Rooted in the territorial approach, this theoretical paper offers a systematic literature review (SLR) of ecosystems based on a selection of 104 articles and books and their archetypes. First, we identify and discuss the four main types of ecosystems-business, innovation, entrepreneurial, and knowledge ecosystems-and indicate the presence of other transversal concepts. Second, we provide an overview of related and well-established theories from the territorial approach that have been largely omitted although they are ecosystem archetypes. Third, we identify the invariants across the four diverging streams from the ecosystem approach and the seven diverging streams from the territorial approach. Finally, we propose a research framework based on the comparison between key invariants from both approaches and discuss their similarities and differences that could serve as a foundation for future empirical research. This study therefore links the ecosystem and territorial approaches under the complex evolutionary system umbrella by creating a theoretical framework that reflects the complex interconnection between models, theories, and emerging concepts. 1 Introduction Only two decades after the introduction of an ecosystem parallel (Moore, 1993) in the management field, researchers have started to use this term more frequently. According to Web of Science (WoS), until 2015, one could only find 39 articles exclusively related to business, management, and economics that responded to the search string 'ecosystem*' AND 'busines*' AND 'innovat*'. In contrast, in 2015 and 2016 alone, one could find 21 and 26 new publications, respectively. This rapid growth justifies the recent emerging discussions, such as by de Vasconcelos

No abstract

No abstract

Over the past decades, the EU heavily invested in Research Infrastructures (RI). What are the expected returns of such investments? In the present article we address the question of returns on public funds/public infrastructures. We consider the role of RI and universities from an economic, social, and entrepreneurial perspective from various Territorial Innovation Models (TIMs): (1) Italian industrial districts, (2) innovative milieus, (3) regional innovation systems, (4) new industrial spaces, and (5) regional clusters. We conducted our empirical study on Grenoble Isère Alpes Nanotechnologies (GIANT), which is composed of large scientific instruments, universities, and engineering and management schools. Our microeconomic methodology measured the socioeconomic and entrepreneurial effects of GIANT with respect to budget, employment, and spin-off generation. We contribute to the existing body of knowledge on TIMs by (1) comparing the long-term investments to the generation of wealth, the creation of employment, and the development of start-ups; (2) adding new insights to the debate opposing positive and negative impacts empirical studies; and (3) offering recommendations for the use of public resources. In our discussion, we compare the GIANT model as a very localized RI-university club to the Grenoble model as localized cluster.

No abstract

This study focuses on major issues of talent management (TM) with respect to knowledge management (KM). Under the effect of the economic paradigm shift toward a knowledge-based economy, multiple human changes occurred and new challenges related to human capital and talent management requires new research in the field. The purpose of the article is to identify what are the contributions of People hold a Job that require a High Level of Talent (PJHLT) to knowledge management in terms of contribution to the value chain, to the creation, to the collective effort, to long distance dynamics, to absorption, transfer and learning, to innovation, and to the relationship with customers. This article develops a hypothetic-deductive study on individuals self-perception regarding talent requirements at their jobs. We used quantitative data collection in the cluster of Grenoble in France specialized in micro-nano technologies and software. 111 organizations and 566 people contributed to the study. We identified three main findings. First, PJHLT are also more likely to be involved in exploration rather than examination. Second, PJHLT are more likely to be able to absorb, transfer, and learn within long-distance and knowledge-rich dynamics. Third, PJHLT are more likely to be involved in the creation of knowledge rather than in the use of knowledge, which may lead to frustration due to a perception of an unfair distribution of wealth. We identified limitations in our study related to the measurement of subjective variables, the lack of generalization, and the focus on the contribution as one aspect of talent. Addressing an original topic related to both talent management and knowledge management; we finally identify paths for further studies.

Purpose – Knowledge is a strategic resource for firms and it can enable them to achieve competitive advantage. Large companies engaged in internationalization pay particular attention to knowledge as a source of innovation. The purpose of this paper is to investigate current debates in the field: the first is about cumulative vs composite knowledge; the second concerns the degree of diversity and redundancy in knowledge-based dynamics; and the third debate is about incremental vs radical innovation. Design/methodology/approach – The authors have used an inductive approach to perform a longitudinal case study of multinational corporation-semiconductor (MNC-SC). Total of 13 interviews were conducted over a four-year period. The MNC-SC case study has given the opportunity to analyse knowledge resources, knowledge, and innovation processes in a context of internationalization. Findings – The findings indicate that in order to achieve technological innovation in a context of internationalization, the company builds knowledge in a cumulative fashion, which can create a path dependency problem. To ensure complementarity between cross-functional teams located long distances from one another, and maximize the utilization of resources, MNC-SC must establish common standards. To maximize returns from composite knowledge, in a context of internationalization, knowledge diversity is preferable over redundancy. However, true knowledge transfer, sharing, and learning are limited. Combinatorial and incremental innovation through internationalization is a process based on trial and error; it maximizes technological performance and enables the company to fulfil needs without diverging from the technological trajectory of the SC industry. Originality/value – The internationalization process revealed limitations: limited understanding of the content of each knowledge module, competency traps, limited innovativeness, and therefore limited wealth creation.

No abstract