Análise configuracional das proximidades em alianças de inovação

Conteúdo do artigo principal

Jessâmine Thaize Sartorello Salvini
Simone Vasconcelos Ribeiro Galina

Resumo

As alianças tornaram-se fator crítico para o desenvolvimento da inovação, contudo a falta de proximidade entre os parceiros, que vai além do aspecto geográfico, pode influenciar os resultados. Apesar desse entendimento, os estudos não avaliam a inter-relação das proximidades em alianças de inovação. Esta pesquisa busca compreender quais combinações de proximidades levam a alianças exploration e exploitation. Para perscrutar esse caminho, realizou-se um survey com 174 empresas de alta tecnologia; como método, adotou-se a Análise Qualitativa Comparativa (QCA). Os resultados encontrados destacam que, no contexto de parceiros próximos fisicamente, as alianças de exploration são dependentes de proximidade social, combinadas com proximidade cognitiva ou institucional. Já as alianças exploitation são dependentes de proximidades cognitiva e social, somada à ausência de proximidade organizacional. Tem-se como conclusão que a orientação inovadora das alianças não depende do desenvolvimento de todas as dimensões de proximidade e destaca-se, assim, a relevância dos laços sociais.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

 

 

 

 

Detalhes do artigo

Como Citar
SARTORELLO SALVINI, J. T. .; VASCONCELOS RIBEIRO GALINA, S. . Análise configuracional das proximidades em alianças de inovação . RAE-Revista de Administração de Empresas, [S. l.], v. 62, n. 3, p. 1–18, 2022. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-759020220306. Disponível em: https://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rae/article/view/85586. Acesso em: 28 maio. 2022.
Seção
Artigos

Referências

Alves, A. C., Fischer, B., Vonortas, N. S., & Queiroz, S. R. R. D. (2019). Configurações de ecossistemas de empreendedorismo intensivo em conhecimento. RAE-Revista de Administração de Empresas, 59(4), 242-257. doi: 10.1590/S0034-759020190403

Ardito, L., Peruffo, E., & Natalicchio, A. (2019). The relationships between the internationalization of alliance portfolio diversity, individual incentives, and innovation ambidexterity: A microfoundational approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 148, 119714. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119714

Balland, P. A., Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2015). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 49(6), 907-920. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.883598

Barbosa, A. P. F. P. L. (2018). Managing collaborative R&D projects with different types of knowledge sources (Ph.D Thesis, Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade). Recuperado de https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/12/12139/tde-12062018-121650/fr.php

Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238-256. doi: 10.5465/amr.2003.9416096

Bishop, K., D’Este, P., & Neely, A. (2011). Gaining from interactions with universities: Multiple methods for nurturing absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 40(1), 30-40. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.009

Blindenbach‐Driessen, F., & Ende, J. Van den. (2014). The locus of innovation: The effect of a separate innovation unit on exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity in manufacturing and service firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(5), 1089-1105. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12146

Boschma, R. A. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61-74. doi: 10.1080/0034340052000320887

Boschma, R. A. (2021). The role of non-local linkages for innovation (Working Paper). Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography.

Bouncken, R. B., Pesch, R., & Kraus, S. (2015). SME innovativeness in buyer–seller alliances: Effects of entry timing strategies and inter-organizational learning. Review of Managerial Science, 9(2), 361-384. doi: 10.1007/s11846-014-0160-6

Broekel, T. (2015). The co-evolution of proximities: A network level study. Regional Studies, 49(6), 921-935. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.1001732

Broekel, T., & Boschma, R. (2012). Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: The proximity paradox. Journal of Economic Geography, 12(2), 409-433. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbr010

Davids, M., & Frenken, K. (2018). Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process: Towards an integrated framework. Regional Studies, 52(1), 23-34. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2017.1287349

Enkel, E., & Heil, S. (2014). Preparing for distant collaboration: Antecedents to potential absorptive capacity in cross-industry innovation. Technovation, 34(4), 242-260. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2014.01.010

Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393-420. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.60263120

Garcia, R., Araujo, V., Mascarini, S., Santos, E. G. Dos, & Costa, A. (2018). Is cognitive proximity a driver of geographical distance of university–industry collaboration? Area Development and Policy, 3(3), 349-367. doi: 10.1080/23792949.2018.1484669

Geldes, C., Heredia, J., Felzensztein, C., & Mora, M. (2017). Proximity as determinant of business cooperation for technological and non-technological innovations: A study of an agribusiness cluster. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 32(1), 168-179. doi: /10.1108/JBIM-01-2016-0003

Gonçalves, E., & Fajardo, B. D. A. G. (2011). A influência da proximidade tecnológica e geográfica sobre a inovação regional no Brasil. Revista de Economia Contemporânea, 15(1), 112-142. Recuperado de https://www.scielo.br/j/rec/a/MtKkTL4ZXgQrmgqmgZZGtTs/?format=pdf&lang=pt

Gonzalez, R. V. D., & Melo, T. M. D. (2018). Inovação por exploração e explotação do conhecimento: Um estudo empírico do setor automobilístico. Gestão & Produção, 25(1), 1-15. doi: 10.1590/0104-530X3899-17

Gulati, R. (1995). Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(4), 619-652. doi: 10.2307/2393756

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2012). Análise multivariada de dados. Porto Alegre: Bookman Editora.

