclusions: This study revealed significant vocabulary relationships, identified key authors and organizations, and delineated research trends within the field of open innovation across various years. Additionally, it highlighted the most frequently used and widely adopted open innovation practices. A co-word analysis revealed a strong association between the keywords "research and development" and "absorption capacity." The study also identified disparities in the utilization of open innovation across different scientific disciplines and observed gaps in the field's scientific structure.

Keywords

References

Akbari, M., Zarehparvar Shojae, E., Padash, H., & Alizadeh, S. (2019). The impact of inbound and outbound open innovation on innovation performance of information and communication technology firms. Journal of Technology Development Management, 6(3), 157-184. (In Persian) https://doi.org/10.22104/jtdm.2019.2673.1901
Arrigo, E. (2018). Open innovation and market orientation: An analysis of the relationship. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 9(1), 150-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0327-7
Artang, A., Bagheri, A. & Akbari, M. (2021). The effect of personal and social characteristics of entrepreneurship team on open innovation in information technology firms in Tehran. Journal of Technology Development Management, 9(3), 73-98. (In Persian) https://doi.org/10.22104/jtdm.2022.4720.2742
Badin Dahesh, M., Tabarsa, G., Zandieh, M. & Hamidizadeh, M. (2021). Analyzing the academic social networks of open innovation field. Journal of Scientometrics, 7(1), 25-52. (In Persian) https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2020.4791.1323
Dahlander, L. & Gan, D. M. (2010). How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39, 699–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.013
Hossain, M., Zahidul Islam, K. M., Abu Sayee, M. & Kaurane, I. (2016). A comprehensive review of open innovation literature. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 7(1), 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-02-2015-0009
Khasseh, A. A., Soosaraei, M. & Fakhar, M. Cluster (2016). Analysis and Mapping of Iranian Researchers in the Field of Parasitology: With an emphasis on the co-authorship indicators and H-index. Iranian Journal of Medical Microbiology, 10(2), 63-74, (In Persian) http://ijmm.ir/article-1-519-fa.html
Kostoff, R. N. (1993). Semiquantitative methods for research impact assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 44(3), 231-244. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1625(93)90070-N
Kovács, A., Van Looy, B. & Cassiman, B. (2015). Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research. Scientometrics, 104, 951–983. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1628-0
Odriozola-Fernández, I., Berbegal-Mirabent, J. & Merigó-Lindahl, J. M. (2019). Open innovation in small and medium enterprises: a bibliometric analysis. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 32(5), 533-557. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-12-2017-0491
Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criad, M., Nájera-SánchezŲŒ J.-J., & Mora-Valentín, E.-M. (2018). A research agenda on open innovation and entrepreneurship: A co-word analysis. Administrative Sciences, 8(34). https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8030034
Mehri, S. (2015). Using of co-word analysis method in mapping of the structure of scientific fields (case study: The field of Informetrics). Iranian Journal of Information Processing & Management, 30(2), 373-396. (In Persian). 10.35050/JIPM010.2015.040
Safdari Ranjbar, M., Manteghi, M., & Tavakoli, G. (2014). Open innovation; A comprehensive view on concepts, approaches, trends and key success factors. Roshd-e-Fanavari, 40(10), 1-10. (In Persian) http://www.roshdefanavari.ir/Article/20015
Siami, Z., Ebadullah Amuqin, J., & Mohammadi, M. (2022). Mapping scientific output in the field of marketing application to libraries and information. Sciences and Techniques of Information Management, 8(1), 339-358. (In Persian) https://doi.org/10.22091/stim.2021.6629.1537
Sohaili, F., Shaban, A., & Khase, A. (2016). Intellectual structure of knowledge in information behavior: A co-word analysis. Human Information Interaction, 2(4), 21–36. (Persian) http://hii.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2446-fa.html
Academic Librarianship and Information Research
Volume 58, Issue 1
March 2024
Pages 61-78

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics