International Association for Management of Technology
IAMOT 2008 Proceedings
A REFERENCE FRAMEWORK TO SUPPORT ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY
DEVELOPMENT
RAFAEL CLEMENTE
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro – COPPE/UFRJ, Cidade Universitária, CT, Bl. D, LabCIM – Ilha do Fundão
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21.945-972, Brazil
[email protected]
HEITOR CAULLIRAUX
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro – COPPE/UFRJ, Cidade Universitária, CT, Bl. D, LabCIM – Ilha do Fundão
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21.945-972, Brazil
[email protected]
LUIZ ANTONIO MEIRELLES
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro – DEI-POLI/UFRJ, Cidade Universitária, CT, G-209 – Ilha do Fundão
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21.945-972, Brazil
[email protected]
ADRIANO PROENÇA
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro – COPPE/UFRJ, Cidade Universitária, CT, Bl. D, LabCIM – Ilha do Fundão
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21.945-972, Brazil
[email protected]
The main objective of this paper is to present a reference framework to support absorptive capacity development. This research is
performed in a context in which innovations are of increasing importance to competitive success and in which environment dynamics
compel organizations to frequently reconfigure their resource base in order to achieve competitive advantage, a concept known as
dynamic capability. In such context of increasing knowledge availability in the environment, developing the ability to identify,
assimilate and exploit externally available knowledge is a priority to increase innovative capability. This ability, known in the literature
as absorptive capacity, is widely studied and extensively cited but, as some researchers have pointed out, the concept is being adapted to
different uses which distort its original meaning. Their research shows that concept development bears some issues that should be
addressed. One of the propositions is that absorptive capacity should be more practically developed, by using the dynamic capability
approach. Some authors point out that the shift from a structural absorptive capacity perspective to its view as more of a dynamic
capability is critical to the advancement of the absorptive capacity literature, by focusing attention on the structure, policies, and
processes within the organization which affect knowledge transfer, sharing, integration, and creation. The framework was developed to
address this issue, using the design research approach, in which the result, the technological rules, comprise a prescription to support
practitioners in designing a solution adapted to their specific context. Based on an extensive literature review, the abilities of acquiring,
assimilating, transforming and exploiting knowledge, which represent the absorptive capacity, are unfolded in a technological rule
framework consisting of four organizational processes (technological prospection, knowledge diffusion, technological planning, and
technological development) and twelve integration requisites, linking each one of the processes. This integration ensures that the four
processes are combined to conform a dynamic capability. This reference framework is important in order to guide organizations in
designing their particular solutions to support absorptive capacity development. The results are empirically verified in a framework
application in designing a specific solution for a vaccine manufacturing organization. Two main contributions can be pointed from the
research, as follows. From an academic perspective, the results contribute to the development of the absorptive capacity concept as a
dynamic capability, by describing it as a set of processes and integration requisites linking each process. From a practical perspective,
the framework was considered a useful reference to guide specific solution design as well as to integrate the processes already
established in organizations. Finally, a number of additional conclusions about proposal potentials and limitations are presented.
Keywords: absorptive capacity; design research; reference framework
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
Introduction
The absorptive capacity construct has been receiving increasing attention since its original
proposition, in 1989, by Cohen and Levinthal, in their article “Innovation and Learning: the
two faces of R&D” published in the Economic Journal. A large number of articles cite this
concept to support its propositions. According to Lane et al. (2006), this number reaches
more than 900 articles in first-class academic journals. However, from a theoretical
perspective, concept use has suffered some adaptations which distort its original meaning and
render construct understanding imprecise, as pointed by Zahra and George (2002) and Lane
et al. (2006). A part of this problem lies in the fact that the original definition is widely
abstract, which leads to interpretations and applications dispersed through time. From a
practical perspective, in spite of absorptive capacity importance recognition as critical to
adaptation success in a dynamic environment (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), in order to face
disruptive threats (Christensen, 1995, 1997a, 1997b, 2003) and to adopt open innovation
models (Chesbrough, 2003a, 2003b, 2006), few studies approach the absorptive capacity
development from a dynamic capability perspective (Zahra and George, 2002; Lane et al.,
2006). Even more critical, very few authors have adopted a practical approach, with no
contributions in developing guidelines, artifacts or techniques which field professionals could
use to guide and support the design of organizational solutions to accelerate absorptive
capacity development in their specific organizations.
With the aim of overcoming these constraints, the main objective of this paper is to present a
reference framework so as to support designing organizational solutions to accelerate
absorptive capacity development (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). This research has two main
implications: the first, of academic value, is that it contributes to develop the construct in a
dynamic capability approach, focusing on its processes and change nature. It’s important to
note that this research path was pointed out by Lane et al. (2006) as critical to theme
development.
