Influences of Intermediation of Support Institutions on Innovativeness and Organizational Performance
Keywords:Innovativeness, Support Institutions, Organizational Performance, Non-redundant contacts, Intermediation
Purpose: Identify the influence of relationships with support institutions on innovativeness and organizational performance.
Theoretical framework: The innovation intermediaries are organizations that act as a link between those involved in the innovation process and whose purpose is to develop the innovative aspects of organizations. Although studies have pointed out the importance of relationships with support institutions for the development of innovation, the present study investigated the role of these institutions as intermediary actors in the innovation process.
Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review was conducted. The Methodi Ordinatio Index was used as a protocol. In order to identify the most central theoretical approaches in the studies, as well to map the interactions between these approaches, the Social Network Analysis - SNA technique was used.
Findings: The relationship with support institutions increases access to non-redundant contacts; these, in its turn, influence innovativeness. The performance of these actors as intermediaries will only influence innovativeness in the circumstances in which the idiosyncrasy of these institutions does not prevent or makes impossible access to non-redundant contacts.
Originality/value: The study contributed with literature from the fields of interorganizational relations, innovation and strategy by identifying the theoretical approaches in which the role of innovation support organizations is inserted, as well as by identifying the influence for access to non-redundant contacts, relevant to the innovation process; in addition, theoretical propositions and a research agenda are presented.
Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Jaakkola, E., Harrison, D., & Mäkitalo-Keinonen, T. (2017). How to manage innovation processes in extensive networks: A longitudinal study. Industrial Marketing Management, 67(September), 88–105.
Adler, P. S., & Shenbar, A. (1990). Adapting Your Technological Base : The Organizational Challenge. Sloan Management Review, 32(1), 25–37.
Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration Networks , Structural Holes , and Innovation: Longitudinal Study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.
Alaaraj, S., Mohamed, Z. A., & Ahmad Bustamam, U. S. (2018). External growth strategies and organizational performance in emerging markets: The mediating role of inter-organizational trust. Review of International Business and Strategy, 28(2), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/RIBS-09-2017-0079
Aldrich, H. E., & Zimmer, C. (1986). Entrepreneurship through social networks. In D. Sexton & R. Smilor (Eds.), The art and science of entrepreneurship (pp. 3–23). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.
Ali, M., Seny Kan, K. A., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Direct and configurational paths of absorptive capacity and organizational innovation to successful organizational performance. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5317–5323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.131
Balestrin, A., & Verschoore, J. (2016). Redes de Cooperação Empresarial: Estratégias de Gestão da Nova Economia. (2nd ed.). Porto Alegre: Bookman.
Battor, M., & Battor, M. (2010). The impact of customer relationship management capability on innovation and performance advantages: Testing a mediated model. Journal of Marketing Management, 26(9–10), 842–857. https://doi.org/10.1080/02672570903498843
Baum, J. A. C., Calabrese, T., & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Don’t Go It Alone: Alliance Network Composition and Startups’ Performance in Canadian Biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 267–294.
Beck, T., Degryse, H., De Haas, R., & van Horen, N. (2018). When arm’s length is too far: Relationship banking over the credit cycle. Journal of Financial Economics, 127(1), 174–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2017.11.007
Belso-Martínez, J. é. A., Expósito-Langa, M., Mas-Verdú, F., & Molina-Morales, F. X. (2017). Dynamics of brokerage positions in clusters: Evidence from the Spanish foodstuffs industry. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020290
Bergé, L., Scherngell, T., & Wanzenböck, I. (2017). Bridging centrality as an indicator to measure the ‘bridging role’ of actors in networks: An application to the European Nanotechnology co-publication network. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 1031–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.09.004
Brusco, S. (1993). Pequeñas empresas y prestación de servicios reales. In F. Pyke & W. Sergenberger (Eds.), Los Distritos Industriales y las Pequeñas Empresas: Distritos Industriales y Regeneración Económica Local (pp. 235–254). 235-254: MTSS.
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural Holes. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.
