Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Mignoni, Julhete
Data de Publicação: 2023
Outros Autores: Bittencourt, Bruno Anicet, Silva, Silvio Bitencourt da, Zen, Aurora Carneiro
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista de Administração e Inovação
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943
Resumo: Purpose – This paper investigates the roles and activities of the orchestrators of innovation networksconstituted within cities. In this sense, the authors expected to contribute for research related to the roles andactivities of the orchestrators of innovation networks constituted in the scope of cities given the large numberand diversity of complex and multiple dimensions social actors (Castells & Borja, 1996; Reypens, Lievens &Blazevic, 2019).Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted an exploratory research with a single case studyin depth. The case chosen for the paper is the case of Pacto Alegre. The case selection criterion was therelevance of the Pacto Alegre Case in the construction of an innovation network in the city of Porto Alegre, RioGrande do Sul, Brazil. The Pacto Alegre network was proposed by the Alliance for Innovation (composed of thethree main Universities in the city: UFRGS, PUCRS and UNISINOS) and by the Municipality of Porto Alegre. Inaddition to these actors, the network counts on financial and development institutions as sponsors, with mediapartners, with design partners, with an advisory board (composed of five professionals considered references indifferent themes) and composed by more than 100 companies, associations and institutions from different areas(Pacto Alegre, 2019). Data were collected from 09/20/2020 to 11/30/2020 through in-depth interviews,documentary research and non-participant observation.Findings – In this research, the authors highlighted the city as a community that involves and integratesvarious actors, such as citizens and companies, to collaborative innovation activities. For this, they proposed aframework on innovation networks and network orchestration. In this direction, seven dimensions of the“orchestration of innovation networks” were assumed as a result of the combination of previous studies byDhanaraj and Parke (2006), Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al. (2011) and da Silva and Bitencourt (2019). In thesequence, different roles of orchestrators associated with the literature were adopted based on the work byPikkarainen et al. (2017) and Nielsen and Gausdal (2017).Research limitations/implications – The authors’ results advance in relation to other fields by promotingthe expansion of the “orchestration of innovation networks” model with the combination of distinct elementsfrom the literature in a coherent whole (agenda setting, mobilization, network stabilization, creation andtransfer of knowledge, innovation appropriability, coordination and co-creation) and in the validation of itsapplicability in the context of the innovation network studied. In addition, when relating different roles oforchestrators to the seven dimensions studied, it was realized that there is no linear and objective relationshipbetween the dimensions and roles of the orchestrator, as in each dimension there may be more than one rolebeing played in the orchestration.Practical implications – Therefore, the findings suggest two theoretical contributions. First, the authorsidentified a role not discussed in the literature, here called the communicator. In the case analysis, the authorsobserved the communicator role through functions performed by a media partner of the innovation networkand by a group of civil society engaged in the city’s causes. Second, the authors indicated a new dimension oforchestration related to the management of communication in the innovation network and its externalities suchas p. ex. civil and organized society, characteristic of an innovation network set up within a city.Originality/value – Although several studies have proposed advances in the understanding of theorchestration of innovation networks (Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006; Ritala, Armila & Blomqvist, 2009; Nambisan& Sawhney, 2011; Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011), the discussion on the topic is still a black box (Nilsen &Gausdal, 2017). More specifically, the authors identified a gap in the literature about the role and activities ofactors in the city level. Few studies connected the regional dimension with the roles and activities of theorchestrators (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011; Pikkarainen et al., 2017), raising several challenges andopportunities to be considered by academics and managers.
