@article {1470,
	title = {Coping with the Double-Edged Sword of Data Sharing in Ecosystems},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {5-16},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {5},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Researchers and practitioners agree upon the huge potential of Big Data Analytics (BDA) for firms{\textquoteright} competitive advantage. Capitalizing on Big Data (BD) often requires sharing firms{\textquoteright} data with their stakeholders in an ecosystem. Sharing data, however, is a double-edged sword, because firms might also risk losing their competitive advantage by doing so. This conceptual paper uses extant literature on data analytics to introduce a comprehensive data sharing strategy framework that helps firms decide which data can be shared in an ecosystem, which should be kept secret, or if additional rules and regulations are required for sharing the data. The framework combines two distinct categorizations of data, and it relates the data categories to firms{\textquoteright} strategic competitive advantage by employing the Resource-Based View (RBV). Firstly, the framework is grounded in the stages of the data analytics process and secondly, it distinguishes between operative, strategic and monetizable data, a new categorization introduced by this paper. Depending on the categories of data a company intends to share, the framework recommends five distinct data sharing strategies that help mitigating the risk of losing their competitive advantage.},
	keywords = {Big Data Analytics Capabilities, competitive advantage, data sharing, ecosystem, Resource-Based View},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1470},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1470},
	author = {Petra Kugler and Thomas Plank}
}
@article {1416,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (January 2021)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {01/2021},
	pages = {3},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {3},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {Digital disruption, digital ecosystem, eCommerce, ecosystem, FAIR, Global eCom, innovation, Innovation management, innovation process, internationalization, interoperability, knowledge, opportunity, roadmap, scientometrics, small business, sustainability, text mining, university cooperation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1416},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1416},
	author = {Stoyan Tanev and Gregory Sandstrom}
}
@article {1433,
	title = {Managing the Disruption of Mobility Services: How to align the value propositions of key ecosystem players},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {04/2021},
	pages = {13-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {13},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Many industries nowadays are facing drastic changes that enable and require new forms of interdependencies that facilitate complex ecosystems of interconnected actors. This paper investigates such a transformation facing the mobility sector, as user-centric bundles of mobility services are being introduced and compiled, by referring to the Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) concept. In the process, new value propositions arise that call for aligning the established players with new entrants. The implementation of MaaS is still in its infancy, and many open questions remain about how local authorities should support its emergence. One key challenge relates to decomposing the focal offering of the MaaS ecosystem into complementary value propositions for key players in the industry. This paper presents the results of a constructive design research project, building on interviews with a leading MaaS provider, as well as stakeholders representing national and local authorities in four European cities. The findings emphasize the need to balance a shared desire to disrupt conventional ways of offering mobility services against reluctance to overturn the industry{\textquoteright}s public and private incumbents. The co-design framework that results serves to summarize five steps that enable MaaS by guiding strategic interaction between local authorities and various players in the mobility ecosystem. In addition, the article builds on ecosystem research insights and emphasizes the need to align value propositions among multiple stakeholders. The study suggests that the mobility sector provides a prominent empirical context for future ecosystem research.},
	keywords = {Design Framework, ecosystem, Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS), Urban Mobility, value proposition},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1433},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1433},
	author = {Joel Wolff and Esko Hakanen}
}
@article {1415,
	title = {A Roadmap for Systematically Identifying Opportunities in Ecosystems Using Scientific Publications Data},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {01/2021},
	pages = {34-55},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {34},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Opportunity identification is a continuous process in ecosystems. However, ambiguities and challenges associated with knowledge exploration and exploitation can retard opportunity recognition processes. This in turn may culminate in excessive expenditure of resources or loss of latent opportunities. The present study adopts an analytical approach and proposes a methodological roadmap that utilizes scientometric and text mining techniques. The roadmap uses data from Web of Science as input, and generates insights that support decision-making about resource saving, strategic planning, investment, and policymaking. Our roadmap extends methods used in studying ecosystems by combining existing and novel techniques in data analytics. Using Python and VOSViewer, we show an exemplary application of the new roadmap, framed in the context of the Nordic countries{\textquoteright} renewable energy ecosystem. },
	keywords = {ecosystem, knowledge, opportunity, roadmap, scientometrics, text mining},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1415},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1415},
	author = {Behrooz Khademi and Hannele Lampela and Kosmas X. Smyrnios}
}
@article {1453,
	title = {Strategies for a Small to Medium-sized Enterprise to Engage in an Existing Ecosystem},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {10/2021},
