Level of collaboration and knowledge transfer among actors of the innovation ecosystem: the proposition of an analytical model

Sandro de Freitas Nascimento; Manolita Correia Lima; Igor Jordano Cassemiro Gondim

doi:10.5585/iji.v10i3.21057

Authors

Sandro de Freitas Nascimento Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing - ESPM https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1077-9199
Manolita Correia Lima Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing - ESPM https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6852-2997
Igor Jordano Cassemiro Gondim Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing - ESPM https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1909-4732

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v10i3.21057

Keywords:

Knowledge management, Innovation ecosystem, Knowledge transfer, Level of collaboration.

Abstract

Objective of the study: This study aimed to investigate how collaboration between actors in the innovation ecosystem is related to the transfer of knowledge between institutions.

Methodology/Approach: The study units were the innovation hubs of the Federal Institutes of Education, Science and Technology in Brazil accredited by Embrapii. The methodological approach of the research was qualitative; the method employed was the multiple-case study; the data collection was conducted through semistructured interviews with representatives from academia, company, government, and society; and the results were obtained via content analysis.

Originality/Relevance: Based on the findings of this research, it was possible to elaborate an analytical model to relate the level of collaboration and transfer of knowledge between agents of the innovation ecosystem.

Main Results: The main results indicated that the collaboration between the actors was related to the transfer of knowledge through the creation and expansion of the established partnerships as well as the management of the facilitators and difficulty of this relationship.

Theoretical/ Methodological Contributions: The theoretical contribution was the proposition of an integrated analytical model of collaborative relations and knowledge transfer between members of the innovation ecosystem.

Management/Social Contributions: The managerial contribution of the study was the identification of key aspects to improve the collaborative relationship between the actors of the innovation and knowledge transfer ecosystem. The social contribution consists of the possibility of collaboration expansion and knowledge transfer by enhancing the facilitating factors and minimizing the difficulties identified in the researched innovation ecosystems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Sandro de Freitas Nascimento, Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing - ESPM

PhD in Business

Manolita Correia Lima, Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing - ESPM

PhD in Education

Igor Jordano Cassemiro Gondim, Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing - ESPM

PhD in Business

References

Adner, R. (2006). Match Your Innovation Strategy to Your Innovation Ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 84(4), 98–107.

Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as Structure. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451

Alexander, A. T., & Martin, D. P. (2013). Intermediaries for open innovation: A competence-based comparison of knowledge transfer offices practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(1), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.07.013

Alexander, A. T., Miller, K., & Fielding, S. (2015). Open for business: Universities, entrepreneurial academics and open innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(6), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919615400137

Alhassan, E., Schillo, R. S., Lemay, M. A., & Pries, F. (2019). Research Outputs as Vehicles of Knowledge Exchange in a Quintuple Helix Context: The Case of Biofuels Research Outputs. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 10(3), 958–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-017-0507-8

Amatucci, M. (2000). Perfil do administrador brasileiro para o século XXI: um enfoque metodológico [Universidade de São Paulo]. https://doi.org/10.11606/T.12.2000.tde-08112010-174044

Baaziz, A. (2018). Towards a new paradigm of “coopetitiveness” in emerging countries: Case of the Algerian Entrepreneurial Ecosystems. International Journal of Innovation, 7(1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v7i1.354

Bacon, E., Williams, M. D., & Davies, G. H. (2019). Recipes for success: Conditions for knowledge transfer across open innovation ecosystems. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 377–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.07.012

BRASIL - Ministério da Educação – MEC. (2019). Portal da Rede Federal de Educação Profissional Científica e Tecnológica. http://portal.mec.gov.br/rede-federal-inicial/

Bush, V. (1945). Science the Endless Frontier: A Report to the President by Vannevar Bush. US Government Printing.

Carayannis E. G.; Barth T. D.; Campbell D. F. G. (2012). The Quintuple Helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and How Do Knowledge, Innovation and the Environment Relate To Each Other? International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 41–69. https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2010010105

Carayannis, E. G., Campbell, D. F. J., & Grigoroudis, E. (2021). Helix Trilogy: the Triple, Quadruple, and Quintuple Innovation Helices from a Theory, Policy, and Practice Set of Perspectives. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00813-x

Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F. J., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R and D Management, 48(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12300

Carayannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation Helixes and Smart Specialisation Strategies for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth in Europe and Beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 212–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0185-8

Carayannis, E., & Grigoroudis, E. (2016). Quadruple Innovation Helix and Smart Specialization: Knowledge Production and National Competitiveness. Foresight and STI Governance, 10(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.17323/1995-459x.2016.1.31.42

Carayannis, E.G. and Campbell, D. F. J. (2006). Knowledge Creation, Diffusion, and Use in Innovation Networks and Knowledge Clusters. A Comparative Systems Approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. Praeger.

Carayannis, E.G. & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). ‘“Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem.’ J. Technology Management, 46(3/4), 201–234.

Ceccagnoli, Forman, Huang, & Wu. (2012). Cocreation of Value in a Platform Ecosystem! The Case of Enterprise Software. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 263. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410417

Chesbrough, henry W. (2003). Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Havard Business School Press.

