Dimensions of Industrial Openness

Understanding Openness and Its Implications for Sustainable Transformation

Nils Weiher ORCID Icon, Theresa Riedelsheimer ORCID Icon, Kai Lindow ORCID Icon
JournalIndustrie 4.0 Management
Issue Volume 39, 2023, Edition 6, Pages 42-45
Open Accesshttps://doi.org/10.30844/IM_23-6_42-45
Bibliography Share Cite Download

Abstract

The topic of Openness is of growing importance for industry, especially in Europe. However, the term Openness is used very differently. Openness includes several concepts, including Open Source Hardware, Open Source Software, Open Data, Open Standards, Open Innovation, Open Science and Open Education. The concepts address different dimensions of Openness, all based on some kind of participation and with the goal to create more transparency and accessibility. This article defines the concepts and provides a basic understanding of their importance for industry and for greater sustainability.

Keywords

, , , ,

Bibliography

[1] Schlagwein, D.; Conboy, K.; Feller, J.; Leimeister, J. M.; Morgan, L.: ‘Openness’ with and without Information Technology: A Framework and a Brief History. In: Journal of Information Technology 32 (2017) 4, pp. 297-305.
[2] Splitter, V.; Dobusch, L.; Von Krogh, G.; Whittington, R.; and Walgenbach, P.: Openness as Organizing Principle: Introduction to the Special Issue. In: Organization Studies 44 (2023) 1, pp. 7-27.
[3] Bonvoisin, J.: Implications of Open Source Design for Sustainability. In: Setchi, R.; Howlett, R. J.; Liu, Y.; Theobald, P. (eds): Sustainable Design and Manufacturing. Cham 2016, pp. 49-59.
[4] Lindman, J.; Nyman, L.; The Businesses of Open Data and Open Source: Some Key Similarities and Differences. In: Technology Innovation Management Review 4 (2014) 1: Open Source Business, pp. 12-17.
[5] CED. Open Standards, Open Source, and Open Innovation: Harnessing the Benefits of Openness. Digital Connections Council of the Committee for Economic Development(CED), 2006, pp. 119-176.
[6] Powell, A.: Democratizing Production through Open Source Knowledge: From Open Software to Open Hardware. In: Media, Culture & Society 34 (2012) 6, pp. 691-708.
[7] OKF. How to Open up Data. The Open Data Handbook by Open Knowledge Foundation (OKF). https://opendatahandbook.org/ guide/en/how-to-open-up-data/, accessed March 30, 2023.
[8] Hess, C.; Ostrom, E. (eds): Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, MA 2007.
[9] OKF. Open Definition 2.1 – Open Definition – Defining Open in Open Data, Open Content and Open Knowledge. Open Knowdledge Foundation (OKF). URL: opendefinition.org/od/2.1/en/, accessed March 19, 2023.
[10] FSFE. Free Software – FSFE. FSFE – Free Software Foundation Europe. URL: fsfe.org/freesoftware/ freesoftware.html, accessed March 30, 2023.
[11] OSI. The Open Source Definition v1.9. Open Source Initiative (OSI). URL: opensource.org/osd/, accessed March 28, 2023.
[12] SPDX. SPDX License List | Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX) Version: 3.20. The Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX). URL: spdx.org/licenses/, accessed March 30, 2023.
[13] OSHWA. Open-Source-Hardware Definition 1.0. Open Source Hardware Association OSHWA. URL: www.oshwa.org/definition/, accessed March 31, 2023.
[14] ITU. Definition of “Open Standards.” International Telecommunication Union (ITU). URL: www.itu.int:443/ en/ITU-T/ipr/Pages/open.aspx, accessed March 30, 2023.
[15] OSGeo. Open Source and Open Standards – OSGeo Whitepaper. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Wiki. URL: wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/ Open_Source_and_Open_Standards, accessed March 19, 2023.
[16] Bogers, M.; Chesbrough, H.; Moedas, C.: Open Innovation: Research, Practices, and Policies. In: California Management Review 60 (2018) 2, pp. 5-16.
[17] Vicente-Saez, R.; Martinez-Fuentes, C.: Open Science Now: A Systematic Literature Review for an Integrated Definition. In: Journal of Business Research 88 (2018), pp. 428-436.
[18] Vrana, R.: Open Educational Resources (OER) as Means of Promotion of Open Education. Presented at the 2021 44th International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO) in Opatija, HR.
[19] Eisenmann, T. R.; Parker, G.; Van Alstyne, M. W.: Opening Platforms: How, When and Why?. In: SSRN Electronic Journal (2008).
[20] Broekhuizen, T. L. J.; Emrich, O.; Gijsenberg, M. J.; Broekhuis, M.; Donkers, B.; Sloot, L. M.: Digital Platform Openness: Drivers, Dimensions and Outcomes. In: Journal of Business Research 122 (2021), pp. 902-914. DOI: doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.001.
[21] Scherer, A. G.; Voegtlin, C.: Corporate Governance for Responsible Innovation: Approaches to Corporate Governance and Their Implications for Sustainable Development. In: Academy of Management Perspectives 34 (2020) 2, pp. 182-208.
[22] Phonthanukitithaworn, C.; Srisathan, W. A.; Ketkaew, C.; Naruetharadhol, P.: Sustainable Development towards Openness SME Innovation: Taking Advantage of Intellectual Capital, Sustainable Initiatives, and Open Innovation. In: Sustainability 15 (2023) 3, p. 2126.

