Since Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum declared the arrival of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, there has been much discussion about it. However, there is no commonly agreed-upon definition of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Therefore, we attempted to answer the following four research questions. “What is the definition of the Fourth Industrial Revolution?”, “How can we respond to the Fourth Industrial Revolution in terms of institutions?”, “How can we respond to the Fourth Industrial Revolution in terms of technology?”, “How can we respond to the Fourth Industrial Revolution in terms of firm innovation and start-up strategy?” Brainstorming was conducted by 11 scholars from several countries to answer these four research questions. Therefore, this research is not the end product of four research questions, but a kind of advanced template to answer the four research questions for continuing research.

Culture, in its various forms, has always been a critical driver of innovation. This paper focuses on generating some insights into the role of “culture for open innovation dynamics”. First, because the requirement to understand culture, which can control open innovation complexity, has been augmented, we want to answer the following research question in this study: How can we define or organize “culture for open innovation dynamics”, which can motivate open innovation dynamics, and control open innovation complexity? Second, we propose a concept model of culture for open innovation dynamics by reviewing the literature on the culture of firms in terms of their traits, organization, static innovation, and dynamic aspects regarding their innovation in entrepreneurship, and we validate said model through an indirect social experiment using the research results of 23 Special Issue papers. Third, the concept model of culture for open innovation dynamics is explained as the interaction between three different entrepreneurship dimensions: Entrepreneurship of novice entrepreneurs, intrapreneurship of employees of an existing firm, and organizational entrepreneurship by the firm itself. According to the balance of three sub-entrepreneurship types, culture for open innovation dynamics can have different aspects, namely, entrepreneurship leading culture for open innovation dynamics, intrapreneurship leading culture for open innovation dynamics, or organizational entrepreneurship leading culture for open innovation dynamics. This paper helps organizations and entrepreneurs to better understand the role that culture plays in boosting open innovation dynamics.

Research Question: Open innovation and the open business model exaggerate complexity (a transaction cost) in addition to the realization of emergence and its lock-in. Within a short period, Alibaba has become one of the global top e-commerce companies with several open innovation business models. Our research question was: “How could Alibaba become a global top e-commerce company in China in such a short time?” Research Method: We chose a deep interview method, participatory observation, and meta-analysis to answer this research question. Research Result: Alibaba has applied global, creative e-commerce business models through open innovation in a short time. In addition, it has overcome complexity—i.e., the cost of open innovation and the force that breaks down a company—through an open innovation-friendly culture. This is a “Jack-Ma style consumer confidence and new Guanxi culture”, a new and strong Chinese corporate culture. Alibaba has also undergone the expansion of its open business model feedback loop platform. This study investigated the expanded open business model feedback loop platform, the continuously strengthened open-innovation-friendly culture, and complexity, with the latter being the cost of open innovation, which was controlled by an open-innovation-friendly culture and open business model feedback loop.

This paper discusses dynamics and differences of business models in the car-sharing industry and focuses on open innovation as the trigger of diverse business models among Uber in the U.S., DiDi Chuxing in China, and KakaoT in Korea. We seek to answer the following two questions: What creates the differences in the business models of the car-sharing industry? Do the differences in open innovation motivate the diversity of business models among Uber, DiDi Chuxing, and KakaoT? We incorporated participatory observation, interviews, and semi-structured questionnaire methods in our study. We used two-step participatory observation and interview methods, hence carrying out observation and interviews two times by different researchers with Uber drivers in the U.S., DiDi-Chuxing drivers in Beijing, and KakaoT taxi drivers in Korea to confirm the interview and participatory observation results. First, business models of the car-sharing firms Uber, DiDi-Chuxing, and KakaoT are not fixed but rather are dynamically changing. Second, business models of car-sharing firms are the result of interaction with government regulations, the taxi industry, public transportation, and the automotive car industry. Third, open innovation strategies of car-sharing firms determine the contents and dynamics of car-sharing business models, such as the revenue business model, responsibility business model, and system business model upon interaction with four agencies.

With the advent of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the role of entrepreneurs has become more crucial than ever. As a result, an open innovation model is suggested here that can promote serial entrepreneurs by answering the following question: “How does the serial entrepreneur in open innovation conditions continuously identify business opportunities?” This question is answered through an in-depth case study of Medison from 1985 to 2016, as Medison is not only a representative Korean medical device company, but is also a representative example of serial entrepreneurship in Korea. First, we examined the diverse open innovation channels, such as spin-offs, venture investment, and joint venture, used by Medison before it was merged with Samsung. Second, we examined the open innovation serial entrepreneurs of Medison and then analyzed the direct serial entrepreneurs of Medison. Fourth, we built a causal loop model of Medison open innovation with emergence and complexity combined. Finally, a sustainable open innovation strategy and an approach to sustainable serial entrepreneurship was formulated. The foundation of this research is as follows. First, an open innovation strategy can be a strong motivator for serial entrepreneurs. Second, a balance between emergence and complexity is required to trigger sustainable serial entrepreneurs of open innovation.

We aim to develop an innovative way to alter existing business models to conquer the growth limits of exponential paradox by applying the open innovation concept to the design of creative business models. Our research question is as follows: How can we innovate existing business models more easily based on our own thinking experiment at the role-place of ourselves in the open innovation knowledge funnel? We built a rectangular compass concept model and carried out social experiments with it for 3.6 years from November 2014 to May 2019 by developing 17 business model patents to validate the model. The rectangular compass concept model has four aspects: over-shooting of modern business models, expanding the bottom of modern business models, cultivating the forward neighborhood of modern business models, and cultivating the backward neighborhood of modern business model. According to our study, open innovation, which is based on a new combination between technologies (protected technology, protectable technology, and social technology) and market (now market, potential market, and social market), is the engine of sustainable business model innovation dynamics.