Types of models of activities of knowledge brokers

• Autorzy: Janiszewski Adam

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2019.136.14

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Innovativeness appears to be one of the most important attributes associated with the best of both public and private organizations. There are many studies conducted that aim at comparing the level of innovativeness among different regions. In general, one can assume that public and private organizations should cooperate and exchange their knowledge of both tangible and intangible elements within each region. However, it often happens that cooperation among organizations that possess distinct resources does not occur smoothly. This may also be because local social capital is not developed sufficiently to make it possible for companies to open their boundaries and allow some knowledge simply to spill over. That is why organizations like knowledge-brokers are necessary. Thanks to their activities, it becomes possible for companies to be able to acquire new and reliable knowledge sources at a local and non-local scale. The aim of the paper is to present emerging types of knowledge-brokers that result from the research conducted in Slaskie Voivodeship in 2018. The research method is a multiple case study with seven cases and deep interviews with people representing organizations responsible for taking part in knowledge and information transfer served as a major source of data. The results of analysis are presented and discussed, and further paths of research are proposed.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

knowledge broker; models of activities; regional development

PL

broker wiedzy; modele działalności; rozwój regionalny

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: z. 136
• Strony: 165--178
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 21 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Janiszewski Adam

• University of Economics in Katowice

Bibliografia

• 1. Arikan, A.T. (2009). Interfirm knowledge exchange and the knowledge creation capability of clusters. Academy of Management Review, 34, 4, 658-677. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.44885776.
• 2. Bąkowski, A., Mażewska, M. (eds.) (2018). Ośrodki innowacji i przedsiębiorczości w Polsce. Warszawa/Poznań: Stowarzyszenie Organizatorów Ośrodków Innowacji i Przedsiębiorczości w Polsce.
• 3. Camuffo, A., Grandinetti, R. (2011). Italian industrial districts as cognitive systems: are they still reproducible. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23, 9-10, 815-852. doi: 10.1080/08985626.2011.577815.
• 4. Cvitanovic, C., Hobday, A.J., van Kerkhoff, L., Wilson, S.K., Dobbs, K., Marshall, N.A. (2015). Improving knowledge exchange among scientists and decision-makers to facilitate the adaptive governance of marine resources: a review of knowledge and research needs. Ocean and Coastal Management, 112, 25-35. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.002.
• 5. Dagnino, G.B., Levanti, G., Minà, A., Picone, P.M. (2015). Interorganizational network and innovation: a bibliometric study and proposed research agenda. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 30, 3/4, 354-377. doi: 10.1108/JBIM-02-2013-0032.
• 6. Debackere, K. (ed.) (2014). Boosting open innovation and knowledge transfer in the European Union. Brussels: Independent expert group report on open innovation and knowledge transfer.
• 7. Dul, J., Hak, T. (2008). Case study methodology in business research. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
• 8. Fleming, L., Waguespack, D.M. (2007). Brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open innovation communities. Organization Science, 18, 2, 165-180. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0242.
• 9. Hollanders, H., Es-Sadki, N., Merkelbach, I. (2019). Regional Innovation Scoreboard 2019. Masstricht: Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology – MERIT.
• 10. Hossain, M., Kauranen, I. (2016). Open innovation in SMEs: a systematic literature review. Journal of Strategy and Management, 9, 1, 58-73. doi: 10.1108/JSMA.
• 11. Kauffeld-Monz, M., Fritsch, M. (2013). Who are the knowledge brokers in regional systems of innovation? A multi-actor network analysis. Regional Studies, 47, 5, 669-685. doi: 10.1080/00343401003713365.
• 12. Lichtenthaler, U. (2011). Open innovation: past research, current debates, and future directions. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25, 1, 75-93. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.25.1.75.
• 13. Lingo, E.L., O' Mahony, S. (2010). Nexus work: brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 47-81. doi: 10.2189/asqu.2010.55.1.47.
• 14. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. (2000). Analiza danych jakościowych. Białystok: Trans Humana.
• 15. Nonaka, I., Kodama, M., Hirose, A., Kohlbacher, F. (2014). Dynamic fractal organizations for promoting knowledge-based transformation – a new paradigm for organizational theory. European Management Journal, 32, 137-146. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2013.02.003.
• 16. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. (2005). The theory of the knowledge-creating firm: subjectivity, objectivity and synthesis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14, 3, 419-436. doi: 10.1093/icc/dth058.
• 17. Obstfeld, D. (2005), Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 100-130. doi: 10.2189/ asqu.2005.50.1.100.
• 18. Oerlemans, L., Meeus, M., Kenis, P., (2007). Regional innovation networks. In R. Rutten, F. Boekema (Eds.), The learning region. Foundations, state of the art, future (pp. 161-163). Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, Massachusetts, USA: Edward Elgar.
• 19. Phelps, C., Heidl, R., Wadhwa, A. (2012). Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: a review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38, 4. doi: 10.1177/0149206311432640.
• 20. Sivakumar, K. (2018). Knowledge indicators for implementation of knowledge creation: a critical examination using structural equation modeling. The IUP Journal of Knowledge Management, XVI, 3, 30-43.
• 21. Yin, R.K. (2015). Studium przypadku w badaniach naukowych: projektowanie i metody. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2020).