Search results
1 – 5 of 5
Abstract
Details
Keywords
Giulia Piantoni, Marika Arena and Giovanni Azzone
Innovation ecosystems (IEs) have attracted the attention of policymakers and researchers because of their potential to positively affect territories, creating shared value…
Abstract
Purpose
Innovation ecosystems (IEs) have attracted the attention of policymakers and researchers because of their potential to positively affect territories, creating shared value. However, due to the fragmentation of IEs, how this happens in different IEs has been explored only partially. This research aims to bridge this gap, aiming to support policymakers in understanding how to foster shared value in diverse IEs.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper identifies, based on the literature, two “drivers of aggregation” of IE's actors as key dimensions characterizing shared value in IEs, namely physical proximity and dominant issue. If these are combined, three archetypes emerge: Hub- and Chain-Driven, Place-Driven, Competence- and Issue-Driven IEs.Then, elements useful for understanding shared value creation in these archetypes are framed and studied in real cases.
Findings
Results reveal that aggregation drivers affect shared value creation, which differ among archetypes: in Competence- and Issue-Driven IEs alignment is challenged by the low physical proximity, which in Place-Driven IEs is high, but not enough to grant shared value; in Hub- and Chain-Driven IEs, the hub is the orchestrator, representing both a driver and a risk.
Originality/value
Differences in shared value creation processes relate to the set-up of the IE, which has relevant implications for policy definition. In Competence- and Issue-Driven IEs, policies at diverse levels align in funding and promoting the IE; in Place-Driven IEs, policies support anchors' development on-site; in Hub- and Chain-Driven IEs, policies, sometimes absent, should foster partnerships for projects for the territory, IE's enlargement and resilience.
Details
Keywords
Richard Franciscus Johannes Haans and Arjen van Witteloostuijn
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the geographic dissemination of work in International Business (IB) by investigating the extent to which research topics tend to see…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the geographic dissemination of work in International Business (IB) by investigating the extent to which research topics tend to see mostly local use – with authors from the same geographic region as the article identified by the topic model as the first article in JIBS building on the topic – vs global use – where topics are used by authors across the world.
Design/methodology/approach
Topic modeling is applied to all articles published in the Journal of International Business Studies between 1970 and 2015. The identified topics are traced from introduction until the end of the sampling period using negative binomial regression. These analyses are supplemented by comparing patterns over time.
Findings
The analyses show strong path dependency between the geographic origin of topics and their spread across the world. This suggests the existence of geographically narrow mental maps in the field, which the authors find have remained constant in North America, widened yet are still present in East Asia, and disappeared in Europe and other regions of the world over time. These results contribute to the study of globalization in the field of IB, and suggest that neither a true globalization nor North American hegemony has occurred in recent decades.
Originality/value
The application of topic modeling allows investigation of deeper cognitive structures and patterns underpinning the field, as compared to alternative methodologies.
Details