{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034241245136186774, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.845454545454546, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The ups and downs of open innovation efficiency: the case of Procter & Gamble


Purpose
Open innovation (OI) has become increasingly popular as an enterprise strategy in both industry and academia, and has been adopted, at least in part, by many companies. Despite this popularity, there is a dearth of evaluation of OI efficiency and a lack of suitable quantitative indices. The paper aims to discuss these issues.


Design/methodology/approach
In this study, the authors used both data envelopment analysis (DEA) and Malmquist techniques to compare the pre- and post-transition levels of performance achievement of Procter & Gamble (P&G), a widely recognised and public early adopter of OI, with a group of its main competitors.


Findings
Most detailed analysis of the time-course revealed that the innovation efficiency of P&G improved rapidly and substantially after its embracing of OI, an effect we term the “open rise”. However, there is also a transient decline in R&D efficiency at the beginning of OI adoption (“open dip”) and an unexpected and marked decline (“open drop”) after the peak positive effect.


Originality/value
The quantitative methods appear to meet the needs identified in the preceding literature for more quantitative approaches to the measurement of OI.