The second implication, of more practical value, is that it contributes to guiding professionals
in designing organizational solutions in a way that absorptive capacity development could be
accelerated and, as consequence, improve the firm’s ability to learn within the environment in
which was immersed.
Research Method
The development of the framework to support absorptive capacity development has its roots
in several research projects developed in close collaboration with organizations from
different sectors. In these projects, organizational ability to use externally available
knowledge was frequently pointed out, in semi-structured interviews with executives and
professionals, as increasingly crucial to competitiveness, although there is wide need for its
development in most organizations. These exploratory interviews, combined with the
absorptive capacity literature review, were the basis to conclude that this construct, although
widely known and cited, presents some issues regarding its theoretical and practical
development.
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
From the literature review, it is possible to emphasize the work of Lane, Koka and Pathak,
published in 2006 by the Academy of Management Review, in which the authors analyzed
900 papers to delineate how the construct has been used and to identify the main constraints
to absorptive capacity development. Based on the interviews and on literature review results,
it was possible to establish that a dynamic capability approach was necessary in order to
develop the absorptive capacity construct, as well as a more prescriptive approach in order to
guide professionals through the design of this capability in their organizations.
In this sense, the main objective of this research can be defined as the development of a
reference framework to support the design of organizational solutions to catalyze absorptive
capacity development. To guarantee its prescriptive character, the framework was developed
based on the design research approach (Van Aken, 2004, 2005; Romme and Endenburg,
2006). It is also important to note that, as a capability flourishes from organizational routines
(Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), it is always designed in an indirect manner through the
process and the way they are dynamically linked to guarantee resource base reconfiguration,
which constitutes a dynamic capability.
Using a more focused literature review, each one of the capabilities - acquiring, assimilating,
transforming and exploiting - which constitute the absorptive capacity was related to known
processes of the innovation management field, in a way that each process could represent a
proxy to that capability development. Additionally to certifying that these processes were
integrated, thus warranting its dynamic character, a number of technological rules
representing integrative requisites was defined to link each one of the process. The
combination of these processes and integrative requirements constitutes the framework which
results from this research.
Two verification methods were used to improve and test the applicability of the proposed
framework. The first consisted in scenario-based analysis through interviews with
experienced executives in innovation management activities from different industries (Plsek
et al., 2007). Each one of the executives, after a reference framework presentation, was
invited to discuss the implications of its use and the way it could be applied in their
respective organizations. This method, in spite of hypothetical analysis limitations, has
provided important contributions to improve framework applicability and practical utilization
by professionals, once it provided interesting insights to balance the ideal level of
prescription in order have rules that are general enough to be used in different context and
specific enough to guide professionals in designing their particular solution.
The second test consisted of the use of the framework to support the design of an
organizational solution which could accelerate absorptive capacity development in a vaccine
manufacturer. The framework potentialities and limitations could be identified after the
application of these two verification methods as well as some practical considerations about
framework utilization.
Article Outline
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
The next sections of this article are structured as follows. In the next section a literature
review about construct origins, a critical analysis about its use, the different perspectives
from which the concept is approached and the main opportunities for concept development
are presented (Lane et al., 2006). At the end of the second section, the need to approach
absorptive capacity as a dynamic capability is stated.
In the third section, the main propositions of design research approach are presented. This
approach was used to support reference framework development, guiding technological rule
definition and it prescriptive characteristic. The fourth section regards the reference
framework proposition, presenting the theoretical representation of absorptive capacity, the
passage from capabilities to processes and the definition of integration requisites linking each
process to configure dynamic capability. To illustrate the framework application, a brief case
study in which the framework was used to support an organizational solution design in a
vaccine manufacturer is presented. The processes and integration requirements guided the
definition of the processes, techniques and links between them, which were to be used by
organization. In the fifth section, the conclusions of this work are presented.
Literature Review
The origins of absorptive capacity concept
The notion that a firm’s ability to assimilate external knowledge is a consequence of its own
R&D efforts was observed by several authors such as Tilton (1971), Evenson and Kislev
(1975), Mowery (1983) and Allen (1977). However, it was Cohen and Levinthal, in a threearticle series: the first published in 1989, in the Economic Journal, named “Innovation and
Learning: The two faces of R&D”; the second, published in 1990, in the Administrative
Science Quarterly, named “Absorptive Capacity: A new perspective on learning and
innovation”; and the third published in 1994, in Management Science, named “Fortune favors
the prepared firm”, which pointed the secondary role that R&D efforts perform in knowledge
acquisition. They also named the expression “absorptive capacity” as the firm’s ability to
identify, assimilate and exploit knowledge from the environment (Cohen and Levinthal,
1989, p.570). These three papers constitute the foundation to the future development of the
concept by other authors, and it is important to observe the main contributions from these
seminal works.
