Resource orchestration in innovation ecosystems: a comparative study between innovation ecosystems at different stages of development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v9i1.18076Keywords:
Resource orchestration, Innovation ecosystems, Stages of development.Abstract
Objective of the study: The present study aimed to answer the following question: How are resources orchestrated to generate innovation in innovation ecosystems?
Methodology/Approach: An exploratory qualitative research was conducted through documentary analysis, non-participant observation, and in-depth interviews with actors from two Brazilian ecosystems in different stages of development: 4th District (emerging) and Porto Digital (growth).
Originality/Relevance: Innovation ecosystems can be understood as a set of resources that foster innovation. Current research suggests that even more important than resources is the articulation among them and the way they are orchestrated.
Main Results: It was found that resource pooling characterizes the transition moment from the emergency stage to the growth stage.
Theoretical/ Methodological Contribution: A direct relationship between resource orchestration and the stage of ecosystem development was identified.
Social/Management Contribution: The importance of the orchestration role, as well as the presence of an orchestrating actor, was emphasized, and a framework of analysis on the orchestration of resources in innovation ecosystems was proposed.
Downloads
References
Arnkil, R., Järvensivu, A., Koski, P., & Piirainen, T. (2010). Exploring the quadruple helix. Report of quadruple helix research for the CLIQ project. Tampere: Work Research Centre, University of Tampere.
Autio, E.; Thomas, L. Innovation ecosystems. (2014) The Oxford handbook of innovation management, p. 204-288, 2014.
Bardin, L. (1977) Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edição 70.
Barney, J. B. Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. (1991) Journal of Management,v. 17, n. 1, p. 99-12.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
Barney, J. B., & Arikan, A. M. (2001). The resource-based view: Origins and implications. The Blackwell handbook of strategic management, 124-188.
Batterink, M. H., Wubben, E. F., Klerkx, L., & Omta, S. W. F. (2010). Orchestrating innovation networks: The case of innovation brokers in the agri-food sector. Entrepreneurship and regional development, 22(1), 47-76.
Bittencourt, B. A.; Figueiró, P. S. (2019). Innovation ecosystems articulation and shared value creation. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, v. 17, n. 4, 2019.
Bittencourt, B. A.; Zen, A. C.; Santos, D. A. G. (2020). Orchestrating university innovation ecosystem: the case of brazillian university. Revue Internationale d’Intelligence Economique – R2IE. V 11 69-95.
Bittencourt, B.A., Zen, A.C., Schmidt, V. and Wegner, D. (2018), The orchestration process for emergence of clusters of innovation, Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, Vol. 0 No. 0, null, doi: 10.1108/JSTPM-02-2018-0016.
Brenner, T. and Mühlig, A. (2007), “Factors and mechanisms causing the emergence of local industrial clusters – a Meta-Study of 159 cases”, Papers on Economics and Evolution, #0723, MPI of Economics.
Cantner, U., Cunningham, J. A., Lehmann, E. E., & Menter, M. (2020). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: a dynamic lifecycle model. Small Business Economics, 1-17.
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2009). 'Mode 3' and 'Quadruple Helix': toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International journal of technology management, 46(3-4), 201-234.
Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F., 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&D Management, 48(1), 148-162.
Cavallini, S., Soldi, R., Friedl, J., Volpe, M., 2016. Using the quadruple helix approach to accelerate the transfer of research and innovation results to regional growth.
Choi, H., Kim, S. H., & Lee, J. (2010). Role of network structure and network effects in diffusion of innovations. Industrial marketing management, 39(1), 170-177.
Cinelli M, Ferraro G.;I and Iovanella A. (2019). Network processes for collaborative innovation. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business 36(4):430-452 10.1504/IJESB.2019.10011453.
Conner, K. R. (1991). A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought within industrial organization economics: do we have a new theory of the firm?. Journal of management, 17(1), 121-154.
Creswell, J. (2010) W. Projeto de pesquisa métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. In: Projeto de pesquisa métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. Artmed.
Dhanaraj, C. and Parkhe, A. (2006), “Orchestrating innovation networks”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 659-669.
Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management science, 35(12), 1504-1511.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix--University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST review, 14(1), 14-19.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research policy, 29(2), 109-123.
Fensterseifer, J. E., & Wilk, E. D. O. (2005). Visão da firma baseada em recursos, clusters e performance: um estudo no setor vitivinícola do RS. Anais do Encontro Nacional da Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração.
