Innovation intermediaries and collaboration: Knowledge–based practices and internal value creation

Research Policy

Volumn 47, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 70-87

  De Silva, Muthu ^a,b   Howells, Jeremy ^c   Meyer, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

European union; Innovation intermediaries; Knowledge based practices; Knowledge capitalization; Research and technology organisations; Value creation

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

EUROPEAN UNION; INNOVATION INTERMEDIARIES; KNOWLEDGE BASED; KNOWLEDGE CAPITALIZATION; VALUE CREATION;

ENGINEERING RESEARCH;

EID: 85030842820     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.011     Document Type: Article

References (163)

1. Agogué, M., Yström, A., Le Masson, P., Rethinking the role of intermediaries as an architect of collective exploration and creation of knowledge in open innovation. Int. J. Innovation Manage. 17:02 (2013), 1–24.
2. Agogué, M., Berthet, E., Fredberg, T., Le Masson, P., Segrestin, B., Stoetzel, M., Wiener, M., Yström, A., A contingency approach of open innovation intermediaries-the management principles of the intermediary of the unknown. 13th Annual Conference of the European Academy of Management, Istanbul, EURAM 26–29 June 2013, 2013, 26–29.
3. Alavi, M., Kayworth, T.R., Leidner, D.E., An empirical examination of the influence of organizational culture on knowledge management practices. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 22 (2005), 191–224.
4. Albors, G.J., Rincón Díaz, C.A., Igartua, L., Research technology organisations as leaders of R&D collaboration with SMEs: role, barriers and facilitators. Technol. Anal. Strategic Manage. 26:1 (2014), 37–53.
5. Aldrich, H.E., von Glinow, M.A., Business start-ups: the HRM imperative. Birley, S., MacMillan, I.C., (eds.) International Perspectives on Entrepreneurial Research, 1992, 233–253 North-Holland, New York.
6. Andersen, B., Blanc, E.L., Catapult to Success: Be Ambitious, Bold and Enterprising Learning from European Technology and Innovation Centres. 2013, Big Innovation Centre, London.
7. Argyris, C., Empowerment: the emperor's new clothes. Harv. Bus. Rev. 76 (1998), 98–105.
8. Arnold, E., Clark, J., Javorka, Z., Impacts of european RTOs: a study of social and economic impacts of research and technology organisations. Report to European Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO), 2010, Technopolis Ltd., Brighton.
9. Autio, E., Dahlander, L., Frederiksen, L., Information exposure, opportunity evaluation, and entrepreneurial action: an investigation of an online user community. Acad. Manage. J. 56 (2013), 1348–1371.
10. Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., Phillips, L.W., Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Adm. Sci. Q. 36:3 (1991), 421–458.
11. Ballon, P., Business modelling revisited: the configuration of control and value. Info: J. Policy Regul. Strategy Telecommun. Inf. Media 9:5 (2007), 6–19.
12. Batterink, M.H., Wubben, E.F.M., Klerkx, L., Omta, S.W.F., Orchestrating innovation networks: the case of innovation brokers in the agri-food sector. Entrepreneurship Regional Dev. 22 (2010), 47–76.
13. Bisbe, J., Batista-Foguet, J.M., Chenhall, R., Defining management accounting constructs: a methodological note on the risks of conceptual misspecification. Accounting. Organ. Soc. 32 (2007), 789–820.
14. Boari, C., Riboldazzi, F., How knowledge brokers emerge and evolve: the role of actors’ behaviour. Res. Policy 43 (2014), 683–695.
15. Boon, W.P., Moors, E.H., Kuhlmann, S., Smits, R.E., Demand articulation in emerging technologies: intermediary user organisations as co-producers?. Res. Policy 40 (2011), 242–252.
16. Bouwen, P., Corporate lobbying in the European Union: the logic of access. J. Eur. Public Policy 9 (2002), 365–390.
17. Bowonder, B., Miyake, T., Technology management: a knowledge ecology perspective. Int. J. Technol. Manage. 19 (2000), 7–8.
18. Bruneel, J., D'Este, P., Salter, A., Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration. Res. Policy 39 (2010), 858–868.
19. Bruneel, J., D'Este, P., Salter, A., The impact of financial slack on explorative and exploitative knowledge sourcing from universities: evidence from the UK. Ind. Corporate Change 25 (2015), 689–706.