It is possible to note that the concept has been improved upon and expanded along the three
articles, in spite of its being always related to the R&D context. It can also be observed that
the definitions could not yet support a uniform understanding, enabling different
interpretations and distortions to adapt the concept to specific needs. Based on Lane et al.
(2006, p.839) it is possible to highlight the main contributions by Cohen and Levinthal’s
(1989, 1990 and 1994) to construct delineation. First is the notion that, through its R&D
activities, an organization can develop a specific knowledge base, which will enable better
understanding and identification of external available knowledge with valuable potential to
be assimilated and exploited internally. It regards the first part of the definition, related to
knowledge identification and valuation. By observing the cumulative character of this
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
capability, in which more knowledge generates more absorptive capacity, and more
absorptive capacity enables the identification and assimilation of more knowledge, in a
virtuous cycle.
The second contribution indicates that, across time, an organization develops processes and
policies which facilitates this kind of knowledge dissemination internally, especially by
increasing knowledge about the organization’s own knowledge, making it easier to identify
which is the best unit to use that knowledge identified by another other unit. It regards the
second part of the definition, related to external knowledge assimilation.
The third contribution regards the improvement of technology forecast ability, which enables
a firm to identify early signals of trends and major changes in environment, providing
considerable advantage in strategically exploiting the opportunities in advance. It regards the
third and last part of the definition, related to knowledge exploitation. These contributions
combined summarize the main concepts of the evolving definition of the three articles.
Lane et al., 2006 research: a critical analysis of absorptive capacity uses
Lane et al. (2006) present an exhaustive bibliographic review concerning absorptive capacity
construct. From a 900-journal article result search, they reviewed 289 articlesI published
between 1991 and 2002, aiming to confirm the hypothesis that the concept has undergone a
reificationII process.
Concerning knowledge construction, this is a very dangerous process, since it leads
researchers to stop specifying hypotheses and concepts supporting the construct, impairing its
challenging and leading to its unrestricted use as generic solution, ever increasingly applied
to a greater scope of problems.
This problem could result in serious doubts regarding concept validity, since several works
are developed couched on an inconsistent basis. A first possible diagnostic from the Lane et
al. (2006) research is that, in spite of the large number of articles related to the topic, the
construct is generally used without receiving greater attention. From the analyzed sample,
78%, or 225, articles use Cohen and Levinthal (1990) only as a secondary mention, with no
discussion on it. Another point to note is that 32,5%, or 94, articles do not discuss any of the
dimensions – identifying, assimilating, and exploiting – proposed for absorptive capacity.
Evaluating by another extreme, only 22% of the articles do more than a secondary reference
and, even more critical, only four articles attempt to refine or extend the construct definition.
I
The move from 900 articles first resulting from searches, to the 289 analyzed articles was done using two main
criteria. First, by including in the sample only articles that cited Cohen and Levinthal (1990), the best-known’s
work. Second by limiting the sample to journals that had published at least 5 articles, concerning the topic,
between 1991 and 2002. Authors considered that, in order to consider the topic as part of journal agenda, it
would be expected that at least one article was published every two years.
II
Lane et al. (2006, p835) defined reification as “the outcome of the process by which we forget the authorship
of ideas and theories, objectify them (turn them into things), and then forget that we have done so”.
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
From the point of view of analyzed dimensions only 24%, or 70, articles consider the three
dimensions of absorptive capacity, which may be considered a very reduced number, given
the clarity with which Cohen and Levinthal (1989, 1990 and 1994) have presented them.
Regarding the prospect with each article dealt with the construct, one can observe that 40,1%,
or 116, articles observe absorptive capacity as a capability, although among these, 72 make
only a simple mention to it, identifying the construct as an organizational knowledge base.
It is important to note some issues from this analysis. First, in spite of detailed definitions
provided by Cohen and Levinthal regarding the three dimensions, 35% of articles do not
make any mention to them. Secondly, despite the unrestrictive criterion used by the writers,
40% of the articles do not discuss the construct, either as a capability or as a resource.
Thirdly, almost 80% of the articles cite the construct only in a ritualistic, pro-forma manner,
devoid of any type of discussion on it. Lane et al. (2006, p.841) highlight the magnitude of
this problem: “Including a construct as a ritual cite in a few papers may do no harm.
However, when a construct is perceived as very important to a field because of high citation
frequency, and when the vast majority of the citations turn out to be ritual, then the true
importance of the construct, the extent to which its assumptions have been tested, and its
contributions to a field are overstated. We believe this has happened with absorptive
capacity.” We should take this problem as a caveat for this work, indicating that is important,
for its unfolding, that the perspectives and hypothesis underlying it be made very clear.