Camisón, C., & Villar-López, A. (2012). Organizational innovation as an enabler of technological innovation capabilities and firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2891–2902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.06.004
Campos, C. M. (2006). The salmon farming and processing cluster in Southern Chile. In C. Pietrobelli & R. Rabellotti (Eds.), Upgrading to Compete Global Value Chains, Clusters, and SMEs in Latin America. (pp. 109–140). Inter-American Development Bank David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies Harvard University.
Carnovale, S., Rogers, D. S., & Yeniyurt, S. (2016). Bridging structural holes in global manufacturing equity based partnerships: A network analysis of domestic vs. international joint venture formations. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 22(1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.08.002
Chen, S. H., & Lin, W. T. (2017). The dynamic role of universities in developing an emerging sector: a case study of the biotechnology sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.006
Chen, Y. S., Su, H. C., & Ro, Y. K. (2017). The co-evolution of supplier relationship quality and product quality in the U.S. auto industry: A cultural perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 184(February 2016), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.020
Chung, H. F. L. (2019). How guanxi networking matters in the relation between market orientation and innovation in Asian emerging economies – the case of Markor. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 34(4), 836–849. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-05-2017-0115
Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators? Research Policy, 31, 1103–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00178-0
Cooper, C. E., Hamel, S. A., & Connaughton, S. L. (2012). Motivations and obstacles to networking in a university business incubator. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(4), 433–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9189-0
Cui, L., Fan, D., Guo, F., & Fan, Y. (2018). Explicating the relationship of entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: Underlying mechanisms in the context of an emerging market. Industrial Marketing Management, 71, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.11.003
Cui, Lin, Fan, D., Guo, F., & Fan, Y. (2018). Explicating the relationship of entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: Underlying mechanisms in the context of an emerging market. Industrial Marketing Management, 71(September), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.11.003
Dai, S., Duan, X., & Zhang, W. (2020). Knowledge map of environmental crisis management based on keywords network and co-word analysis, 2005–2018. Journal of Cleaner Production, 262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121168
Decarolis, D. M., & Deeds, D. L. (1999). The Impact of Stocks and Flows of Organizational Knowledge on Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation of the Biotechnology Industry. Strategic Management Journal, 20(10), 953–968.
Dhanora, M., Sharma, R., & Khachoo, Q. (2017). Non-linear impact of product and process innovations on market power: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Economic Modelling, 70(February), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2017.10.010
Díez-Vial, I., & Montoro-Sánchez, Á. (2015). How knowledge links with universities may foster innovation: The case of a science park. Technovation, 50–51, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.001
Doloreux, D., & Melançon, Y. (2009). Innovation-support organizations in the marine science and technology industry: The case of Quebec’s coastal region in Canada. Marine Policy, 33(1), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.04.005
Esparcia, J. (2014). Innovation and networks in rural areas. An analysis from European innovative projects. Journal of Rural Studies, 34, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.12.004
Freeman, C. (1987). Technology, policy, and economic performance: lessons from Japan. London: Frances Pinter.
Gallego-Bono, J. R., & Chaves-Avila, R. (2016). Innovation cooperative systems and structural change: An evolutionary analysis of Anecoop and Mondragon cases. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 4907–4911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.051
Gao, G. Y., Xie, E., & Zhou, K. Z. (2015). How does technological diversity in supplier network drive buyer innovation? Relational process and contingencies. Journal of Operations Management, 36, 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.06.001
Geroski, P., Machin, S., & Reenen, J. Van. (1993). The Profitability of Innovating Firms. The RAND Journal of Economics, 24(2), 198–211.
Giannopoulou, E., Barlatier, P. J., & Pénin, J. (2019). Same but different? Research and technology organizations, universities and the innovation activities of firms. Research Policy, 48(1), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.008
Gilsing, V., Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., & Oord, A. Van Den. (2008). Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance , betweenness centrality and density. Research Policy, 37, 1717–1731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.08.010
Granovetter, M. (1985). Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.
Guirado, C., Valldeperas, N., Tulla, A. F., Sendra, L., Badia, A., Evard, C., … Vera, A. (2017). Social farming in Catalonia: Rural local development, employment opportunities and empowerment for people at risk of social exclusion. Journal of Rural Studies, 56, 180–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.09.015
Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and Networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293–317.