20. Byrne, B.M., Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming Mahwah. 1998, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
21. Caloffi, A., Rossi, F., Russo, M., The emergence of intermediary organizations: a network-based approach to the design of innovation policies. Geyer, R., Cairney, P., (eds.) Handbook on Complexity and Public Policy, 2015, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 314–330.
22. Cameron, A.C., Trivedi, P.K., Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications. 2005, Cambridge University Press, New York.
23. Carmines, E.G., McIver, J.P., Analyzing models with unobserved variables. Bohrnstedt, G.W., Borgatta, E.F., (eds.) Social Measurement: Current Issues, 1981, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.
24. Cepeda, G., Vera, D., Dynamic capabilities and operational capabilities: aknowledge management perspective. J. Bus. Res. 60 (2007), 426–437.
25. Chesbrough, H.W., The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 44:3 (2003), 35–41.
26. Chesbrough, H.W., Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. 2006, Harvard Business Press, Cambridge, MA.
27. Chin, W.W., The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Marcoulides, G.A., (eds.) Modern Methods for Business Research, 1988, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
28. Collis, B., Moonen, J., Web 2.0 tools and processes in higher education: quality perspectives. Educ. Media Int. 45 (2008), 93–106.
29. Curley, M., Salmelin, B., Open Innovation 2.0. A New Paradigm. White Paper. 2013.
30. Dahlander, L., Gann, D.M., How open is innovation?. Res. Policy 39 (2010), 699–709.
31. Davenport, T.H., De Long, D.W., Beers, M.C., Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Manage. Rev. 39 (1998), 43–57.
32. Davenport, T.H., Thomas, R.J., Cantrell, S., The mysterious art and science of knowledge-worker performance. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 44:1 (2002), 23–30.
33. Downward, P., Mearman, A., Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in economic research: reorienting economics into social science. Camb. J. Econ. 31 (2007), 77–99.
34. Dyer, J., Nobeoka, K., Creating and managing a high performance knowledge sharing network: the toyota case. Strateg. Manage. J. 21 (2000), 345–367.
35. EARTO, How Joint Undertakings Boost RTOs-industry Collaboration and Leverage Private RD&I Investments in Europe. 2017, European Association of Research and Technology Organisations (EARTO), Brussels (Working Paper, 10 March 2017).
36. Earl, M., Knowledge management strategies: toward a taxonomy. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 18 (2001), 215–233.
37. Edler, J., Yeow, J., Connecting demand and supply: The role of intermediation in public procurement of innovation. Res. Policy 45:2 (2016), 414–426.
38. Edmondson, A.C., Mcmanus, S.E., Methodological fit in management field research. Acad. Manage. Rev. 32 (2007), 1155–1179.
39. Escribano, A., Fosfuri, A., Tribó, J.A., Managing external knowledge flows: the moderating role of absorptive capacity. Res. Policy 38 (2009), 96–105.
40. Etzkowitz, H., The triple helix: university-industry-government. Innovation in Action, 2008, Routledge, London.
41. Fontana, R., Geuna, A., Matt, M., Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: the importance of searching, screening and signalling. Res. Policy 35 (2006), 309–323.
42. Ford, R.C., Fottler, M.D., Empowerment: a matter of degree. Acad. Manage. Perspect. 9 (1995), 21–29.
43. Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Marketing Res. 18:1 (1981), 39–50.
44. Garud, R., Nayyar, P.R., Transformative capacity: continual structuring by intertemporal technology transfer. Strateg. Manage. J. 15 (1994), 365–385.
45. Gassmann, O., Enkel, E., Chesbrough, H., The future of open innovation. R&D Manage. 40 (2010), 213–221.
46. Gavetti, G., Cognition and hierarchy: rethinking the micro foundations of capabilities’ development. Organ. Sci. 16 (2005), 599–617.
47. Gold, A.H., Malhotra, A., Segars, A.H., Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 18 (2001), 185–214.
48. Granovetter, M.S., Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Am. J. Sociol. 91 (1985), 481–510.
49. Grant, R.M., Baden-Fuller, C., A knowledge-based theory of inter-firm collaboration. Acad. Manage. Best Papers Proc. 8 (1995), 17–21.
50. Grant, R.M., Baden-Fuller, C., A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. J. Manage. Stud. 41 (2004), 61–84.