Thematic analysis of absorptive capacity application
Lane et al. (2006) have performed a thematic analysis on the 64 articles previously mentioned
as making substantial use of the construct. As a result, the authors have reached seven
themes, of which three represent static features of absorptive capacity – types of knowledge,
organizational structure and organizational scope – and three represent dynamic features –
inter-organizational learning, innovation, and organizational learning – and finally a theme
related to construct definition and measuring. Each one of these themes shall be presented
and the main related works discussed as from these.
Definitions and operationalization of absorptive capacity
One of the main approaches performed in literature concerning absorptive capacity is dealing
with it as a knowledge base, that is, as knowledge accumulated in a company along the years
(Ahuja and Katila, 2001; Kim, 1998; Mowery et al., 1996). To measure it, some authors use
variables which attempt to represent this accumulated knowledge, as the R&D intensity
(Meeus et al., 2001; Mowery et al., 1996; Tsai, 2001) and patents (Mowery et al., 1996 and
Ahuja and Katila, 2001). However, the use of these variables, in spite of showing a highly
R&D-centered bias, imply in serious validity problems, since they are questionable as
representative of accumulated knowledge.
Another approach which has constantly been gaining followers is characterizing absorptive
capacity as a capability, adding the routines and process notions to the previous knowledge
base.
It is noted that, in spite of the attempt by these studies to measure the concept as proposed by
Cohen and Levinthal (1990), very few works - only four according to Lane et al.’s
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
classification - have attempted to refine or extend the construct use beyond the R&D scope,
with a more dynamic capability’s oriented approach. Dyer and Sigh (1998) explore
absorptive capacity as an interactive learning process, in which two organizations in a
collaborative relation develop overlapping knowledge, which makes development and
exploitation of relational rents possible. Van den Bosch et al. (1999) highlight the
environment’s dynamics and competitiveness role in designing the feedback looping
proposed by Cohen and Levinthal, in which more absorptive capacity implies in greater
learning, and greater learning implies in more absorptive capacity.
Zahra and George (2002) are authors who bring substantial contributions to theme
discussion. They use a process perspective to understand absorptive capacity as a dynamic
capability and highlight the importance of knowledge dissemination and organizational
integration as critical factors to that discussion. They suggest that the construct should be
understood from two perspectives, the potential absorptive capacity (PACAP), which means
the external knowledge which the firm can absorb, and the realized absorptive capacity
(RACAP), which means the external knowledge that the firm has effectively exploited.
Finally it is important to highlight that Lane et al. (2006, p.846) affirm that despite the
analyzed works bringing a great deal of contributions to the theme, very few integration
efforts have been carried out among them, which points to the need for revitalizing the theme.
Knowledge types and absorptive capacity
The exploration regarding the nature of knowledge and the ease with which the latter can be
absorbed comprises another approach gleaned in literature. Lane et al. (2006) point to the fact
that there are two clearly-perceivable lines among the authors dealing with this theme. The
first focuses on external knowledge features, as variables, which imply in absorption and
assimilation by the organization. The second, focuses on an organization’s knowledge
features acting as supporting variables to absorptive capacity.
Still according to the same writers (p.846), the first feature reviewed relates to knowledge
content, or the know-what. Certain factors such as common skills (Bierly and Chakrabarti,
1996; Lane and Lubatkin, 1998), strategy (Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998), knowledge bases
(Ahuja and Katila, 2001), culture (Bhagat et al., 2002; Simonin, 1999) and cognitive
structures increase absorptive capacity according to these writers’ viewpoint. The second
feature reviewed comprises how much knowledge is tacit, that is, how much it is built into
skills and uncodified forms, or know-how. This knowledge, as it is vested in organizational
routines, is harder to be imitated and thus, harder to be absorbed (Saviotti, 1998; Nonaka,
1994; Simonin, 1999; Szulanski, 1996; Lane et al., 2006). The third characteristic is the
complexity of knowledge, “defined as the number of technologies, routines, individuals and
independent resources related to a specific knowledge” (Simonin, 1999, apud. Lane et al.,
2006, p.846). The underlying argument is that, as knowledge becomes more complex, the
organization needs to absorb more content areas, as well as understand the interfaces and
relationships among them (Garud and Nayyar, 1994; Lane et al., 2006, p.846).
