Level of collaboration and knowledge transfer among actors of the innovation ecosystem: the proposition of an analytical model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v10i3.21057Keywords:
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
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.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 International Journal of Innovation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
The author(s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal.
The author(s) ensure that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not being evaluated in other journal(s).
The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts expressed in the texts because they are the sole responsibility of the author(s).
The publishers reserve the right to make adjustments and textual adaptation to the norms of APA.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.
