I’m sure I’m not the first person to draw to your attention to the ever-so good 2007 white paper on  ’The Value of Openess in Scientific Problem Solving’ by Karim R Lakhani, Lars Bo Jeppesen, Peter A. Lohse & Jill A. Panetta  http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/07-050.pdf

With insights and gems-galore for the open innovation-minded amongst us, the authors present a compelling case for ‘the value of being open’ - with all that that phrase implies.

Broadcast Search

The term they employ, ‘broadcast search’, is used to describe the open approach to information sharing and problem solving that should be, but most times isn’t, the norm within the scientific community. But there in lies a dilemma. When it comes to solving scientific challenges, it’s best not to only ask scientists to participate.

The beauty of knowledge transference

Karim Lakhani, et al, discovered that “the further the focal problem was from a solver’s field of expertise, the more likely they were to solve it.” This implies that knowledge transference, from one field to another, is desirable, if not mandatory, if you are to achieve breakthrough solutions.

Other people’s motivations

However, to create the right open environment where a breakthrough solution is even a possibility, you are still going to have to overcome resistance in the form of other peoples personal motivations. Ring fencing career opportunities, financing concerns and intellectual property ownership are but a few of the barriers in the way of openess becoming more widespread.

I urge you to read this commendable white paper, as it really does get you all excited about the possibilities of what can be achieved through open innovation.

What’s not in it for me

What the paper also highlights is the vested interest in at least slowing ‘opens’ progress. It would never do, would it, to solve some of those big challenges, when there’s a living to be had from always being one step away from cracking them.