Another line of thought mentioned above argues that absorptive capacity can be improved as
from the development of routines which leverage resource recombination (Pavlou, 2004;
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
Teece et al., 1997; Galunic and Rodan, 1998; Van Den Bosch et al., 1999), as well as from
the development of inter-organizational integration and participation in network communities
(Beise and Stahl, 1999; Liebeskind et al, 1996; Mcmillan et al., 2000; Fontaine and Millen,
2004; Lesser and Fontaine, 2004; Hislop, 2004).
Lane et al. (2006) indicate that the lack of empirical evidence to demonstrate this influence is
a sign of the low-profile attention assigned to this current of thought.
Organizational structure and absorptive capacity
One of the most striking aspects in Cohen and Levinthal’s (1990) work was the discussion of
absorptive capacity at the individual level as an important factor building up absorptive
capacity within the organization. Certain authors discuss the role of routines as a basic
element to ensure the transit between these two levels. Despite several studies considering the
construct as a dynamic capability and, therefore, understood as a set of process (Zahra and
George, 2002; Lane et al., 2006; Van den Bosch et al., 1999) few authors have looked into
the importance of organizational structure as shoring for the construct. Among these, Meeus
et al. (2001) discussed the role of multi-functional teams, Gupta and Govindarajan (2000) and
Lane et al. (2001) the level of centralization, Gupta and Govindarajan (2000) and Meeus et
al. (2001) discussed the use of formal integrative mechanisms such as task forces, and Lane
et al. (2001) organizational flexibility, as relevant factors.
Van den Bosch et al. (1999) posits one of the few approaches relating absorptive capacity
with organizational structure arguing that the scope, flexibility and efficiency in knowledge
assimilation vary whether the organization bears a functional, divisional or matricial structure
(Lane et al. 2006; Daft, 2002; Galbraith, 1995). Lane et al. (2006, p.847) conclude that this
topic still needs further studies which exploit how organizational structure may influence
construct capabilities.
Organizational scope and absorptive capacity
The action scope decisions of a company and, consequently, the degree of cohesion of its
products, capabilities and markets is the form by which the latter affect absorptive capacity,
have been study themes for several researchers.
Zook (2003) argues that expansion decisions should occur in an incremental manner and in
markets and products in which one may use capabilities which already support its core
business. The central argument is that, the closer it is to its current knowledge base and its
expertise, the greater the absorptive capacity and, as a consequence, the better the
performance the firm may secure from the expansion (Zook, 2003; Ahuja and Katila, 2001;
Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998; Isobe et al., 2000; Kim and Kogut, 1996).
The absorptive capacity construct is also used to explain strategic decisions of how to enter in
specific markets. In the case of new market or industry in which the company has already
developed competence, it can decide to enter without the formation of any strategic alliance
or acquisition; otherwise, in the case of a completely new market, decision should prioritize
some kind of collaboration to develop absorptive capacity, since doing so alone would take a
long time for capability development (Hitt et al., 2000; Santangelo, 2000; Zook, 2003; Lane
et al., 2006). The alternative path, in which firm expansion increases absorptive capacity, has
been approached by a number of researchers, as McGrath (1997) and Bowman and Hurry
(1993). Lane et al. (2006) highlight that most part of the articles concerning the relation
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
between absorptive capacity and organizational scope have a limited view of construct,
approaching it as a resource base and focusing on knowledge acquisition, which is only one
of absorptive capacity dimensions.
Organizational learning and absorptive capacity
The relationship between organizational learning and absorptive capacity has a central role in
Cohen and Levinthal’s (1989, 1990) virtuous cycle, in which absorptive capacity implies
greater learning, increasing knowledge base, and consequently, a high learning potential, as
pointed by Autio et al. (2000) and Barkema and Vermeulen (1998).
Lane et al. (2006, p.848) highlight a lack of studies concerning this topic, and argues that
some questions - as “How absorptive capacity affects knowledge creation in organization?
How could it help external knowledge assimilation and integration with already established
knowledge base? - were not answered by authors. Certain specific studies present implicit
propositions about it, as can be seen in Schilling (2002) which relates low investments in
learning with lock-out of certain technological paths. Rugman and Verbeke (2001) highlight
that focused learning is a mechanism to develop absorptive capacity in a certain theme.
Lane et al. (2006) demonstrate surprise regarding their review about testing the relationship
between organizational learning and absorptive capacity construct. Only Szulanski (1996)
dealt with this issue. The authors shows that, despite increasing improvement of the resourcebased view (Proença, 1999; Penrose, 1959; Rumelt, 1984; Collis and Montgomery, 1997),
absorptive capacity perception is strongly constrained to a knowledge base and to R&D
environment perspectives, which has limited the development of research oriented to explore
the relationship of these two topics.
