Matchmaking for open innovation - theoretical perspectives based on interaction, rather than transaction

Thomas Holzmann, Klaus Sailer, Brendan Galbraith, Bernhard Katzy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)


This an editorial of the Special Issue entitled: "Matchmaking for open innovation: interaction rather than transaction" that was guest edited by Holzmann, Sailer, Galbraith and Katzy.This special issue is the third part of a trilogy of special issues that have been guest edited by Brendan Galbraith on the broad theme of innovation intermediaries. In this editorial, the authors present matchmaking an interdisciplinary field and propose a matchmaking theoretical perspective based on interaction and collaboration.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)595-599
JournalTechnology Analysis & Strategic Management
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 23 Jun 2014

Bibliographical note

Reference text: 1. Afuah, A., and C.L. Tucci. 2012. Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review 37, no. 3: 355–75. doi: 10.5465/amr.2010.0146 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
2. Chan, F.T.S. 2003. Interactive selection model for supplier selection process: An analytical hierarchy process approach. International Journal of Production Research 41, no. 15: 3549–79. doi: 10.1080/0020754031000138358 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [CSA]
3. Chesbrough, H.W. 2003. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
4. Cropper, S., M. Ebers, C. Huxham, and P. Smith Ring. 2008. The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [CrossRef]
5. Doz, Y.L. 1996. The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal 17, no. S1: 55–83. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250171006 [CrossRef]
6. Galbraith, B., and R. McAdam. 2011. The promise and problem with open innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 23, no. 1: 1–6. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2011.537084 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
7. Galbraith, B., and R. McAdam. 2013. The convergence of ICT, policy, intermediaries and society for technology transfer: Evidence from European innovation projects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 25, no. 3: 249–52. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2013.766684 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
8. Gale, D., and L.S. Shapley. 1962. College admissions and the stability of marriage. The American Mathematical Monthly 69, no. 1: 9–15. doi: 10.2307/2312726 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
9. Hacklin, F., C. Marxt, and F. Fahrni. 2006. Strategic venture partner selection for collaborative innovation in production systems: A decision support system-based approach. International Journal of Production Economics 104, no. 1: 100–12. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.09.002 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
10. Hargadon, A., and R.I. Sutton. 1997. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 42, no. 4: 716–49. doi: 10.2307/2393655 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [CSA]
11. Hippel, E.V. 1986. Lead users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science 32, no. 7: 791–805. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.32.7.791 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
12. Howells, J. 2006. Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy 35, no. 5: 715–28. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
13. Jeppesen, L.B., and M.J. Molin. 2003. Consumers as co-developers: Learning and innovation outside the firm. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 15, no. 3: 363–83. doi: 10.1080/09537320310001601531 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
14. Katzy, B., and K. Crowston. 2008. Competency rallying for technical innovation – the case of the Virtuelle Fabrik. Technovation 28, no. 10: 679–92. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2007.11.003 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
15. McCutcheon, D., and F.I. Stuart. 2000. Issues in the choice of supplier alliance partners. Journal of Operations Management 18, no. 3: 279–301. doi: 10.1016/S0272-6963(99)00026-1 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
16. Miller, K.D., and A.T. Arikan. 2004. Technology search investments: Evolutionary, option reasoning, and option pricing approaches. Strategic Management Journal 25, no. 5: 473–85. doi: 10.1002/smj.392 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
17. Mishra, S., S. Deshmukh, and P. Vrat. 2002. Matching of technological forecasting technique to a technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 69, no. 1: 1–27. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(01)00123-8 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
18. Mitsuhashi, H., and H.R. Greve. 2009. A matching theory of alliance formation and organizational success: Complementarity and compatibility. Academy of Management Journal 52, no. 5: 975–95. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2009.44634482 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
19. Mortensen, D.T. 2011. Markets with search friction and the DMP model. American Economic Review 101, no. 4: 1073–91. doi: 10.1257/aer.101.4.1073 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
20. Mowshowitz, A. 2002. Virtual organization: Toward a theory of societal transformation stimulated by information technology. Westport: Greenwood.
21. Phaal, R., C.J. Farrukh, and D.R. Probert. 2006. Technology management tools: Concept, development and application. Technovation 26, no. 3: 336–44. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2005.02.001 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
22. Pissarides, C.A. 1985. Short-run equilibrium dynamics of unemployment vacancies, and real wages. American Economic Review 75, no. 4: 676–90. [Web of Science ®], [CSA]
23. Porter, M.E. 2000. Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly 14, no. 1: 15–34. doi: 10.1177/089124240001400105 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
24. Powell, W.W., K.W. Koput, and L. Smith-Doerr. 1996. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41, no. 1: 116–45. doi: 10.2307/2393988 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [CSA]
25. Ring, P.S., and A.H. Van de Ven. 1994. Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review 19, no. 1: 90–118. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
26. Roth, A.E., T. Sönmez, and M.U. Ünver. 2005. A kidney exchange clearinghouse in New England. American Economic Review 95, no. 2: 376–80. doi: 10.1257/000282805774669989 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
27. Schnizler, B., D. Neumann, D. Veit, and C. Weinhardt. 2008. Trading grid services – a multi-attribute combinatorial approach. European Journal of Operational Research 187, no. 3: 943–61. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.05.049 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
28. Shehabuddeen, N., D. Probert, and R. Phaal. 2006. From theory to practice: Challenges in operationalising a technology selection framework. Technovation 26, no. 3: 324–35. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2004.10.017 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]
29. Spulber, D.F. 1996. Market microstructure and intermediation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 10, no. 3: 135–52. doi: 10.1257/jep.10.3.135 [CrossRef]
30. Spulber, D.F. 2003. The intermediation theory of the firm: Integrating economic and management approaches to strategy. Managerial and Decision Economics 24, no. 4: 253–66. doi: 10.1002/mde.1120 [CrossRef]
31. Veit, D. 2003. Matchmaking in electronic markets – an agent-based approach towards matchmaking in electronic negotiations. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
32. Williamson, O.E. 1998. Transaction cost economics: How it works; where it is headed. De Economist 146, no. 1: 23–58. doi: 10.1023/A:1003263908567 [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]


Dive into the research topics of 'Matchmaking for open innovation - theoretical perspectives based on interaction, rather than transaction'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this