id USP-40_4eac1cb564c94970a00a3b1b6a8e58a8
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/215943
network_acronym_str USP-40
network_name_str Revista de Administração e Inovação
repository_id_str
spelling Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto AlegreInnovation networksOrchestrationOrchestratorsPurpose – This paper investigates the roles and activities of the orchestrators of innovation networksconstituted within cities. In this sense, the authors expected to contribute for research related to the roles andactivities of the orchestrators of innovation networks constituted in the scope of cities given the large numberand diversity of complex and multiple dimensions social actors (Castells & Borja, 1996; Reypens, Lievens &Blazevic, 2019).Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted an exploratory research with a single case studyin depth. The case chosen for the paper is the case of Pacto Alegre. The case selection criterion was therelevance of the Pacto Alegre Case in the construction of an innovation network in the city of Porto Alegre, RioGrande do Sul, Brazil. The Pacto Alegre network was proposed by the Alliance for Innovation (composed of thethree main Universities in the city: UFRGS, PUCRS and UNISINOS) and by the Municipality of Porto Alegre. Inaddition to these actors, the network counts on financial and development institutions as sponsors, with mediapartners, with design partners, with an advisory board (composed of five professionals considered references indifferent themes) and composed by more than 100 companies, associations and institutions from different areas(Pacto Alegre, 2019). Data were collected from 09/20/2020 to 11/30/2020 through in-depth interviews,documentary research and non-participant observation.Findings – In this research, the authors highlighted the city as a community that involves and integratesvarious actors, such as citizens and companies, to collaborative innovation activities. For this, they proposed aframework on innovation networks and network orchestration. In this direction, seven dimensions of the“orchestration of innovation networks” were assumed as a result of the combination of previous studies byDhanaraj and Parke (2006), Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al. (2011) and da Silva and Bitencourt (2019). In thesequence, different roles of orchestrators associated with the literature were adopted based on the work byPikkarainen et al. (2017) and Nielsen and Gausdal (2017).Research limitations/implications – The authors’ results advance in relation to other fields by promotingthe expansion of the “orchestration of innovation networks” model with the combination of distinct elementsfrom the literature in a coherent whole (agenda setting, mobilization, network stabilization, creation andtransfer of knowledge, innovation appropriability, coordination and co-creation) and in the validation of itsapplicability in the context of the innovation network studied. In addition, when relating different roles oforchestrators to the seven dimensions studied, it was realized that there is no linear and objective relationshipbetween the dimensions and roles of the orchestrator, as in each dimension there may be more than one rolebeing played in the orchestration.Practical implications – Therefore, the findings suggest two theoretical contributions. First, the authorsidentified a role not discussed in the literature, here called the communicator. In the case analysis, the authorsobserved the communicator role through functions performed by a media partner of the innovation networkand by a group of civil society engaged in the city’s causes. Second, the authors indicated a new dimension oforchestration related to the management of communication in the innovation network and its externalities suchas p. ex. civil and organized society, characteristic of an innovation network set up within a city.Originality/value – Although several studies have proposed advances in the understanding of theorchestration of innovation networks (Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006; Ritala, Armila & Blomqvist, 2009; Nambisan& Sawhney, 2011; Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011), the discussion on the topic is still a black box (Nilsen &Gausdal, 2017). More specifically, the authors identified a gap in the literature about the role and activities ofactors in the city level. Few studies connected the regional dimension with the roles and activities of theorchestrators (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011; Pikkarainen et al., 2017), raising several challenges andopportunities to be considered by academics and managers.Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade2023-09-13info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/21594310.1108/INMR-01-2021-0002INMR - Innovation & Management Review; v. 20 n. 3 (2023); 194-2102515-8961reponame:Revista de Administração e Inovaçãoinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPporhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943/198020https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943/198021https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMignoni, Julhete Bittencourt, Bruno AnicetSilva, Silvio Bitencourt daZen, Aurora Carneiro2023-09-13T22:33:22Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/215943Revistahttp://www.viannajr.edu.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/raiPUBhttp://www.revistas.usp.br/viaatlantica/oairevistarai@usp.br||tatianepgt@revistarai.org1809-20391809-2039opendoar:2023-09-13T22:33:22Revista de Administração e Inovação - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
title Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
spellingShingle Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
Mignoni, Julhete
Innovation networks
Orchestration
Orchestrators
title_short Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
title_full Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
