Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 5 (2020) 20–28 Journal of Innovation & Knowledge https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-innovation-and-knowledge Makers and clusters. Knowledge leaks in open innovation networks Jessica D. Giusti, Fernando G. Alberti, Federica Belfanti ∗ Institute for Entrepreneurship and Competitiveness, LIUC Università Cattaneo, Corso Matteotti 22, 21053 Castellanza (VA), Italy a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 29 March 2018 Accepted 4 April 2018 Available online 25 April 2018 JEL classification: O3 Keywords: Open innovation Maker Movement Knowledge leak Cluster SNA Multiplexity a b s t r a c t This paper aims at investigating the role of makers in open innovation networks by focusing on whether and how knowledge leaks occur in open innovation networks with makers. In the last years, makers have been widely recognized as conducive to innovation and growth in different fields through a novel and open approach. However, little is known about the role played by makers and, more specifically, about the flow of unintended knowledge – i.e. knowledge leaks. Data have been collected by iteratively deploying a snowball sampling technique in an Italian high-tech cluster with a dense and heterogeneous ecosystem of makers. Data analysis relied on social network analysis method and techniques. Findings shed light on a totally unexplored phenomenon and suggest intriguing implications both for theory and practice on whether and how knowledge is exchanged in innovation networks and how knowledge leaks occur. © 2018 Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. Published by Elsevier Espa ˜ na, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Introduction It is widely acknowledged that the Maker Movement is having far reaching effects on business, economy, even our everyday way of life (Make, 2013). The growth of the Maker Movement and the rapid changes in the ecosystem of business and platforms suppor- ting Makers is already attracting interest from entities as diverse as the White House and the Chinese government (Lindtner, 2015) to major multinational corporations (Deloitte, 2014). Makers have been widely recognized by media (NCDMM, 2016) as well as in literature as conducive to innovation and growth. In fact, one of the main implications for the Maker Movement is that they are advancing innovation in several fields through a novel and open approach. Thus, what are the implications of the Maker Movement for innovation? Aldrich (2014) suggested a number of implications. First, user driven innovation, like the one promoted by makers, is often a major source of product improvements, as well as totally new products, in established industries (Von Hippel, 2005). Next, the tools (such as rapid prototyping tools: 3D printers, laser cutters, form boxes, etc.) available in spaces and laborato- ries (Stacey, 2014) where makers work enable users to quickly and cheaply experiment with variations on their designs (Hatch, 2013). Further, the Maker Movement is grounded in an ideology ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: fbelfanti@liuc.it (F. Belfanti). promoting cooperation and sharing (Pieri & Domeniconi, 2016), according to the paradigm of collaborative and open innovation. Open innovation is defined as “the use of purposive inflows and outflows of knowledge to accelerate internal innovation and to expand the markets for external use of innovation” (Chesbrough, 2003). Adopting open innovation approaches implies redefining the firm’s boundaries, allowing knowledge to become an exchange- able good (Chesbrough, 2003). The assumption for pursuing open innovation with a variety of partners (e.g. users, suppliers, uni- versities, research centres, individual experts/scientists and even makers) is that they are conducive to several potential benefits (e.g. reducing time to market, cost and risk reduction, improving access to specific expertise; West, Salter, Vanhaverbeke, & Chesbrough, 2014). Previous works on the Maker Movement and culture do stress their capacity of open and collaborative innovation through net- working (e.g. Aldrich, 2014; Browder, Aldrich, & Bradley, 2017; Van Holm, 2015; Von Busch, 2013). Openness, peering and sharing are integral parts of the Maker Movement. Inter-organizational net- working for innovation is a distinctive trait of any community of makers (e.g. Aldrich, 2014; Browder et al., 2017; Van Holm, 2015; Von Busch, 2013), but scholars in open innovation networks argue that a strength in the most competitive networks is the exchange of a large quantity and quality of different types of knowledge (Alberti & Pizzurno, 2015). The general understanding in literature (Alberti & Pizzurno, 2017) is that different types of knowledge exchanges are required for innovation and that multiplexity of knowledge exchanges – i.e. the concurrent and not-intended exchange of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2018.04.001 2444-569X/© 2018 Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. Published by Elsevier Espa ˜ na, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).