Inter-organizational learning and absorptive capacity
Among absorptive capacity themes, this is largely the topic which has received more
attention and effort from authors. Not only from a theoretical formulation perspective, but
also with many applications and empirical tests. Lane et al. (2006) support this finding by the
direct relation between absorptive capacity construct and knowledge acquisition, which is the
main motivator driving alliance formation. Accordingly to the authors, this topic can be
divided in two main categories: two firms relation and network relation.
Lane and Lubatkin (1998) argues that inter-organizational learning needs such an alliance
with a small portion of knowledge overlapping to enable learning and a considerable
difference to enable significative learning. The balance between overlapping and difference
can be associated to positive effects of some alliances, such as innovation (Dyer and Singh,
1998; Ahuja and Katila, 2001; Jones et al., 2001; Koza and Lewin, 1998; Lane and Lubatkin,
1998; Santangelo, 2000; Simonin, 1999) and organizational performance (Gupta and
Govindarajan, 2000; Lane et al., 2001).
As the relation between organizational learning and absorptive capacity, this theme has also a
recursive relation. Bowman and Hurry (1993) propose that inter-organizational learning can
increases absorptive capacity, while other authors, as Lei and Hitt (1995) argue that relying
excessively on external sources of technology could erode a firm’s absorptive capacity.
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
Innovation and absorptive capacity
The relationship between innovation and absorptive capacity can be seen in two different
lines. The first highlights absorptive capacity contributions to increase velocity, frequency
and magnitude of an innovation. The second indicates that innovation increases firm’s
knowledge base, and consequently its absorptive capacity (Lane et al., 2006, p.849).
Van den Bosch et al. (1999) propose that incremental innovation is better supported by an
absorptive capacity that prioritizes the focused learning, strongly related to firm’s core
competences (Hamel and Prahalad, 1990). Lane et al. (2006) observe that insufficient
attention was directed to explore radical innovation and absorptive capacity relations. A
small number of isolated propositions like Van den Bosch et al. (1999), which states that
combinative capabilities are critical to radical innovation development. In that sense,
different from incremental innovations, an absorptive capacity that prioritizes a wider scope
is more indicated to support radical innovations (Lane et al., 2006).
Finally, it is important to note that, in this topic, investigation focus migrates from the
acquisition dimension to the exploitation dimension, associating it with results.
Considerations from thematic analysis
From the thematic analysis presented, it is possible to highlight some considerations
regarding absorptive capacity construct use and theoretical contributions related to this body
of knowledge across the last 20 years. A first consideration is that, in spite of being largely
cited, few authors attempt to improve and refine construct definitions and underlying
concepts. Only five works have engaged in such effort (Dyer and Singh, 1998; Lane and
Lubatkin, 1998; Van den Bosch et al., 1999; Zahra and George, 2002; Lane et al., 2006),
which can constitute a high potential to conceptual development.
Second, few works have analyzed absorptive capacity effects empirically, and among them
most of articles identified absorptive capacity as a knowledge based, which deviates from
such original definitions as process and capabilities.
Third, few researchers investigated the relations between absorptive capacity and
organizational learning, scope and knowledge. On the contrary, most part has used the
construct to support their arguments, without a clear validation of its relations (Lane et al.,
2006).
Finally, as pointed by Lane et al. (2006, p.857) “Critical to the advancement of the
absorptive capacity literature is the need to move away from a structural perspective of
absorptive capacity to a view of it as more of a dynamic capability. Such a shift in perspective
focuses attention on the structure, policies, and processes within the organization that affect
knowledge transfer, sharing, integration, and creation”.
This dynamic capability perspective, combined with the need for practical knowledge
development to guide organizations in designing solutions to support absorptive capacity
development, comprises the basis on which to develop the following framework.
Design Research approach
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
The nature of management research requires a close interaction between academics and
professionals, either to formulate propositions, as its practical test. This and others particulars
characteristics of management research require different questions and answers relevant both
to the ‘academic world’ and to the ‘professionals’, which, in turn, leads to specific research
methods and approaches. This debate on the distinction between the natural sciences and
artificial sciences was started by Simon, in 1969. To the author, natural science aims to
explain how things are; conversely, the artificial science is concerned with how things
should be, in order to reach objectives and work out (Simon, 1996). According to Van Aken
(2004) most academic research carried out on management sciences is based on the notion
that the mission of every science ‘understands’, that is, describing, explaining and possibly
forecasting (Emory, 1985; Nagel, 1979).
Thus, if ‘management schools’ aim to fulfill their mission as ‘professional schools’, the latter
must not only perform research with the purpose of developing knowledge for general
understanding and conceptual use but also perform research aiming to develop knowledge for
instrumental use, that is in management, additionally to description-driven research, it then
becomes necessary to advance in prescription-driven research so that research products
which may be used in designing solutions to management problems (Van Aken, 2004).