Hameed, M. A., Counsell, S., & Swift, S. (2012). A meta-analysis of relationships between organizational characteristics and IT innovation adoption in organizations. Information and Management, 49(5), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2012.05.002
Hameed, T., von Staden, P., & Kwon, K.-S. (2019). Impediments to sustaining South Korea’s economic development: Pathologies of cooperation in intra-teamdynamics of technology commercialization. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113040
Hameed, Tahir, von Staden, P., & Kwon, K. S. (2018). Sustainable economic growth and the adaptability of a national system of innovation: A socio-cognitive explanation for South Korea’s mired technology transfer and commercialization process. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051397
Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. (1997). Technology Brokering and Innovation in a Product Development Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716–749.
Helmers, C., Patnam, M., & Rau, P. R. (2017). Do board interlocks increase innovation? Evidence from a corporate governance reform in India. Journal of Banking and Finance, 80, 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2017.04.001
Homburg, C., Alavi, S., Rajab, T., & Wieseke, J. (2017). The contingent roles of R&D–sales versus R&D–marketing cooperation in new-product development of business-to-business firms. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 212–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.05.008
Hooley, G., Broderick, A., & Möller, K. (1998). Competitive positioning and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6(2), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09652549800000003
Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35, 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005
Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2003.08.015
Hung, C. L. (2017). Social networks, technology ties, and gatekeeper functionality: Implications for the performance management of R&D projects. Research Policy, 46(1), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.11.009
Jarillo, J. C. (1988). On strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 31–41.
Jean, B. R. J., Sinkovics, R. R., & Kim, D. (2017). Antecedents and Outcomes of Supplier Innovativeness in International Customer–Supplier Relationships: The Role of Knowledge Distance. Management International Review, 57(1), 121–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-016-0291-x
Johanson, J., & Mattsson, L. (1987). Interorganizational Relations in Industrial Systems: A Network Approach Compared with the Transaction-Cost Approach. International Studies of Management & Organization, XVII(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.1987.11656444
Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A General Theory of Network Governance: Exchange Conditions and Social Mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 911–945.
Joo, J., Eom, M. T. I., & Shin, M. M. (2017). Finding the missing link between corporate social responsibility and firm competitiveness through social capital: A business ecosystem perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050707
Kafetzopoulos, D., Gotzamani, K., & Skalkos, D. (2019). The relationship between EFQM enablers and business performance: The mediating role of innovation. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 30(4), 684–706. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-06-2018-0166
Kanda, W., Pablo, R., Hjelm, O., & Bienkowska, D. (2019). A technological innovation systems approach to analyse the roles of intermediaries in eco-innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 227, 1136–1148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.230
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, Vol. 3, pp. 383–397.
Kshetri, N., & Dholakia, N. (2009). Professional and trade associations in a nascent and formative sector of a developing economy: A case study of the NASSCOM effect on the Indian offshoring industry. Journal of International Management, 15(2), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2008.09.003
Küçüksayraç, E., Keskin, D., & Brezet, H. (2015). Intermediaries and innovation support in the design for sustainability fi eld : cases from the Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom. Journal of Cleaner Production, 101, 38–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.03.078
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
Lavie, D. (2006). The Competitive Advantage of Interconnected Firms: An Extension of The Resource-Based View. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 638–658. https://doi.org/10.1145/2611286.2611321
Lawson, B., & Samson, D. (2001). Developing Innovation Capability in Organizations a Dynamic Capabilities Approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(3), 377–400.
Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust : The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer. Management Science Publication, 50(11), 1477–1490. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1030.0136
Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1123–1134. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069392
Lintukangas, K., Kähkönen, A., & Hallikas, J. (2019). The role of supply management innovativeness and supplier orientation in firms’ sustainability performance. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 25(4), 100558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2019.100558
Lofsten, H., & Lindelof, P. (2005). R & D networks and product innovation patterns — academic and non-academic new technology-based firms on Science Parks. Technovation, 25, 1025–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.02.007
McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging Ties : A Source of Firm Heterogeneity in Competitive Capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 1133–1156.