	pages = {5-19},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {5},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Recent advances in ecosystem theory prescribe that companies need to develop offers that are modular and form unique or supermodular complementarities with other offers. However, both academic and managerial knowledge of the strategies that especially small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) can use to engage in existing ecosystems for value creation remains scattered and predominantly vague. This article thus aims to explore applicable ecosystem engagement strategies from the perspective of SMEs, as discussed in previous scholarly literature. In so doing, the article puts forward and elaborates three distinct strategies that SMEs can apply to become part of value-creating ecosystems. In this way, the findings contribute to the literature on ecosystems.},
	keywords = {Complementarities, ecosystem, engagement, Entry, SME, strategy, value creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1453},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1453},
	author = {Ermela Bashuri and Tony Bailetti}
}
@article {1311,
	title = {Ecosystem Value Creation and Capture: A Systematic Review of Literature and Potential Research Opportunities},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2020},
	month = {01/2020},
	pages = {16-34},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {16},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Collaboration, co-creation, and competition are essential strategies for success in today{\textquoteright}s modern businesses. In comparison with former ways of doing business in isolation, ecosystems nowadays have created ample opportunities for generating significantly more values. However, there are also potential threats in the pathway towards success in ecosystems. Ecosystem value creation and capture (EVCC) has recently gained significant attention in the academic literature of business and management. Yet, due to the complex structures of ecosystems and ambiguity in understanding value creation and capture in ecosystems, the contributions heretofore are fragmented, where scholars analysed different aspects of EVCC. The present study offers a systematic review of the literature to shed light on the EVCC studies. The content analysis of a fine-grained sample of articles relevant to EVCC revealed that despite the initiation of discussions in 2007, the topic did not gain noticeable attention until 2016. A 150\% increase in the number of papers has since been observed. The paper contributes to the intersection of strategy and studies on EVCC by synthesizing existing knowledge, illuminating current EVCC research, and highlighting potential research avenues. },
	keywords = {ecosystem, strategy, Systematic literature review, value capture, value creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1311},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1311},
	author = {Behrooz Khademi}
}
@article {1298,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (January 2020)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2020},
	month = {01/2020},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {3},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {AI, artificial intelligence, B2B sales, big data, business-to-business sales, data-based value, digital solutions, ecosystem, ecosystems, Ethics, Gujarat State, Indian IT industry, innovation, IT clusters, Knowledge Innovation clusters, Networks Analysis, regional development, Roboethics, Smart robot, strategy, Systematic literature review, technology, value capture, value creation, value sales},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1298},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1298},
	author = {Stoyan Tanev and Gregory Sandstrom}
}
@article {1253,
	title = {The Ecosystem Knowledge Explorer: A Tool to Systematically Discover External Knowledge},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {07/2019},
	pages = {28-40},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {It is crucial for any organization to discover knowledge from ecosystem-specific sources of knowledge that are considered external to the organization. Since knowledge exploration is a resource-intensive task for organizations, untimely or excessive knowledge exploration have detrimental impacts on the innovativeness and competitiveness of organizations. The benefits of performance measurement and management tools for knowledge management in organizations have been known for many years now. Therefore, the application of similar tools in ecosystems may enable actors to have access to valuable external knowledge. However, there is a paucity of such tools in management scholarship. The purpose of this study is to bridge this gap by proposing a conceptual tool {\textendash} the Ecosystem Knowledge (EK) Explorer, which generates insightful knowledge for ecosystem actors using codified technical knowledge (e.g., scientific publications and patents). Not only does the EK Explorer reduce the uncertainty and fuzziness of the knowledge exploration phase for ecosystem actors, it also enables them to save resources and have access to strategic knowledge regarding competition, collaboration, technology management, and policy making in ecosystems. Bibliometric analysis, social network analysis, and text mining were used to conceptualize the constructs and measurable variables of the EK Explorer. },
	keywords = {ecosystem, knowledge management, performance measurement, social network analysis, text mining},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1253},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1253},
	author = {Behrooz Khademi}
}
@article {1142,
	title = {Value Creation in the Internet of Things: Mapping Business Models and Ecosystem Roles},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {03/2018},
	pages = {5-15},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The increasing connectivity provided by the Internet of Things (IoT) supports novel business opportunities for actors in overlapping service systems. Therefore, the co-creative nature of IoT business needs to be further studied. This article reports an empirical study on a European IoT initiative. It contributes to the understudied area of IoT ecosystem dynamics by describing different actor roles and activities in the IoT use cases, and their implications for value creation in IoT ecosystems. Our findings show how IoT ecosystem actors may take the roles of ideator, designer, or intermediary in different IoT design layers, and we recommend this perspective to better understand and describe ecosystem business models. We also discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of our findings.},