Prescription, or according to Bunge (1967), ‘technological rule’ is the typical product of
design sciences. This can be defined as a convenient general-knowledge sample, relating an
intervention or artifact as a desired result or performance in a specific application field (Van
Aken, 2004). In this context, it is important to highlight that the ‘design science’ does not
refer to the mere application of theories, but rather, to the development of scientific
knowledge, to support the project, by the professional.
The artifacts generated by design research, the technological rules, act as a conceptual
framework for a more productive interaction between professionals and academics.
According to Hevner et al. (2004 apud. Manson, 2006) “The result of Design Research is, by
definition, a purposeful artifact, which must be described effectively so that it can be
implemented and applied. These artifacts can be constructs, models, methods or
instantiations. They are rarely complete, full-grown systems that can be used in practice.
Rather they are innovations that define the ideas, practices, technical capabilities and
products through which the analysis, design, implementation, and use of systems can be
accomplished effectively and efficiently.”
These technological rules should not be used as instructions in the management activity
project, but rather as ‘project reference’. Practitioners must choose a technological rule for
their organizational problem, and then translate this general technological rule, through the
specific variation project, as applied to their particular cases. Actual use of this technological
rule requires considerable professional understanding, a perfect understanding of the rule,
with its indications and counter-indications, perfect understanding of the local conditions,
cognitive skills to translate the general into the specific, and social skills to mobilize
organizational stakeholders so that they act according to the project (Van Aken, 2005).
Thus, technological rules are developed and tested in the Field. Each case, individually, is
oriented toward solving the local problem in close cooperation with local personnel.
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
However, as from the reflexive cycle, following each case study, the researcher develops
knowledge which can be transferred to similar contexts upon reflection and cross-review of
cases (Van Aken, 2004), thereby contributing for scientific knowledge construction.
Framework for Supporting Absorptive Capacity Development
As seen in bibliographical review, the absorptive capacity construct has merited great
attention from the academics. However, published research contribute little to the practical
application of this concept, by providing very abstract indications on how a manager is able
to develop this capacity in an organization. This section develops the core target of this work,
which comprise the development of an abstract theoretical construct in a reference
framework which may drive the design of process and organizational routines which shall
lead to absorptive capacity development.
The first step in order to render systematic reference framework construction and application
comprises the definition of an absorptive capacity construct from which the processes and
requirements for their integration could be defined. This conceptual representation, albeit
abstract, bear as main objective setting-up the reference from which the framework shall be
developed. The construction of this initial representation shall take place as from the
bibliographical review performed on absorptive capacity and the definition of the main
aspects which this construct should deal with, that is, explicating antecedents, conditioners
and results this should generate. The result generated in this passage consists of a conceptual
framework which organizes the various elements defining the construct.
Reference framework development is performed as from this construct representation, which
sets forth a uniform conceptual basis on which a more practical orientation can be erected.
This bears as focal point providing managers with guidance as to which processes should be
carried out and, of greater importance, the integration requirements among them. Each one of
the capabilities comprising absorptive capacity is associated to an organizational process, so
that this construction be accomplished. This shift displays as its target the generating of a
proxy between a more conceptual view, with capability terminology, to a more practical
view, with a process terminology. Integration requirements between these processes are
defined so as to ensure the dynamic character to this capability, in order to complement this
framework.
The reference framework
As has been pointed out, the perspective adopted in this work features absorptive capacity as
dynamic capability, that is, the set of processes and routines by means of which the
organization shall reconfigure its resources to adapt itself or exploit new market opportunities
(Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000). This view agrees with Van den Bosch et al.’s (1999), Zahra
and George’s (2002) e Lane et al.’s (2006) propositions, and is especially important, as it
associates capability to a set of routines and process, that is, actions which the organization
can develop and design.
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
Zahra and George’s (2002, p.186) definition, is the one which most highlights this character
and, therefore, shall be used as reference to framework building. According to the authors,
absorptive capacity is “a set of organizational routines and processes by which firms acquire,
assimilate, transform and exploit knowledge to produce a dynamic organizational
capability.” This proposition differs from the others, as it depicts absorptive capacity in four
dimensions, each representing a capability. The authors point out that the combination of the
four dimensions makes up generates dynamic capacity, that is, special attention should be
assigned to the form by which these capabilities integrate themselves.
Knowledge acquisition capability represents the firm’s ability to identify externallygenerated knowledge which may impact their activities. The assimilation dimension refers to
the capacity of analysis, processing, interpretation and understanding of information obtained
through outside sources. The transformation capability comprises the skill with which the
organization, based on assimilated knowledge, redefines its action as from the combination of
new knowledge with the previously-existing ones. This bears a fundamental role in
identifying new opportunities and in the changing of the way by which the organization
relates with the surrounding environment. Lastly, the exploration dimension refers to the
ability of refining and taking advantage of knowledge assimilated in the development of their
activities.