51. Grant, R.M., Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg. Manage. J. 17 (1996), 109–122.
52. Gulati, R., Nohria, N., Akbar, Z., Guest editors’ introduction to the special issue: strategic networks. Strateg. Manage. J. 21 (2000), 203–215.
53. Gulati, R., Nohria, N., Akbar, Z., Strategic networks. Strateg. Manage. J. 21 (2000), 199–201.
54. Gulati, R., Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strateg. Manage. J. 20 (1999), 397–420.
55. Gupta, A.K., Tesluk, P.E., Taylor, M.S., Innovation at and across multiple levels of analysis. Organ. Sci. 18 (2007), 885–897.
56. Hales, M., Birds were dinosaurs once: the diversity and evolution of research and technology organizations. RISE Final Report, 2001, CENTRIM, University of Brighton, Brighton.
57. Hardy, C., Phillips, N., Strategies of engagement: lessons from the critical examination of collaboration and conflict in an interorganizational domain. Organ. Sci. 9:2 (1998), 217–230.
58. Hardy, C., Phillips, N., Lawrence, T.B., Resources, knowledge and influence: the organizational effects of interorganizational collaboration. J. Manage. Stud. 40 (2003), 321–347.
59. Hargadon, A.B., Sutton, R.I., Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Adm. Sci. Q. 42 (1997), 716–749.
60. Hargadon, A.B., Brokering knowledge: linking learning and innovation research. Organ. Behav. 24 (2002), 41–85.
61. Hauser, H., The Current and Future Role of Technology and Innovation Centres in the UK. 2010, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, HMSO, London.
62. Hobday, M., The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems?. Res. Policy 29 (2000), 871–893.
63. Holmstrom, B., Agency costs and innovation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 12:3 (1989), 305–327.
64. Howells, J., Roberts, J., From innovation systems to knowledge systems. Prometheus 18 (2000), 17–31.
65. Howells, J., Ramlogan, R., Cheng, S.L., Innovation and university collaboration: paradox and complexity within the knowledge economy. Camb. J. Econ. 36 (2012), 703–721.
66. Howells, J., Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Res. Policy 35 (2006), 715–728.
67. Howells, J., The geography of knowledge: never so close but never so far apart. J. Econ. Geogr. 12:5 (2012), 1003–1020.
68. Huber, F., On the role and interrelationship of spatial, social and cognitive proximity: personal knowledge relationships of R&D workers in the Cambridge information technology cluster. Reg. Stud. 46 (2012), 1169–1182.
69. Huizingh, E.K., Open innovation: state of the art and future perspectives. Technovation 31 (2011), 2–9.
70. Jöreskog, K.G., Sörbom, D., LISREL-VI User's Guide. 3rd ed., 1984, Scientific Software, Mooresville.
71. Jensen, M., The Foundations of Organizational Strategy. 2001, Harvard University Press, Boston.
72. Johnson, M.W., Christensen, C.M., Kagermann, H., Reinventing your business model. Harv. Bus. Rev. 86:12 (2008), 50–59.
73. Kale, P., Singh, H., Perlmutter, H., Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital. Strateg. Manage. J. 21 (2000), 217–237.
74. Kauffeld-Monz, M., Fritsch, M., Who are the knowledge brokers in regional systems of innovation? A multi-actor network analysis. Reg. Stud. 47 (2013), 669–685.
75. Kim, J.-Y., Miner, A.S., Vicarious learning from the failures and near-failures of others: evidence from the U.S: commercial banking industry. Acad. Manage. J. 50 (2007), 687–714.
76. Kirkels, Y., Duysters, G., Brokerage in SME networks. Res. Policy 39:3 (2010), 375–385.
77. Klerkx, L., Leeuwis, C., Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: experiences with innovation intermediaries. Food Policy 33 (2008), 260–276.
78. Klerkx, L., Leeuwis, C., Balancing multiple interests: embedding innovation intermediation in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure. Technovation 28 (2008), 364–378.
79. Klerkx, L., Leeuwis, C., Grassroots innovations in community energy: the role of intermediaries in niche development. Global Environ. Change 23 (2008), 868–880.
80. Knockaert, M., Spithoven, A., Under which conditions do technology intermediaries enhance firms' innovation speed? The case of Belgium's Collective Research Centres. Reg. Stud. 48 (2014), 1391–1403.