Hansen, T. (2014). Juggling with proximity and distance: Collaborative innovation projects in the Danish cleantech industry. Economic Geography, 90(4), 375-402. doi: 10.1111/ecge.12057

Hansen, T. (2015). Substitution or overlap? The relations between geographical and non-spatial proximity dimensions in collaborative innovation projects. Regional Studies, 49(10), 1672-1684. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2013.873120

Hansen, T., & Mattes, J. (2018). Proximity and power in collaborative innovation projects. Regional Studies, 52(1), 35-46. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1263387

He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1040.0078

Hinzmann, S., Cantner, U., & Graf, H. (2019). The role of geographical proximity for project performance: Evidence from the German leading-edge cluster competition. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(6), 1744-1783. doi: 10.1007/s10961-017-9600-1

Huber, F. (2011). On the role and interrelationship of spatial, social and cognitive proximity: Personal knowledge relationships of R&D workers in the Cambridge information technology cluster. Regional Studies, 46(9), 1169-1182. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.569539

Iammarino, S., & McCann, P. (2006). The structure and evolution of industrial clusters: Transactions, technology and knowledge spillovers. Research Policy, 35(7), 1018-1036. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.05.004

Jansen, J. J. P., Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2009). Strategic leadership for exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of environmental dynamism. Leadership Quarterly, 20(1), 5-18. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.11.008

Kauppila, O. P. (2010). Creating ambidexterity by integrating and balancing structurally separate interorganizational partnerships. Strategic Organization, 8(4), 283-312. doi: 10.1177%2F1476127010387409

Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(2), 71-89. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00121.x

Lauvås, T., & Steinmo, M. (2019). The role of proximity dimensions and mutual commitment in shaping the performance of university-industry research centres. Innovation: Organization and Management, 23(2), 182-208. doi: 10.1080/14479338.2019.1662725

Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 109-155. doi: 10.5465/19416521003691287

Leeuw, T., Lokshin, B., & Duysters, G. (2014). Returns to alliance portfolio diversity: The relative effects of partner diversity on firm's innovative performance and productivity. Journal of Business Research, 67(9), 1839-1849. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.12.005

Li, R., Fu, L., & Liu, Z. (2020). Does openness to innovation matter? The moderating role of open innovation between organizational ambidexterity and innovation performance. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 28(2), 251-271. doi: 10.1080/19761597.2020.1734037

Liu, L., Wang, F., & Li, X. (2019). Comparing the configured causal antecedents of exploration and exploitation: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 13(1), 1-25. doi: 10.1186/s11782-019-0048-z

Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672. doi: 10.1177%2F0149206306290712

March, J. G. (1991).Exploration and Exploitation Organizational Learning. . Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

Martin, R., & Moodysson, J. (2013). Comparing knowledge bases: On the geography and organization of knowledge sourcing in the regional innovation system of Scania, Sweden. European Urban and Regional Studies, 20(2), 170-187. doi: 10.1177%2F0969776411427326

Martínez-Noya, A., & Narula, R. (2018). What more can we learn from R&D alliances? A review and research agenda. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 21(3), 195-212. doi: 10.1016%2Fj.brq.2018.04.001

Marx, A., Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. (2014). The origins, development, and application of qualitative comparative analysis: The first 25 years. European Political Science Review, 6(1), 115-142. doi: 10.1017/S1755773912000318

Mattar, F. N. (2006). Pesquisa de marketing. São Paulo, SP: Atlas.

Mattes, J. (2012). Dimensions of proximity and knowledge bases: Innovation between spatial and non-spatial factors. Regional Studies, 46(8), 1085-1099. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.552493

Molina-Morales, F. X., Belso-Martínez, J. A., Más-Verdú, F., & Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2015). Formation and dissolution of inter-firm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters. Journal of Business Research, 68(7), 1557-1562. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.051

Nooteboom, B. (2000). Learning and innovation in organizations and economies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

O'Connor, M., Doran, J., & McCarthy, N. (2020). Cognitive proximity and innovation performance: Are collaborators equal?. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(3),637-654. doi: 10.1108/EJIM-11-2019-0347

Pickernell, D., Jones, P., & Beynon, M. J. (2019). Innovation performance and the role of clustering at the local enterprise level: A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis approach approach. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 31(1-2), 82-103. doi: 10.1080/08985626.2018.1537149

Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press.

Schamp, E. W., Rentmeister, B., & Lo, V. (2004). Dimensions of proximity in knowledge-based networks: The cases of investment banking and automobile design. European Planning Studies, 12(5), 607-624. doi: 10.1080/0965431042000219978

Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2013). Set-theoretic methods for social science: A guide qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Steinmo, M., & Rasmussen, E. (2016). How firms collaborate with public research organizations: The evolution of proximity dimensions in successful innovation projects. Journal of Business Research, 69(3), 1250-1259. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.09.006

Tiwana, A., Jijie, W., Keil, M., & Ahluwalia, P. (2007). The bounded rationality bias in managerial valuation of real options: Theory and evidence from IT projects. Decision Sciences, 38(1), 157-181. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2007.00152.x

Xu, J., Yang, F. F., & Xue, D. (2019). The geography of knowledge sourcing, personal networks, and innovation effects: Evidence from the biomedical firms in Guangzhou, China. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(12), 3412. doi: 10.3390/su11123412

Yang, T. T., & Li, C. R. (2011). Competence exploration and exploitation in new product development: The moderating effects of environmental dynamism and competitiveness. Management Decision, 49(9), 1444-1470. doi: 10.1108/00251741111173934