title_fullStr Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
title_full_unstemmed Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
title_sort Orchestrators of innovation networks in the city level: the case of Pacto Alegre
author Mignoni, Julhete
author_facet Mignoni, Julhete
Bittencourt, Bruno Anicet
Silva, Silvio Bitencourt da
Zen, Aurora Carneiro
author_role author
author2 Bittencourt, Bruno Anicet
Silva, Silvio Bitencourt da
Zen, Aurora Carneiro
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Mignoni, Julhete
Bittencourt, Bruno Anicet
Silva, Silvio Bitencourt da
Zen, Aurora Carneiro
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Innovation networks
Orchestration
Orchestrators
topic Innovation networks
Orchestration
Orchestrators
description Purpose – This paper investigates the roles and activities of the orchestrators of innovation networksconstituted within cities. In this sense, the authors expected to contribute for research related to the roles andactivities of the orchestrators of innovation networks constituted in the scope of cities given the large numberand diversity of complex and multiple dimensions social actors (Castells & Borja, 1996; Reypens, Lievens &Blazevic, 2019).Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted an exploratory research with a single case studyin depth. The case chosen for the paper is the case of Pacto Alegre. The case selection criterion was therelevance of the Pacto Alegre Case in the construction of an innovation network in the city of Porto Alegre, RioGrande do Sul, Brazil. The Pacto Alegre network was proposed by the Alliance for Innovation (composed of thethree main Universities in the city: UFRGS, PUCRS and UNISINOS) and by the Municipality of Porto Alegre. Inaddition to these actors, the network counts on financial and development institutions as sponsors, with mediapartners, with design partners, with an advisory board (composed of five professionals considered references indifferent themes) and composed by more than 100 companies, associations and institutions from different areas(Pacto Alegre, 2019). Data were collected from 09/20/2020 to 11/30/2020 through in-depth interviews,documentary research and non-participant observation.Findings – In this research, the authors highlighted the city as a community that involves and integratesvarious actors, such as citizens and companies, to collaborative innovation activities. For this, they proposed aframework on innovation networks and network orchestration. In this direction, seven dimensions of the“orchestration of innovation networks” were assumed as a result of the combination of previous studies byDhanaraj and Parke (2006), Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al. (2011) and da Silva and Bitencourt (2019). In thesequence, different roles of orchestrators associated with the literature were adopted based on the work byPikkarainen et al. (2017) and Nielsen and Gausdal (2017).Research limitations/implications – The authors’ results advance in relation to other fields by promotingthe expansion of the “orchestration of innovation networks” model with the combination of distinct elementsfrom the literature in a coherent whole (agenda setting, mobilization, network stabilization, creation andtransfer of knowledge, innovation appropriability, coordination and co-creation) and in the validation of itsapplicability in the context of the innovation network studied. In addition, when relating different roles oforchestrators to the seven dimensions studied, it was realized that there is no linear and objective relationshipbetween the dimensions and roles of the orchestrator, as in each dimension there may be more than one rolebeing played in the orchestration.Practical implications – Therefore, the findings suggest two theoretical contributions. First, the authorsidentified a role not discussed in the literature, here called the communicator. In the case analysis, the authorsobserved the communicator role through functions performed by a media partner of the innovation networkand by a group of civil society engaged in the city’s causes. Second, the authors indicated a new dimension oforchestration related to the management of communication in the innovation network and its externalities suchas p. ex. civil and organized society, characteristic of an innovation network set up within a city.Originality/value – Although several studies have proposed advances in the understanding of theorchestration of innovation networks (Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006; Ritala, Armila & Blomqvist, 2009; Nambisan& Sawhney, 2011; Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011), the discussion on the topic is still a black box (Nilsen &Gausdal, 2017). More specifically, the authors identified a gap in the literature about the role and activities ofactors in the city level. Few studies connected the regional dimension with the roles and activities of theorchestrators (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011; Pikkarainen et al., 2017), raising several challenges andopportunities to be considered by academics and managers.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-09-13
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943
10.1108/INMR-01-2021-0002
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943
identifier_str_mv 10.1108/INMR-01-2021-0002
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943/198020
https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/215943/198021
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv INMR - Innovation & Management Review; v. 20 n. 3 (2023); 194-210
2515-8961
reponame:Revista de Administração e Inovação
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Revista de Administração e Inovação
collection Revista de Administração e Inovação
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista de Administração e Inovação - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistarai@usp.br||tatianepgt@revistarai.org
_version_ 1800221937851432960