Fornahl, D., R. Hassink and M.P. Menzel (2015), ‘Broadening our knowledge on cluster evolution’, European Planning Studies, 23 (10), 1921–31.
Gomes, L. A. V. et al. (2016) Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends. Technological Forecasting and Social Change.
Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation. California management review, 33(3), 114-135.
Hair, J. et al. (2005) Fundamentos de métodos de pesquisa em administração. Bookman Companhia Ed, 2005.
Hansen, M. H., Perry, L. T., & Reese, C. S. (2004). A Bayesian operationalization of the resource‐based view. Strategic Management Journal, 25(13), 1279-1295.
Heaton, S., Siegel, D. S., & Teece, D. J. (2019). Universities and innovation ecosystems: a dynamic capabilities perspective. Industrial and Corporate Change, 28(4), 921-939.
Helfat, C. E.; Peteraf, M. A. Understanding dynamic capabilities: Progress along a developmental path. (2009) Strategic Organization, v. 7, n. 1, p. 91-102.
Helfat, C.; Finkelstein, S.; Mitchell, W.; Peteraf, M.; Singh, H.; Teece, D.; Winter, S. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Henning, M., Stam, E. and Wenting, R. (2013), “Path dependence research in regional economic development: cacophony or knowledge accumulation?”, Regional Studies, Vol. 47 No. 8, pp. 1348-1362.
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., & Nätti, S. (2018). Orchestrator types, roles and capabilities – A framework for innovation networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 74, 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.09.020 September 2017.
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P.; Nätti, S. (2012) Network Orchestration for Knowledge Mobility – The Case of an International Innovation Community. Journal of Business Market Management, v. 5, n. 4, p. 244-264.
Isenberg, D. J. (2010) How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard business review, v. 88, n. 6, p. 40-50.
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255-2276.
King, D.R., J.G. Covin, and W. H. Hegarty. 2003. Complementary resources and the exploitation of technological innovations. Journal of Management 29(4): 589–606.
Koberg, C. S., Uhlenbruck, N., & Sarason, Y. (1996). Facilitators of organizational innovation: The role of life-cycle stage. Journal of business venturing, 11(2), 133-149.
Kotha, R., Zheng, Y., & George, G. (2011). Entry into new niches: The effects of firm age and the expansion of technological capabilities on innovative output and impact. Strategic Management Journal, 32(9), 1011-1024.
Lancee, B., Radl, J. (2012). Social connectedness and the transition from work to retirement. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. v.67, n.4, p. 481-490. 2012.
Lopes, J., Farinha, L., & Ferreira, J. J. (2020). Regional Innovation Ecosystems and Smart Specialization: Opportunities and Challenges For Regions. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, 16(1).
Lumineau, F., Oliveira, N. (2018). A pluralistic perspective to overcome major blind spots in research on interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Annals, 12: 440-465.
Mack, E.; Mayer, H. (2016) The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Urban Studies, v. 53, n. 10, p. 2118-2133.
Majchrzak, A., Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Bagherzadeh, M. (2015). A review of interorganizational collaboration dynamics. Journal of Management, 41: 1338-1360.
Maritan, C. A., & Peteraf, M. A. (2011). Invited editorial: Building a bridge between resource acquisition and resource accumulation. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1374-1389.
Mason, C.; Brown, R. (2014) Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship. Final Report to OECD, Paris, v. 30, n. 1, p. 77-102.
Menzel, M. P.; Fornahl, D. (2010). Cluster life cycles-dimensions and rationales of cluster evolution. Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 19, n. 1, p. 205–238.
Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review, 71(3), 75-86.
Nambisan, S.; Sawhney, M. (2011) Orchestration Processes in Network-Centric Innovation: Evidence From the Field. Academy of Management Perspectives.
Nilsen, E. R., & Gausdal, A. H. (2017). The Multifaceted Role of The Network Orchestrator — A Longitudinal Case Study. International Journal of Innovation Management, 0(0).
Paquin, R. L., & Howard-Grenville, J. (2013). Blind dates and arranged marriages: Longitudinal processes of network orchestration. Organization Studies, 34(11), 1623-1653.
Penrose, E. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford University Press.
Pikkarainen, M., Ervasti, M. and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen Nätti, S. (2017), “Orchestration roles to facilitate networked innovation in a healthcare ecosystem”, Technology Innovation Management Review, Vol. 7 No. 9, pp. 30-43.
