Since 'Open Innovation' ( OI) concept has been proposed by Henry Chesbrough in 2003, it has been enjoying an upward trend in popularity. However, OI concept is not a bed of roses! On the contrary, it has been criticized on three major fronts: a) dearth of solid theoretical underpinning; b) research shortcomings, many uncharted research domains, and dearth of external validity; and c) being built upon fuzzy pillars so much so that it has been labelled for being 'old wine in new bottles'. Thus, in view of the persistent conceptual and empirical trenches of OI, there remains a perplexing question: Why has OI been formally criticized by only few in academic context? The present conceptual paper, through analytically reviewing the extant literature of OI, first offers a summary of the major 'shortcomings' and 'critiques' associated with OI research. Second, it analyzes the erosion factors' giving rise to OI, and their conceptual relevance. Third, by drawing upon main 'barriers associated with strategy of pursuing failure', 'theory of fads', and 'concept of informational cascades', it further attempts to provide a plausible explanation to this study's research question. Finally, I propose an inductive theory in form of three propositions in order to explain the current status-quo, and forecast the future dynamics of the research on OI. This research is exploratory in nature; however, it is significant because OI's conceptual development has reached a critical intersection where it may evolve into a 'runaway train' advancing towards an unknown destination and detached from existing theories as its rails and breaks. In this sense, OI may remain 'merely' a framework without offering rigorous theoretical insights about firm-level innovation management process. Thus, to develop a consistent body of knowledge well rooted in relevant theories, and to facilitate adoption of OI by practitioners, we need to encourage further criticism on OI and address them aptly.