Your downloads


Potentials: Innovation

You might also be interested in

Audio-Immersive Learning in Continuing Vocational Education

Audio-Immersive Learning in Continuing Vocational Education

From linear audio playback to AI-supported conversational learning companions
Tim Beichter, Vanessa Hartmann, Katharina Hölzle ORCID Icon, Manuel Kaiser
Artificial intelligence is increasingly shaping continuing vocational education and training by enabling the personalization of individual learning experiences. At the same time, audio-based learning formats are attracting growing interest among learners because of their flexibility and suitability for workplace learning. However, a conceptual framework for AI-supported audio learning, as well as the potential of combining artificial intelligence with audio-based learning, has received little attention to date. This paper therefore presents a conceptual perspective on the design possibilities and educational potential of AI-supported audio learning formats.
Industry 4.0 Science | Volume 42 | 2026 | Edition 5 | Pages 102-108 | DOI 10.30844/I4SE.26.5.12
Explaining AI in Industrial Production in an Accessible Way

Explaining AI in Industrial Production in an Accessible Way

Requirements for AI demonstrators to promote acceptance
Jennifer Link ORCID Icon, Markus Harlacher ORCID Icon, Colin Srebny, Sascha Stowasser ORCID Icon
Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a wide range of possibilities in industrial production, but it also presents challenges regarding employee acceptance. AI demonstrators are therefore of central importance, as they enable hands-on experience with AI. However, there has been a lack of systematically identified requirements for demonstrators that specifically promote acceptance and address negative emotions. Using a multi-stage research design, 69 requirements were identified, structured into functional requirements, quality requirements, and boundary conditions.
Industry 4.0 Science | Volume 42 | 2026 | Edition 5 | Pages 6-14 | DOI 10.30844/I4SE.26.5.1
Work Design in the Use of Autonomous Systems

Work Design in the Use of Autonomous Systems

Addressing the shortage of skilled workers
Tim Jeske ORCID Icon, Sascha Stowasser ORCID Icon, Nicole Ottersböck, Sebastian Terstegen, Rasmus Adler ORCID Icon
Companies are increasingly challenged to address shortages of skilled workers while meeting rising demands for productivity, flexibility, and innovation. Because labor supply can only be expanded to a limited extent, there is a growing focus on designing work systems with productivity in mind. Autonomous systems offer significant potential in this regard. Their implementation requires not only technical adjustments but, above all, changes in organization, skills, and work design. This article analyzes empirically grounded change requirements in existing work systems as well as associated economic potential.
Industry 4.0 Science | Volume 42 | 2026 | Edition 5 | Pages 44-50 | DOI 10.30844/I4SE.26.5.5
Cooperation Routines of Complementors in Digital Ecosystems

Cooperation Routines of Complementors in Digital Ecosystems

A microfoundation of integrative dynamic capability
Christian Zabel ORCID Icon, Tahir Schmidt ORCID Icon
Complementors are central to value creation in digital ecosystems yet have limited leverage and must adapt through dynamic capabilities. Building on the Profiting From Innovation Framework, this study examines how integrative capabilities manifest for complementors through cooperative routines. Based on a systematic literature review of Scopus-indexed studies from 2020 to mid-2025 focusing on the microfoundation “orchestrating ecosystem actors”, we identify two routine clusters. Complementors cooperate with other complementors via partner sensing, scouting, coalitions, resource sharing, and risk allocation while protecting critical assets. They cooperate with platform owners via multichannel boundary spanning, quality signaling, governance compliance, boundary resource integration, and co-development, while facing the risk of owner entry. Research gaps concern the formalization of cooperation routines, taxonomy, and B2B contexts.
Industry 4.0 Science | Volume 42 | 2026 | Edition 4 | Pages 22-28 | DOI 10.30844/I4SE.26.4.3
Enabling Digital Trust in Green Hydrogen Markets

Enabling Digital Trust in Green Hydrogen Markets

Trust-Building Information Systems and Mechanisms
Johanna Voß, Jens Pöppelbuß ORCID Icon
Building a global hydrogen economy requires more than technology and investment; it requires trust. As information systems (IS) increasingly mediate collaboration among unfamiliar, distributed actors, the question of how trust can be deliberately built becomes critical. This study systematically maps how IS enable different types of trust and reveals how these mechanisms can support trusting collaboration in emerging hydrogen value chains.
Industry 4.0 Science | Volume 42 | 2026 | Edition 4 | Pages 82-90 | DOI 10.30844/I4SE.26.4.9
Platform Adoption as a Dynamic Capability

Platform Adoption as a Dynamic Capability

How SMEs overcome barriers to adoption of B2B collaboration platforms
Nikolai Schäfer ORCID Icon, Marcel Hülsbeck ORCID Icon
Digital collaboration and innovation platforms offer SMEs significant potential to compensate for structural resource weaknesses and to participate in innovation ecosystems. Nevertheless, adoption in the B2B context remains low. This paper examines adoption barriers based on a systematic literature review using Teece’s dynamic capabilities approach. The analysis suggests that recurring obstacles can be structured along three dimensions: Sensing—lack of ecosystem awareness, absence of scanning routines; Seizing—IP concerns, governance uncertainty, adoption fatigue; Reconfiguring—closed-innovation culture, lack of absorptive capacity. Building on this, a practice-oriented capability-building framework is developed with recommendations for action.
Industry 4.0 Science | Volume 42 | 2026 | Edition 4 | Pages 42-48 | DOI 10.30844/I4SE.26.4.5
Christoph Brocks