Meinhardt, R., Junge, S., & Weiss, M. (2018). The organizational environment with its measures, antecedents, and consequences: a review and research agenda. Management Review Quarterly, 68(2), 195–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-018-0137-7
Minh, N. Van, Badir, Y. F., Quang, N. N., & Afsar, B. (2017). The impact of leaders’ technical competence on employees’ innovation and learning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management - JET-M, 44(2016), 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2017.03.003
Molina-Morales, F. Xavier, & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2004). How much difference is there between industrial district firms? A net value creation approach. Research Policy, 33(3), 473–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2003.10.004
Molina-Morales, Francesc Xavier, & Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2014). Cluster Firms : You’ll Never Walk Alone. Regional Studies, (October), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.952719
Navarrete-Hernandez, P., & Navarrete-Hernandez, N. (2018). Unleashing Waste-Pickers’ Potential: Supporting Recycling Cooperatives in Santiago de Chile. World Development, 101, 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.08.016
OECD. (2005). Oslo Manual. Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data (Third Edit). Paris: OECD-European Communities.
Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants Interorganizational Relationships : Integration and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 241–265.
Orsenigo, L., Pammolli, F., & Riccaboni, M. (2001). Technological change and network dynamics Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry.
Pagani, R. N., Kovaleski, J. L., & Resende, L. M. (2015). Methodi Ordinatio: a proposed methodology to select and rank relevant scientific papers encompassing the impact factor, number of citation, and year of publication. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2109–2135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1744-x
Pennings, J. M. (1981). Strategically interdependent organizations. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Penrose, E. (1959). The Theory ofthe Growth ofthe Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
Pitt, L., Merwe, R. Van Der, & Berthon, P. (2006). Swedish BioTech SMEs : The veiled values in online networks. Technovation, 26, 553–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.09.009
Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007). Modes of Network Governance: Structure , Management , and Effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015
Pun, H., & Ghamat, S. (2016). The value of partnership under competition: When competitors may be R&D joint-venture and supply-chain partners for a critical component. International Journal of Production Economics, 177, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.03.018
Radziwon, A., & Bogers, M. (2018). Open innovation in SMEs: Exploring inter-organizational relationships in an ecosystem. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 573–587. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2017.16692abstract
Rajapathirana, R. P. J., & Hui, Y. (2017). Relationship between innovation capability, innovation type, and firm performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 3(1), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2017.06.002
Rathore, H., Jakhar, S. K., Bhattacharya, A., & Madhumitha, E. (2018). Examining the mediating role of innovative capabilities in the interplay between lean processes and sustainable performance. International Journal of Production Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.04.029
Ravichandran, T. (2017). Exploring the relationships between IT competence, innovation capacity and organizational agility. Journal of Strategic Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2017.07.002
Rehman, N. U. (2016). Network alliances and firms’ performance: a panel data analysis of Pakistani SMEs. Eurasian Business Review, 6(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-015-0033-1
Rehme, J., Nordigården, D., Ellström, D., & Chicksand, D. (2016). Power in distribution channels - Supplier assortment strategy for balancing power. Industrial Marketing Management, 54, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.07.007
Reynolds, E. B., & Uygun, Y. (2018). Strengthening advanced manufacturing innovation ecosystems: The case of Massachusetts. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 178–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.003
Ritala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S., & Husted, K. (2015). Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking and relative innovation performance : An empirical study. Technovation, 35, 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.07.011
Rivera, M. T., Soderstrom, S. B., & Uzzi, B. (2010). Dynamics of Dyads in Social Networks: Assortative, Relational, and Proximity Mechanisms. Annual Review of Sociology, 36(1), 91–115. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134743
Roundy, P.T. (2017). Hybrid organizations and the logics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(4), 1221–1237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0452-9
Roundy, Philip T., & Bayer, M. A. (2019). To bridge or buffer? A resource dependence theory of nascent entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 11(4), 550–575. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-06-2018-0064
Rubera, G., & Kirca, A. H. (2012). Firm Innovativeness and Its Performance Outcomes : A Meta-Analytic Review and. Journal of Marketing, 76, 130–147. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.10.0494
Rubin, T. H., Aas, T. H., & Stead, A. (2015). Knowledge flow in Technological Business Incubators: Evidence from Australia and Israel. Technovation, 41–42, 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.03.002
Rungsithong, R., Meyer, K. E., & Roath, A. S. (2017). Relational capabilities in Thai buyer-supplier relationships. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 32(8), 1228–1244. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-02-2017-0027
Sakkab, N. Y. (2002). Connect & Develop Complements Research & Develop at P&G. Research-Technology Management, 45(2), 38–45.
