Researchers, policy makers and practitioners alike have in recent years acknowledged a growing tendency towards opening up the innovation process by combining internal organizational assets with external actors’ resources. However, opening up the innovation process usually also entails revealing ideas, which may result in misappropriation. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate tensions related to the openness-appropriability relationship; this is done in three studies. The first study concerns a specific contextual factor that is likely to stress the openness-appropriability tensions: the location of external partners in innovation. The second study relates to the way managing openness-appropriability tensions affects performance, and the third study involves a theoretical discussion about the nature of the tensions occurring in the openness-appropriability relationship, i.e. paradoxical, dilemmatic, or dialectical. The first two studies apply quantitative methods, using survey data, while the third is a conceptual paper. The findings from the first study indicate that the use of different groups of appropriability mechanisms varies across various types of openness and that the location of external partners in innovation refines these linkages even more. The second study’s main takeaway is that the higher appropriability intensity, i.e. the extent to which appropriability mechanisms are put into practice, explains higher performance outcomes. The third study suggests that the tensions between openness and appropriability are more likely of paradoxical nature. From a theoretical perspective, findings indicate that paradoxical tensions between openness and appropriability may have a spatial dimension, and that these tensions should also be investigated in regards to performance. Managerial implications point out that opening up to innovation partners located abroad is likely to require more costly appropriability mechanisms.

The fundamental paradox of disclosure suggested by Kenneth Arrow represents a challenge in contemporary open innovation settings. Potential negative outcomes of this paradox – e.g. misappropriation of ideas – are still not fully avertable. Researchers, practitioners and policy makers strive to untangle tensions related to this paradox, because failure to manage such tensions might entail lost jobs and hampered economic and technological growth.The purpose of this thesis is to provide a deeper understanding of this paradox by combining three perspectives on tensions in open innovation and applying a paradox lens. The overarching perspective is of value co-creation–value capture. The thesis comprises of five papers that are based on quantitative, qualitative and conceptual studies. The findings reveal: 1) characteristics of tensions; 2) factors that create tensions; and 3) possible solutions and pitfalls to managing said tensions. Findings show that tensions may be managed as paradoxical, dilemmatic or dialectical, depending e.g. on the need to be open or on the overlap between a product’s solution and its characteristics. Moreover, tensions could be spurred by a variety of factors, which may be categorized as: plurality of views, scarcity of resources, change, and combinations thereof (compound factors).Possible solutions to managing tensions include e.g. increasing staff awareness about intellectual property issues or improving collaboration contracts. Possible pitfalls are linked to over-focusing on either co-creating or on capturing value, and also to subsequent tensions. Findings also reveal a category of factors with dual role, which depending on their intensity, may lead to either solutions or to pitfalls. This hints towards additional layers of complexity concerning the paradox of disclosure. The findings contribute to theory on open innovation, appropriability and organizational paradox, and have important implications for practitioners and policy makers.

En aktuell utmaning i samband med öppen innovation kan hänföras till den grundläggande paradox om avslöjande av idéer som föreslogs av Kenneth Arrow. Det är oklart hur potentiella negativa konsekvenser av denna paradox - till exempel otillåten användning av idéer – ska hanteras. Forskare, praktiker och beslutsfattare strävar efter att eliminera de spänningar som följer av paradoxen eftersom de kan hindra ekonomisk och teknologisk tillväxt. Denna avhandling syftar till att ge en djupare förståelse av paradoxen om avslöjande genom att kombinera tre perspektiv på spänningar och tillämpa paradoxteori som teoretisk lins. Det övergripande perspektivet är spänningarna mellan samskapande av värde och värdefångst. Avhandlingen inkluderar fem papper som baseras på kvalitativa, kvantitativa och konceptuella studier. Resultaten identifierar: 1) karaktären på spänningar; 2) faktorer som skapar spänningar och 3) möjliga lösningar och fallgropar för att hantera spänningarna. Resultaten visar att spänningarna kan hanteras som paradoxala, dilemmatiska eller dialektiska beroende på t.ex. behovet av att vara öppen eller överlapp mellan en produkts lösning och dess egenskaper. Dessutom kan spänningar förstärkas av en mängd olika faktorer, som kan kategoriseras som: olika synsätt, brist på resurser, förändring eller kombinationer därav (sammansatta faktorer). Möjliga lösningar för att hantera spänningar inkluderar t.ex. att öka medvetenheten om immateriella frågor eller förbättra samarbetsavtal. Möjliga fallgropar är kopplade till överfokusering på antingen samskapande eller fångst av värde, eller till efterföljande spänningar. Resultaten visar också en kategori av faktorer med dubbel roll, som beroende på deras intensitet kan leda till antingen lösningar eller fallgropar. Detta pekar mot ytterligare lager av komplexitet angående paradoxen om avslöjande. Avhandlingens resultat bidrar bland annat till teorier om öppen innovation och organisatoriska paradoxer och har viktiga konsekvenser för praktiker och beslutsfattare.