ROLE AND NATURE OF TRUST IN THE INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS Academic Summit on Learning Clusters Jyväskylä Oct. 13th, 2009 Professor Kirsimarja Blomqvist School of Business & Technology Business Research Center Lappeenranta University of Technology
WHY IS THIS INTERESTING? Increasingly global competition between networks rather than firms Dispersed, specialized and complex nature of valuable knowledge A search for relational advantage instead of only firm-level advantage Dynamics and related mechanisms in the innovation ecosystems are not well known Trust may be a critical factor enhancing innovation ecosystems
KEY DEFINITIONS INNOVATION/ BUSINESS ECOSYSTEM TRUST New organizational form for distributed innovation (Iansiti & Levien 2004) Collaboration to create a system of complementary capabilities and companies (Moore, 2006) Vulnerable actor s expectation of the other party s competence, goodwill and identity (Blomqvist 1997 & 2002)
WHY IS TRUST CRITICAL? Trust is relevant when there is risk, vulnerability, interdependency, power and information asymmetry as well as complexity. COLLABORATION COMMITMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST These characteristic are embedded in innovation ecosystems, where communication, commitment and collaboration are critical.
TRUST IS A MULTI-DISCIPLINARY & MULTI-LEVEL PHENOMENON Inter-organizational....... organization Global and national Regional Organizational Team level Interpersonal Personal organization..... Trustee S1. Trustor B1 Trustor B2 Macro level Micro level (ind/ org)
SYSTEMIC TECHNOLOGY AND NEED FOR INTEROPERABILITY Laitteet Network Laitteet Verkko Equipment No part can function alone. Interoperability as a basis for ICT business. Laitteet Applications Sovellukset Laitteet Content Service quality is defined by the weakest part of the network. Adapted from Jukka Helin, TeliaSonera Finland
CASE FINNISH MOBILE TV CONCEPT & DEVELOPMENT Collaborative development of a technology-based systemic service experience Broadcasting of TV channels (DVB-H Technology) Interactive and peer services, reporting www.finnishmobiletv.com DVB-H network infrastructure and terminal development 2001- Finnpilot I consumer testing of technology and market for MobileTV 2005- MobileTV at Forum Virium for service development 2006-
FINNISH MOBILE TV KEY ACTORS Finnish MobileTV (FiMTV) = A group of seven companies interested in developing mobile TV into a business opportunity MTV3 Media and broadcasting company AlmaMedia Media and broadcasting company YLE National media and broadcasting company Tekes = National research financer TeliaSonera Telco Nokia Network and teminal manufacturer Elisa Telco RTT Ltd = Joint venture by mobile operators, terminal manufacturer and media and broadcasting companies for basic research Forum Virium Helsinki = Living lab in Helsinki area Digita network operator FiMTV developer communities = Any large company, SME, organization or community interested in the development of mobile TV services - services - content - applications - terminals - network operation - networks
RESEARCH DESIGN & DATA COLLECTION A case study with 23 key actor interviews, interactive seminar and complementary data from 12 organizations in collaborative development for Finnish MobileTV First round interviews Motives/benefits, risks/costs, networks, cooperation/competition, contracts, IPR and Second round interviews What is your experience of in this case? Was it important or not? If, what kind of role it had? Please describe role of at inter-personal, inter-organizational and national levels Transcribed data was arranged according to themes Similarities & differences, notions and stories of the interplay of Illustrations in accordance to coding derived from themes
WHAT WAS THE ROLE OF TRUST? Trust was critical for the evolution of the innovation ecosystem as it made collaboration possible and enhanced efficient and effective communication, collaboration, commitment and conflict solving at interpersonal and inter-organizational levels.
WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF TRUST? Trustworthiness as belief in actor s competence, goodwill and identity Individual propensity to was visible both as generalized and specific Social and interpersonal enhances inter-organizational Impersonal at macro (society) and meso-levels (community) was highlighted In this case the inter-personal was relatively more important than interorganizational.. At meso-level the community (RTT, Tekes, Forum Virium).
HOW TRUST BUILDS? PATTERN 1/4 1. Societal and cultural level of (impersonal) has an impact on SOCIETAL TRUST ENHANCES ALL OTHER LEVELS OF TRUST individual s propensity to, interpersonal and inter-organizational Macro Micro ind. 1. Societal 2. Interpersonal 2. Individual s propensity to 4. Inter-organizational SOCIETAL TRUST ENHANCES INDIVIDUAL S PROPENSITY TO TRUST, WHICH ENHANCES INTERPERSONAL AND THEN ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST
HOW TRUST BUILDS? PATTERN 2/4 2. Community level of (impersonal) ( e.g. RTT, Tekes, Forum Virium) has an impact on inter-personal, which again enhances inter-organizational Meso Micro ind. 1. Community-level 2. Interpersonal 3. Inter-organizational COMMUNITY LEVEL TRUST ENHANCES INTERPERSONAL TRUST, WHICH ENHANCES INTERORGANIZATIONAL TRUST
HOW TRUST BUILDS? 3/4 3. Inter-organizational (impersonal) based on shared history has an impact on individual s propensity to, which again enhances inter-personal relationships leading to inter-organizational Micro ind. 1. Inter-organizational 3. Interpersonal 2. Individual s propensity to 4. Inter-organizational INTERORGANIZATIONAL TRUST (HISTORY) ENHANCES INTERPERSONAL TRUST AND SUBSEQUENTLY BUILDS INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST
HOW TRUST BUILDS? 4/4 4. Interpersonal across organizations build intra-organizational interorganizational Micro ind. 1. Inter-personal 2. Intra-organizational 3. Inter-organizational
EVOLUTION OF TRUST FOUR DIFFERENT PATTERNS WITH SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES Macro Meso Micro ind. Micro ind. Micro ind. Micro ind. Dynamics and interplay of different levels of Evolution of can be initiated from any level. Individuals mediate the evolution of across levels. Different levels complement each other providing stronger.
RESEARCH RESULTS Trust as a multi-dimensional concept: competence, goodwill and identity Generalized and specific Impersonal at macro and meso levels Social at interpersonal level Evolution of as a dynamic interplay of different levels of analysis Multi-directional causalities and interplay of Inter-organizational as an outcome of other processes Interpersonal acts as a mediator
IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Evolution of in the innovation ecosystem is based on Interpersonal relationships based on similarity and shared past Meso-level organisations and institutions Macro-level societal institutions, norms and culture Past intra- and inter-organizational experiences How to build when there is no character or cultural similarity, shared history/shadow of the past or social control based on closed networks? How can evolution of be enhanced in global innovation ecosystems? Can modern high performance i.e. fast and individual-based and active development of impersonal structures and processes enhance?
DELIMITATIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH Cultural effect on Finland vs. Poland, Russia, China or US Engineers vs. business development people and lawyers Contextual contingencies: role, nature and evolution of in technology vs. complex technology based service innovations incremental vs. radical innovations Local vs. global innovation ecosystems Modern high performance in global innovation ecosystems
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS? Kirsimarja.blomqvist@lut.fi +358-40-7551693