Pique, J.M., Miralles, F. & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2019). Areas of Innovation in Cities: The evolution of 22@Barcelona. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 10(1), 43-74
Presutti, M.; Boari, C.; M., (2013) Antonio. Inter-organizational geographical proximity and local start-ups’ knowledge acquisition: a contingency approach. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, v. 25, n. 5-6, p. 446-467.
Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research?. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 22-40.
Quigley, R., & Thornley, L. (2011). Literature review on community cohesion and community severance: Definitions and indicators for transport planning and monitoring. Wellington: Quigley and Watts Ltd.
Rabelo, Ricardo J.; Bernus, Peter. (2015) A holistic model of building innovation ecosystems. IFAC-PapersOnLine, v. 48, n. 3, p. 2250-2257.
Ramadani, V., Grguri, S., Rexhepi, G. and Abduli, S. (2013) “Innovation and Economic Development: The Case of FYR of Macedonia”, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 15, issue 3, pp. 324- 345, doi: 10.1080/19448953.2013.789326.
Reynolds, E. B.; Uygun, Y. (2017). Strengthening advanced manufacturing innovation ecosystems: The case of Massachusetts. Technological Forecasting and Social Change.
Reypens, C., Lievens, A., & Blazevic, V. (2019). Hybrid Orchestration in Multi-stakeholder Innovation Networks: Practices of mobilizing multiple, diverse stakeholders across organizational boundaries. Organization Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619868268.
Rinkinen, S.; Harmaakorpi, V. (2017) The business ecosystem concept in innovation policy context: building a conceptual framework. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, p. 1-17.
Ritala, P.; Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P.; Nätti, S. (2012). Coordination in innovation‐generating business networks – the case of Finnish Mobile TV development. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 27, 324-334.
Robaczewska, J., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Lorenz, A. (2019). Applying open innovation strategies in the context of a regional innovation ecosystem: The case of Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Global Transitions, 1, 120-131.
Sakakibara, M. (2002). Formation of R&D consortia: Industry and company effects. Strategic Management Journal [on-line], [S.l.], v. 23, n. 11, p. 1033-1050.
Sampieri, R. H.; Collado, C. F.; Lucio, M. P. B. (2013) Métodos de Pesquisa, 5. ed. Porto Alegre: Penso.
Semadeni, M., & Anderson, B. S. (2010). The follower's dilemma: Innovation and imitation in the professional services industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1175-1193.
Shaw, D. R.; Allen, T. (2016) Studying innovation ecosystems using ecology theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016.
Sirmon, D. G.; Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, v. 32, n. 1, p. 273-292.
Sirmon, D. G.; Hitt, M. A.; Ireland, D. R.; Gilbert, B. A. (2011) Resource Orchestration to Create Competitive Advantage: Breadth, Depth, and Life Cycle. Effects. Journal of Management, v. 37, n. 5, p. 1390-1412.
Spigel, B. (2017) The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, v. 41, n. 1, p. 49-72.
Spigel, B; Harrison, R. (2017) Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. p. 1-18.
Stam. (2015) Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, v. 23, n. 9, p. 1759-1769, 2015.
STARTUPI, (2015).Porto Digital é eleito o melhor parque tecnológico do Brasil Disponível em: https://startupi.com.br/2015/12/porto-digital-e-eleito-o-melhor/. Acesso em 10 dez 2017.
Teece, D. J. (2000). Managing intellectual capital: organizational, strategic, and policy dimensions. London: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, E., Faccin, K., & Asheim, B. T. (2020). Universities as orchestrators of the development of regional innovation ecosystems in emerging economies. Growth and Change.
Thomas, L.D., Autio, E., (2020). Innovation ecosystems in management: an organizing typology. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management.
Valkokari, K., Seppanen, M. M. and Jylha-Ollila, S. (2017). Orchestrating innovation ecosystems: a qualitative analysis of ecosystem positioning strategies. Technology Innovation Management Review. V3. 12-24.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
Westerman, G., McFarlan, F. W., & Iansiti, M. (2006). Organization design and effectiveness over the innovation life cycle. Organization Science, 17(2), 230-238.
Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., and Knockaert, M., (2008). ‘Mid-range Universities’ Linkages with Industry: Knowledge Types and the Role of Intermediaries,’ Research Policy, 37, 1205-1223.
Yoon, D. (2017), “The regional-innovation cluster policy for R&D efficiency and the creative economy: with focus on DaedeokInnopolis”, Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 206-226.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 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.
