开放创新在新兴市场是不同的，因为研究和开发的资源是有限的，而发达市场则以先进的技术和本土性质的开发来存档开放创新。通过发展中经济体和发达经济体中存在的因素，开放创新受到了相当大的影响。这些都在Marriot(2012)和Sutton(2007)等不同的研究中被调查过。很少有与此相反的发现，这些发现仅仅表明了开放创新的共同效应，而这些共同效应取决于知识共享。对新产品管理的研究最初的重点是对内部流程的研究，以及通过对这些流程的有效管理来提高市场成功的方法(Almeida & Kogut, 1999)。通过对使用标准、用于舞台设置的门和用于新产品线性管理的模型的好处的研究，人们普遍接受了这种方法。对新产品管理的最初研究重点是内部过程，以及如何通过对这些过程的有效管理来提高市场上的成功。
通过对使用标准、用于舞台设置的门和用于新产品线性管理的模型(Chesbrough, 2003)的益处的此类研究，人们普遍接受了这一观点。这样的模型确实假定，一般每个创新过程阶段都发生在单个组织中。在整个90年代中期，发达经济体的公司开始质疑传统的创新方法，在新产品开发过程中审视专有知识所有权和孤立的工作方式(Chesbrough, 2007)。越来越多的证据表明，采取合作朝向创新的方向已证明是成功的。增加接受度的一个重要原因是采用一种考虑新知识生成的协作方法(Chesbrough et al.， 2006)。当这些知识与当前对业务的理解和经验相联系时，就会产生新的想法，这些想法通常会挑战整个行业中普遍存在的传统。
Open innovation is different in emerging market as the resources for the research and development are limited while the developed markets archive open innovation with advanced technologies and developments of indigenous nature. Open innovation is considerable influenced through factors present in developing economies and developed economies. These have been investigated in various researches such as Marriot (2012) and Sutton (2007). There are very few contrasting findings to this which merely suggest the common effects of open innovation and these common effects depend upon the knowledge sharing. The initial focus of research over new management of product was over inner processes and the way in which success in the market can be enhanced by the effective management of such processes (Almeida & Kogut, 1999). General acceptance has been followed through such research over the benefits of using a standard, a gate for stage setting and a model for linear management of newer product. The initial focus of research over new management of product was over inner processes and the way in which success in the market can be enhanced by the effective management of such processes.
General acceptance has been followed through such research over the benefits of using a standard, a gate for stage setting and a model for linear management of newer product (Chesbrough, 2003). Such a model did assume that general every innovation process phase happened within an individual organization. Throughout the middle years of 1990s, the firms within developed economies started to question the approach of traditional nature towards innovation to look at proprietary knowledge ownership and work in an isolation manner during the new products development (Chesbrough, 2007). Evidence of growing nature has emerged of the proven success to adopt an orientation of collaboration towards innovativeness. An essential reason to increase acceptance exists to adopt a collaboration approach which is to consider generation of newer knowledge (Chesbrough et al., 2006). This knowledge when connected with current understanding and experience of business, results into new ideas generation which often challenges the conventions of prevailing nature across an industry.