	keywords = {business model, ecosystem, Internet of Things, role, value co-creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1142},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1142},
	author = {Heini Ik{\"a}valko and Petra Turkama and Anssi Smedlund}
}
@article {991,
	title = {Editorial: Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Australia (June 2016)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {06/2014},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {Australia, design-led innovation, ecosystem, entrepreneurship, hidden innovation, high-growth startups, innovation, innovation catalyst, ISPIM, job creation, National Innovation and Science Agenda, policy, regional innovation management, regions, strategic management},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/991},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/991},
	author = {Chris McPhee}
}
@article {1032,
	title = {The Smart City Ecosystem as an Innovation Model: Lessons from Montreal},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {11/2016},
	pages = {26-31},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Innovations are not confined to new technologies designed to improve the manufacturing processes of a product or the provision of a service. In a context of postmodernity, the new innovation paradigm calls on organizations to choose the best innovation strategies for their broader purposes. Today, such strategies usually involve adopting organizational structures that enable better collaboration with the stakeholders of an ecosystem. This article focuses on the smart city of Montreal {\textendash} selected as the 2016 Intelligent Community of the Year by the Intelligent Community Forum {\textendash} as a model of innovation. The aim is to understand the distinction between "the smart city" and "the smart destination", despite the omnipresence of tourism projects in smart city development plans. Among the key lessons are the importance of engaging tourism stakeholders and the role of a dedicated organization to develop and implement the city{\textquoteright}s unique vision.},
	keywords = {ecosystem, innovation, Montreal, smart cities, smart destination, stakeholders},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1032},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1032},
	author = {Mohamed Reda Khomsi}
}
@article {919,
	title = {Business, Innovation, and Knowledge Ecosystems: How They Differ and How to Survive and Thrive within Them},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {08/2015},
	pages = {17-24},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In management studies, the ecosystem metaphor is often utilized without clear definition and, thereby, several partially overlapping concepts such as industrial, business, service, innovation, and knowledge ecosystems have been introduced. The purpose of this conceptual article is to go beyond the confusion to define what is meant by different concepts regarding an ecosystem and especially describe the relationships between the three different ecosystem types: business, innovation, and knowledge ecosystems. The article contributes to the literature by describing how the ecosystem types differ in terms of their outcomes, interactions, logic of action, and actor roles. The results show that the three ecosystem types are interconnected from the viewpoint of the ecosystem actor. For practitioners, the article sheds more light on how the rules of the game (i.e., the logic of action) differ in the different types of ecosystems and demonstrates that different models are needed in order to operate in different ecosystems.},
	keywords = {business ecosystem, communities, conceptual paper, ecosystem, innovation ecosystem, knowledge ecosystem, logic of action, man-made ecosystem, platforms},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/919},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/919},
	author = {Katri Valkokari}
}
@article {914,
	title = {The Creativity Canvas: A Business Model for Knowledge and Idea Management},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {07/2015},
	pages = {50-58},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Innovation depends on ideas generated through creativity and the knowledge and research that make it possible to put ideas to work. However, these two activities are very dependent on the people who perform them. As demonstrated by a pilot project realized at Hydro-Qu{\'e}bec{\textquoteright}s research institute (IREQ), any approach that does not take this understanding into account is doomed to failure. This article proposes that what must be developed is a knowledge and idea management system designed as a coherent ecosystem that takes all controlling factors into account and is based on stakeholder interest and preferences. This ecosystem is the result of a meticulous design of each of the elements that must generally be taken into account in a business model. A business model approach includes not only developing a value proposition for knowledge and idea management that suits the target clientele but also a good understanding of the resources and activities required to deliver this value proposition and especially the ways to finance them. Key to the development of such an ecosystem is the creation of fully functional innovation communities, which are responsible for building up and nurturing their ideas and knowledge assets and getting value out of them.},
	keywords = {business model, business model canvas, communities, creativity, ecosystem, ideas, knowledge, R\&D, research institute, technological innovation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/914},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/914},
	author = {Raouf Naggar}
}
@article {903,
	title = {A Value Blueprint Approach to Cybersecurity in Networked Medical Devices},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {06/2015},