81. Knockaert, M., Spithoven, A., Clarysse, B., The impact of technology intermediaries on firm cognitive capacity additionality. Technol. Forecasting Social Change 81 (2014), 376–387.
82. Kodama, T., The role of intermediation and absorptive capacity in facilitating university–industry linkages: an empirical study of TAMA in Japan. Res. Policy 37 (2008), 1224–1240.
83. Kogut, B., Zander, U., What firms do? coordination, identity, and learning. Organ. Sci. 7 (1996), 502–518.
84. Krenz, P., Basmer, S., Buxbaum-Conradi, S., Redlich, T., Wulfsberg, J.P., Knowledge management in value creation networks: establishing a new business model through the role of a knowledge-intermediary. Procedia CIRP 16 (2014), 38–43.
85. Landry, R., Amara, N., Lamari, M., Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent?. Technol. Forecasting Social Change 69 (2002), 681–701.
86. Landry, R., Amara, N., Cloutier, J.S., Halilem, N., Technology transfer organizations: services and business models. Technovation 33 (2013), 431–449.
87. Lee, S., Park, G., Yoon, B., Park, J., Open innovation in SMEs-An intermediated network model. Res. Policy 39 (2010), 290–300.
88. Lichtenthaler, U., Ernst, H., Attitudes to Externally Organising Knowledge Management Tasks: A review, reconsideration and extension of the NIH syndrome. R&D Manage. 36:4 (2006), 367–386.
89. Lichtenthaler, U., Ernst, H., Intermediary services in the markets for technology: organizational antecedents and performance consequences. Organ. Stud. 29 (2008), 1003–1035.
90. Lichtenthaler, U., Lichtenthaler, E., A capability-based framework for open innovation: complementing absorptive capacity. J. Manage. Stud. 46 (2009), 1315–1338.
91. Lichtenthaler, U., The drivers of technology licensing: an industry comparison. Calif. Manage. Rev. 49 (2007), 67–89.
92. Lichtenthaler, U., The collaboration of innovation intermediaries and manufacturing firms in the markets for technology. J. Product Innovation Manage. 30 (2013), 142–158.
93. Lin, R.J., Che, R.H., Ting, C.Y., Turning knowledge management into innovation in the high-tech industry. Ind. Manage. Data Syst. 112 (2012), 42–63.
94. Lin, H., Zeng, S., Liu, H., Li, C., How do intermediaries drive corporate innovation? A moderated examination. J. Business Res. 69:11 (2016), 4831–4836.
95. Lopez, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., How Innovation Intermediaries Are Shaping the Technology Market? An Analysis of Their Business Model. 2009, University of Muenchen, Muenchen (MPRA Paper No. 20458) http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen. de/20458/.
96. Lui, S.S., The roles of competence trust, formal contract, and time horizon in interorganizational learning. Organ. Stud. 30 (2009), 333–353.
97. Mankins, J.C., Technology Readiness Levels [White Paper]. 1995 (Retrieved September 7, 2016) https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/trl/trl.pdf.
98. Martín-de Castro, G., Knowledge management and innovation in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets: the role of openness and absorptive capacity. Ind. Marketing Manage. 47 (2015), 143–146.
99. Martínez-Vela, C., Benchmarking Research and Technology Organizations (RTO): A Comparative Analysis. 2016, MIT Industrial Performance Centre, Cambridge MA (MIT-IPC Working Paper 16-005).
100. Mazey, S., Richardson, J., Interest groups and EU policy making: organizational logic and venue shopping. Richardson, J.J., (eds.) European Union: Power and Policy-Making, 2006, Routledge, Oxon, 247–268.
101. McElroy, M.W., Social innovation capital. J. Intellectual Capital 3 (2002), 30–39.
102. Melle, C., Russo-Spena, T., Innomediary agency and practices in shaping market innovation. Ind. Marketing Manage. 44 (2015), 42–53.
103. Metcalfe, J.S., Knowledge of growth and the growth of knowledge. J. Evol. Econ. 12 (2002), 3–15.
104. Meyer, M., Kuusisto, J., Grant, K., De Silva, M., Flowers, S., 2017. Towards New Triple Helix Organisations? A Comparative Study of Competence Centres as Knowledge, Consensus and Innovation Spaces. Manuscript, submitted to R&D Management.