Clinton, M. S., Merritt, K. L., & Murray, S. R. (2009). Using Corporate Universities to Failitate Knowledge Transfer and Achieve Competitive Advantage. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(4), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.4018/jkm.2009062903

Cunningham, J. A., & O’Reilly, P. (2018). Macro, meso and micro perspectives of technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(3), 545–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9658-4

Del Giudice, M., Carayannis, E. G., & Maggioni, V. (2017). Global knowledge intensive enterprises and international technology transfer: emerging perspectives from a quadruple helix environment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 229–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9496-1

Dell’Ano, D.; DEL GIUDICE, M. (2015). Absorptive and desorptive capacity of actors within university-industry relations: does technology transfer mater? Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 4(13).

D’Este, P., Guy, F., & Iammarino, S. (2013). Shaping the formation of university-industry research collaborations: what type of proximity does really matter? Journal of Economic Geography, 13(4), 537–558. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs010

EMBRAPII. (2019). Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa e Inovação Industrial. https://embrapii.org.br

Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The Triple Helix of university-industry government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293–337.

Etzkowitz, H. (2008). Triple Helix Innovation: Industry, University, and Government in Action. Routledge.

Etzkowitz, H., & Zhou, C. (2017). Hélice Tríplice: inovação e empreendedorismo universidade-indústria-governo. Estudos Avançados, 31(90), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-40142017.3190003

Freeman, C. (1987). Technology, Policy, and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. Pinter Publishers.

Galvao, A., Mascarenhas, C., Marques, C., Ferreira, J., & Ratten, V. (2019). Triple helix and its evolution: a systematic literature review. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 10(3), 812–833. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-10-2018-0103

Gomes, L. A. de V., Facin, A. L. F., Salerno, M. S., & Ikenami, R. K. (2018). Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 30–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.009

Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90–91, 102098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102098

Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904

Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Can ‘the public’ be considered as a fourth helix in university-industry-government relations? Science and Public Policy, 30(1), 55–61.

Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2006). Triple Helix indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems. Introduction to the special issue. Research Policy, 35(1), 1441–1449.

Leydesdorff, Loet; Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy, 25(3), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/spp/25.3.195

Maietta, O. W. (2015). Determinants of university–firm R&D collaboration and its impact on innovation: A perspective from a low-tech industry. Research Policy, 44(7), 1341–1359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.03.006

Meng, D., Li, X., & Rong, K. (2019). Industry-to-university knowledge transfer in ecosystem-based academic entrepreneurship: Case study of automotive dynamics & control group in Tsinghua University. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 249–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.10.005

Milagres, R., & Burcharth, A. (2019). Knowledge transfer in interorganizational partnerships: what do we know? Business Process Management Journal, 25(1), 27–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2017-0175

Miller, K., McAdam, M., & McAdam, R. (2014). The changing university business model: a stakeholder perspective. R&D Management, 44(3), 265–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12064

Miller, K., McAdam, R., Moffett, S., Alexander, A., & Puthusserry, P. (2016). Knowledge transfer in university quadruple helix ecosystems: an absorptive capacity perspective. R&D Management, 46(2), 383–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12182

Minayo, M. C. S. (2012). Análise qualitativa: teoria, passos e fidedignidade. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 17(3), 621–626.

Mineiro, A. A. da C., Souza, D. L., Vieira, K. C., Castro, C. C., & Brito, M. J. de. (2018). Da hélice tríplice a quíntupla: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Economia & Gestão, 18(51), 77–93.

Munshi Naser Ibne Afzal, Datuk Dr Kasim Bin HJ. MD. Mansur, Shamim Siddiqui, J. G. (2018). A panel investigation of the triple helix (TH), quadruple helix (QH) relationship in ASEAN-5 economies. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 27(3), 97–122.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press.

Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Hirata, T. (2008). Managing flow: A process theory of the knowledge-based firm. Palgrave Macmillan.

Oliva, F. L. (2014). Knowledge management barriers, practices and maturity model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(6), 1053–1074. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-03-2014-0080

Perkmann, M and Walsh, K. (2008). Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry. Research Policy.

Piirainen, T; Arnkil, R; Järvensivu, A; Koski, P. (2010). Exploring Quadruple Helix Outlining user-oriented innovation models. Tampereen yliopistopaino Oy Juvenes Print.

Popadiuk, S., & Choo, C. W. (2006). Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related? International Journal of Information Management, 26(4), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2006.03.011

Sábato, J.; Botana, N. (1968). La ciencia y la tecnología en el desarrollo futuro de América Latina. Revista de La Integración, 1, 15–36.

Schartinger, D., Rammer, C., Fischer, M. M., & Fröhlich, J. (2002). Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants. Research Policy, 31(3), 303–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00111-1

Schoonmaker M G; Carayannis E G. (2013). Mode 3: A Proposed Classification Scheme for the Knowledge Economy and Society. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4(4), 556–577.

Secundo, G., Toma, A., Schiuma, G., & Passiante, G. (2019). Knowledge transfer in open innovation. Business Process Management Journal, 25(1), 144–163. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2017-0173

Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640

Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393808

Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Free Press.

Yin, R. K. (2001). Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos (2a). Bookman.