Schermerhorn, J. R. (1981). Open Questions Limiting the Interorganizational Development. Group & Organization Studies, 6(1), 83–95.
Sears, J. B. (2017). When are acquired technological capabilities complements rather than substitutes? A study on value creation. Journal of Business Research, 78(May 2016), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.04.021
Shan, W., Walker, G., & Kogut, B. (1994). Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 387–394.
Sheng, M. L. (2017). A dynamic capabilities-based framework of organizational sensemaking through combinative capabilities towards exploratory and exploitative product innovation in turbulent environments. Industrial Marketing Management, 65(June), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.06.001
Shih, T., & Aaboen, L. (2017). The network mediation of an incubator : How does it enable or constrain the development of incubator fi rms ’ business networks ? Industrial Marketing Management, (December), 0–1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.12.002
Shu, R., Ren, S., & Zheng, Y. (2018). Building networks into discovery: The link between entrepreneur network capability and entrepreneurial opportunity discovery. Journal of Business Research, 85(71372064), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.048
Staber, U. (1987). Structural Constraints on Associative Action in Business: An Empirical Investigation. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 4(3), 252–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.1987.tb00455.x
Stam, W., & Elfring, T. (2008). Entrepreneurial Orientation and New Venture Performance: The Moderating Role of Intra- and Extraindustry Social Capital. The Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 97–111.
Stattman, S. L., & Mol, A. P. J. (2014). Social sustainability of Brazilian biodiesel: The role of agricultural cooperatives. Geoforum, 54, 282–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.04.001
Su, Y., & Wu, F. (2015). Technological Forecasting & Social Change Regional systems of biotechnology innovation — The case of Taiwan. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.002
Sulistyo, H., & Siyamtinah. (2016). Innovation capability of SMEs through entrepreneurship, marketing capability, relational capital and empowerment. Asia Pacific Management Review, 21(4), 196–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2016.02.002
Tajeddini, K., Altinay, L., & Ratten, V. (2017). Service innovativeness and the structuring of organizations: The moderating roles of learning orientation and inter-functional coordination. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 65, 100–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.010
Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic Capabilities and Organizational Agility: Risk, Uncertainty, and Strategy in the Innovation Ecnonomy. California Management Review, 58(4), 13–35.
Thorelli, H. B. (1986). Networks: Between Markets and Hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal, 51, 37–51.
Ulrich, D., & Barney, J. B. (1984). Perspectives in Organizations: Resource Dependence, Efficiency, and Population. Acoriemy of Management Review, 9(3), 471–481.
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks : The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.
Vakharia, N., Vecco, M., Srakar, A., & Janardhan, D. (2018). Knowledge centricity and organizational performance: an empirical study of the performing arts. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(5), 1124–1152. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2017-0219
Wang, J. (2018). Innovation and government intervention: A comparison of Singapore and Hong Kong. Research Policy, 47(2), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.008
Wang, W., Cao, Q., Qin, L., Zhang, Y., Feng, T., & Feng, L. (2019). Uncertain environment, dynamic innovation capabilities and innovation strategies: A case study on Qihoo 360. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.06.029
Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44(8), 1407–1418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.004
Xie, X., Wang, L., & Zeng, S. (2018). Inter-organizational knowledge acquisition and firms’ radical innovation: A moderated mediation analysis. Journal of Business Research, 90(May 2017), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.038
Yu, X., Tao, Y., Chen, Y., Zhang, W., & Xu, P. (2019). Social networks and online store performance in emerging economies: the mediating effect of legitimacy. Electronic Markets, 29(2), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-019-00333-2
Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2000). International Expansion by New Venture Firms: International Diversity, Mode of Market Entry, Technological Learning, and Performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 925–950.
Zhang, J. J., & Guan, J. (2018). The time-varying impacts of government incentives on innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 135(April), 132–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.012
How to Cite
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html• 8. 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.