105. Meyers, L.S., Gamst, G., Guarino, A.J., Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation. 2006, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
106. Miles, J., A framework for power analysis using a structural equation modelling procedure. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 3:27 (2003), 1–11.
107. Miller, S., The strathclyde technology and innovation centre (TIC) in scotland's innovation system. regional studies. Reg. Sci. 1 (2014), 145–151.
108. Mils, P.K., Ungson, G.R., Reassessing the limits of structural empowerment: organizational constitution and trust as controls. Acad. Manage. Rev. 28:1 (2003), 143–153.
109. Morton, A., A Guide Through the Theory of Knowledge. second edition, 1997, Blackwell, Oxford.
110. Mount, M., Milewski, S., Fernandes, K., Exploring the knowledge complexities of innovation intermediaries: the case of nanotechnology in the UK. Int. J. Technol. Manage. 69 (2015), 20–37.
111. Mowery, D.C., Oxley, J.E., Silverman, B.S., Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strateg. Manage. J. 17 (1996), 77–91.
112. Muller, E., Zenker, A., Business services as actors of knowledge transformation: the role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems. Res. Policy 30 (2001), 1501–1516.
113. Nagaoka, S., Kwon, H.U., The incidence of cross-licensing: a theory and new evidence on the firm and contract level determinants. Res. Policy 35 (2006), 1347–1361.
114. Nambisan, S., Sawhney, M., A buyer's guide to the innovation bazaar. Harv. Bus. Rev. 85:6 (2007), 109–118.
115. Nell, P.S.V., Lichtenthaler, U., The role of innovation intermediaries in the markets for technology. Int. J. Technol. Intell. Plann. 7 (2011), 128–139.
116. Nelson, R.R., On the uneven evolution of human know-how. Res. Policy 32 (2003), 909–922.
117. Nielsen, B.B., The role of knowledge embeddedness in the creation of synergies in strategic alliances. J. Bus. Res. 58 (2005), 1194–1204.
118. Oliver, A.L., On the duality of competition and collaboration: network-based knowledge relations in the biotechnology industry. Scand. J. Manage. 20 (2004), 151–171.
119. Oxford Economics, Study of the Impact of the Intermediate Research and Technology Sector on the UK Economy. 2008 Oxford, UK.
120. Paulraj, A., Lado, A.A., Chen, I.J., Inter-organizational communication as a relational competency: antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer–supplier relationships. J. Oper. Manage. 26 (2008), 45–64.
121. Perkmann, M., Schildt, H., Open data partnerships between firms and universities: the role of boundary organizations. Res. Policy 44 (2014), 1133–1143.
122. Petruzzelli, A.M., Rotolo, D., Institutional diversity, internal search behaviour, and joint-innovations. Manage. Decision 53 (2015), 2088–2106.
123. Pisano, G.P., Teece, D.J., How to capture value from innovation: shaping intellectual property and industry architecture. Calif. Manage. Rev. 50 (2007), 278–296.
124. Podsakoff, P.M., Organ, D.W., Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J. Manage. 12:4 (1986), 531–544.
125. Polanyi, M., Knowing and being. Mind (N.S.) 70 (1961), 458–470.
126. Polzin, F., von Flotow, P., Klerkx, L., Addressing barriers to eco-innovation: exploring the finance mobilisation functions of insitituional innovation intermediaries. Technol. Forecastinf Social Change 103 (2016), 34–46.
127. Rhoten, D., Pfirman, S., Women in interdisciplinary science: exploring preferences and consequences. Res. Policy 36 (2007), 56–75.
128. Rosenberg, N., Adam Smith in the Division of Labour: two views or one?. Econ. (N.S.) 32 (1965), 127–139.
129. Rubin, D.B., For objective causal inference, design trumps analysis. Ann. Appl. Stat. 2:3 (2008), 808–840.
130. Sapsed, J., Grantham, A., DeFillippi, R., A bridge over troubled waters: bridging organisations and entrepreneurial opportunities in emerging sectors. Res. Policy 36 (2007), 1314–1334.
131. Saviotti, P.P., Technological Evolution, Variety, and the Economy. 1996, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
132. Sawhney, M., Prandelli, E., Verona, G., The power of innomediation. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 44 (2003), 77–82.
133. Scardamalia, M., Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal Education in a Knowledge Society, 97, 2002, 67–98.
