Knowledge Mobilization in Open Innovation Networks: What’s in It for Schools?

• In Event: Educational Leaders Maximizing the Social Capital Benefits of Networks: Thoughts From an International Symposium

Abstract

Objectives: Schools are historically weak in knowledge sharing within and beyond their institutional borders (Fullan, 2002). Accordingly, they have few systems and little experience in strategic knowledge management. Yet, at the same time, mobilisation of knowledge is essential to introducing innovation and change in schools and teaching (Greany, 2018). In organisational and innovation research, the term ‘open innovation’ refers to an according inflow and outflow of knowledge to and from organisations: with open innovation theory suggesting active exchanges of knowledge with external actors leads to the development of exploitable new ideas (Chesbrough, 2003). Following this idea, a single organisation cannot innovate in isolation and so must draw on external knowledge, whereby access to external knowledge sources and the linking of internal and external knowledge must be actively managed (Bogers et al., 2019). Importantly, organizations need to build networks that enable appropriate knowledge flows to be generated (West & Bogers, 2014). In the field of education, however, knowledge sharing with external parties represents a paradigm shift. Corresponding findings for schools are therefore not yet available. Against that background we investigate: 1) Can different innovation networks of schools be detected? 2) Does the type of innovation network depend on school structural characteristics (i.e. type of school)? 3) Does the type of network have an impact on knowledge mobilisation in schools?

Methods: To answer our research questions, we apply a latent class distal outcome model. Hence, we estimate latent profiles of collaboration networks and relate them to the open innovation variables that indicate knowledge mobilisation. Here, we consider the effect of latent class membership on the distal outcomes (i.e., knowledge mobilisation) adjusting for observed potential confounders (i.e., school size, ISCED school type, public-private school).

Data Source: We use data from the third wave of the Leadership in German Schools (LineS) study in which a random sample of N=411 school leaders, representative of Germany, was surveyed about their work and innovation in schools. In doing so, we capture both the networks and the construct of open innovation with the help of established procedures, following Laursen and Salter (2006).

Results: Our findings show that German schools mainly use internal knowledge for innovation and open innovation takes place only to a very limited extent. Four different network types are detectable in our data, whereby network formation is independent of school structural characteristics. Those open innovation networks have the potential to overcome corresponding barriers as close(r) collaboration in networks is associated with increased knowledge mobilisation for learning and teaching in schools. What is striking is that only collaboration with market actors (companies and external consultants) makes a significant difference when it comes to the diversity of knowledge mobilised for learning and teaching in schools. This suggests that cooperation with these actors generally can increase the diversity of knowledge in schools that can be used for innovation. All other forms of cooperation (i.e. other schools, educational administration etc.) increase the amount knowledge from the field of education that is important for innovation in teaching and learning in schools.

Authors

• Marcus Pietsch, Leuphana University - Lueneburg

• Chris Brown, University of Southampton

• Burak Aydin, Ege University

• Colin Cramer, University of Tuebingen