	pages = {17-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Cybersecurity for networked medical devices has been usually {\textquotedblleft}bolted on{\textquotedblright} by manufacturers at the end of the design cycle, rather than integrated as a key factor of the product development and value creation process. The recently released cybersecurity guidelines by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) offer an opportunity for manufacturers to find a way of positioning cybersecurity as part of front-end design, value creation, and market differentiation. However, the technological architecture and the functionality of such devices require an ecosystem approach to the value creation process. Thus, the present article adopts an ecosystem approach to including cybersecurity as part of their value proposition. It extends the value blueprint approach suggested by Ron Adner to include an additional dimension that offers the opportunity to define: the potential locations of cybersecurity issues within the ecosystem, the specific nature of these issues, the players that should be responsible for addressing them, as well as a way to articulate the added cybersecurity value as a competitive differentiator to potential customers. The value of the additional blueprint dimension is demonstrated through a case study of a representative networked medical device {\textendash} a connected insulin pump and continuous glucose monitor. },
	keywords = {cybersecurity, ecosystem, market differentiation, networked medical devices, value proposition},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/903},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/903},
	author = {George Tanev and Peyo Tzolov and Rollins Apiafi}
}
@article {895,
	title = {Viability Radar: A Practical Tool for Assessing the Viability of Transformative Service Innovations in a Healthcare Context},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {05/2015},
	pages = {17-30},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This article develops and showcases the viability radar, which is designed to assess the innovation potential of transformative service ideas. Based on service research and innovation literature, we highlight the importance of novel simplifying technology, supporting value networks, cost-effective business models, and regulatory environments that enable the renewal of prevailing market practices. We operationalize the radar with a set of questions and assess the innovation potential of three pilot cases of new transformative healthcare services. },
	keywords = {business model, ecosystem, healthcare, innovation, institutionalization, technology, transformative service, viability, viability assessment, viability radar},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/895},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/895},
	author = {Marikka Heikkil{\"a} and Jouni Saarni and Valtteri Kaartemo and Aki Koponen}
}
@article {807,
	title = {Designing Business Models for the Internet of Things},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {07/2014},
	pages = {5-14},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This article investigates challenges pertaining to business model design in the emerging context of the Internet of Things (IOT). The evolution of business perspectives to the IOT is driven by two underlying trends: i) the change of focus from viewing the IOT primarily as a technology platform to viewing it as a business ecosystem; and ii) the shift from focusing on the business model of a firm to designing ecosystem business models. An ecosystem business model is a business model composed of value pillars anchored in ecosystems and focuses on both the firm{\textquoteright}s method of creating and capturing value as well as any part of the ecosystem{\textquoteright}s method of creating and capturing value. The article highlights three major challenges of designing ecosystem business models for the IOT, including the diversity of objects, the immaturity of innovation, and the unstructured ecosystems. Diversity refers to the difficulty of designing business models for the IOT due to a multitude of different types of connected objects combined with only modest standardization of interfaces. Immaturity suggests that quintessential IOT technologies and innovations are not yet products and services but a "mess that runs deep". The unstructured ecosystems mean that it is too early to tell who the participants will be and which roles they will have in the evolving ecosystems. The study argues that managers can overcome these challenges by using a business model design tool that takes into account the ecosystemic nature of the IOT. The study concludes by proposing the grounds for a new design tool for ecosystem business models and suggesting that "value design" might be a more appropriate term when talking about business models in ecosystems.},
	keywords = {business model, design tool, ecosystem, Internet of Things, IOT, value, value design},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/807},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/807},
	author = {Mika Westerlund and Seppo Leminen and Mervi Rajahonka}
}
@article {822,
	title = {Q\&A. What is the Future of Entrepreneurship in India?},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {08/2014},
	pages = {46-49},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {ecosystem, entrepreneurship, incubators, India, social entrepreneurship, support agencies},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/822},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/822},
	author = {Ritu Dubey}
}
@article {488,
	title = {Economics of Software Product Development Collectives},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {1},
	year = {2011},
	month = {10/2011},
	pages = {13-18},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Where software product development occurs is shifting from single companies to groups or collectives of companies. In this article, we retrace the evolution of how software product development is organized and then offer insights into the economic motivation for collectives, which will be relevant to companies considering joining a software product development collective. Building on the literature on software product line economics, we identify three factors affecting the economics of collectives (level of contribution, number of members, and diversity of use), and develop a model that links those factors to three economic outcomes (time, quality, and cost). This model can be used by potential members when deciding whether or not to join a collective.},
	keywords = {collectives, eclipse, ecosystem, product line, software development},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/488},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/488},
	author = {Michael Weiss}
}