134. Sethi, R., Smith, D.C., Park, C.W., How to kill a team's creativity. Harv. Bus. Rev. 80 (2002), 16–17.
135. Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., Campbell, D.T., Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. 2002, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
136. Sieg, J.H., Wallin, M.W., von Krogh, G., Managerial challenges in open innovation: a study of innovation intermediation in the chemical industry. R&D Manage. 40 (2010), 281–291.
137. Smedlund, A., The roles of intermediaries in regional knowledge systems. J. Intellectual Capital 7 (2006), 204–222.
138. Smith, K.G., Collins, C.J., Clark, K.D., Existing knowledge creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms. Acad. Manage. J. 48 (2005), 346–357.
139. Smith, A., An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. 1863 ed., 1776, Adam and Charles Black, Edinburgh.
140. Spender, J.C., Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strateg. Manage. J. 17 (1996), 45–62.
141. Spithoven, A., Clarysse, B., Knockaert, M., Building absorptive capacity to organise inbound open innovation in traditional industries. Technovation 30 (2010), 130–141.
142. Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., Using Multivariate Statistics. 5th ed., 2007, Allyn and Bacon, New York.
143. Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C., Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 1998, Sage, London.
144. Teece, D.J., Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. Holsapple, C.W., (eds.) Handbook on Knowledge Management, 2004, Spring Verlag, Berlin, 129–152.
145. Tjong, T., Tai, S., Veraart, F., Davids, M., How the Netherlands became a bicycle nation: users, firms and intermediaries, 1860–1940. Bus. History 57 (2015), 257–289.
146. Tortoriello, M., Reagans, R., McEvily, B., Bridging the knowledge gap: the influence of strong ties, network cohesion, and network range on the transfer of knowledge between organizational units. Organ. Sci. 23 (2012), 1024–1039.
147. Tortoriello, M., McEvily, B., Krackhardt, D., Being a catalyst of innovation: the role of knowledge diversity and network closure. Organ. Sci. 26 (2014), 423–438.
148. Tran, Y., Hsuan, J., Mahnke, V., How do innovation intermediaries add value? Insight from new product development in fashion markets. R&D Manage. 41 (2011), 80–91.
149. Tsai, W., Ghoshal, S., Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks. Acad. Manage. J. 41 (1998), 464–476.
150. Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, P.J., Vanhaverbeke, W., De Rochemont, M., Open innovation in SMEs: trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation 29 (2009), 423–437.
151. Verona, G., Prandelli, E., Sawhney, M., Innovation and virtual environments: towards virtual knowledge brokers. Organ. Stud. 27 (2006), 755–788.
152. Vlaar, P.W.L., Van Den Bosch, F.A.J., Volberda, H.W., Towards a dialectic perspective on formalization in interorganizational relationships: how alliance managers capitalize on the duality inherent in contracts, rules and procedures. Organ. Stud. 28 (2007), 437–466.
153. Wallin, M.W., von Krogh, G., Organizing for open innovation: focus on the integration of knowledge. Organ. Dyn. 39 (2010), 145–154.
154. Wenger, E., Snyder, W.M., Communities of practice: the organizational frontier. Harv. Bus. Rev. 110 (2000), 139–145.
155. West, J., Gallagher, S., Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software. R&D Manage. 36 (2006), 319–331.
156. Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., Knockaert, M., Mid-range universities’ linkages with industry: knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Res. Policy 37 (2008), 1205–1223.
157. Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., Sapienza, H.J., Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strateg. Manage. J. 22 (2001), 587–613.
158. Yusuf, S., Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses. Res. Policy 37 (2008), 1167–1174.
159. Zellner, A., An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 57 (1962), 348–368.
160. Zukin, S., DiMaggio, P., Introduction to Structures of Capital. 1990, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
161. de Felice, A., Knowledge, Social Capabilities and Innovation in the Modern Industrial District. 2015, McGraw Hill, Milano.
162. del Águila-Obra, A.R., Padilla-Meléndez, A., Serarols-Tarrés, C., Value creation and new intermediaries on Internet: an exploratory analysis of the online news industry and the web content aggregators. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 27:3 (2007), 187–199.
163. van Lente, H., Hekkert, M., Smits, R., van Waveren, B., Roles of systemic intermediaries in transition processes. Int. J. Innovation Manage. 7:03 (2003), 247–279.