These dimensions, however, as pointed out by Lane et al. (2006), undergo influence by
internal and external factors to the firm. Thus, by using the four components proposed by
Lane et al. (2006) and by adapting the core element to contemplate the four dimensions
proposed by Zahra and George (2002), one reaches the framework proposed in Figure 1.
Organizational structure
and individuals’ mental
model
Acquisition
Environmental
characteristics
Assimilation
Transformation
Results
Exploitation
Company strategy
Figure 1: Conceptual representation of absorptive capacity
The first relationship presented in this framework is the influence of environmental features
upon absorptive capacity development. Van den Bosch et al. (1999) have pointed out how
environment dynamics creates incentives to greater or lesser investment in the development
of this dynamic capability. Another very much highlighted factor by several authors is
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
knowledge characteristic and the direct influence which this creates upon the acquisition and
assimilation process. Issues related to partners, to knowledge overlapping, to incentives and
stakeholders’ cultures upon the environment are also fundamental for the ease of incentives
and knowledge assimilation.
Still regarding this theme, it is important to point out the co-evolutionary character also
emphasized by Van den Bosch et al. (1999) in which a company, by identifying, assimilating
and exploring knowledge, also influences the environment around it, causing this relationship
to be analyzed in two ways.
The second relationship pointed out by Lane et al. (2006) is the role of organizational
structures, especially the way by which the latter assure work coordination in the assimilation
and transformation of knowledge. Different types of structure shall bear discrete influences in
absorptive capacity, as the work of Van den Bosch (1999) points out. Another very important
point in the relationship is the individual’s role. His/her previous knowledge, cultural features
and incentive systems shall be critical to conform which types of opportunities shall be
perceived, how the individuals shall appraise certain knowledge and especially, their
propensity to absorb it (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990).
The other element of this set, which Lane et al. (2006) named internal drivers, comprises
company strategy. It’s formulation process bears strong impact in defining which areas of
knowledge shall be most valuable, which themes need to be developed and what is the
organization’s action and observation scope.
It is important to point out that, there are also co-evolutionary mechanisms in these internal
drives, that is, as absorptive capacity is developed (1) organizational structures and
coordination mechanisms are altered on account of new actions in the transformation and
exploration process; (2) the individuals’ mental models are altered, as they are confronted
with new knowledge and new opportunities and their value judgment starts to be oriented by
definite strategic priorities and (3) new resource combinations are generated, and may
represent opportunities which can conform the organization’s strategy so that these
opportunities may be better exploited.
Lastly, absorptive capacity directly influences the company’s value generation capacity as it
recombines resources in order to incorporate external knowledge. This impact is reflected on
the company’s performance and on its innovation capacity, a relationship appraised by
several authors, such as Cohen and Levinthal (1989), Meeus et al. (2001), Mowery et al.
(1996) and Ahuja and Katila (2001), through representation variables such as the number of
patents granted to it.
Lane et al. (2006) point out that, in addition to these commercial results, the increase in
company’s knowledge base is also a significant result. On account of the path dependence
character of the construct, this base shall directly influence the organization’s absorptive
capacity, bearing a virtuous cycle feature pointed out by Cohen and Levinthal (1994) and
Van den Bosch et al. (1999), in which a greater absorptive capacity generates greater learning
which, in turn, increases the knowledge base which, in turn enhances absorptive capacity.
It is necessary, as from the construct representation, based on the design research approach,
to change representation into a set of technological rules which guide the applied solution
design.
From capabilities to process
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
In order to perform this shift, association with each one of the dimensions of the theoretical
construct was attempted, to a recognized and consolidated process in the literature and
practice of innovation management. Each one of the four capabilities was represented in
questions which have oriented the performing of a bibliographic review, so as to guide this
shift, and in which the most adequate processes to answer the formulated question were
identified.
According to Savioz and Blum (2002), the speed of technological change and the growing
complexity generated by the increasing convergence of disciplines demand, from the
organization, a capacity to identify signs, although weak, of potential changes which may
impact their business. According to the authors, this identification may be achieved through
technological prospection and environment scanning actions. Lang (1998, apud Savioz and
Blum, 2002) states that these techniques may also be used for information or already-known
technologies, through deeper search. Daim, Rueda, Martin and Gerdsri (2006, p.981) state
that various factors such as: political conditions, culture, consumer behavior and regulation
should be monitored in the process called prospection and technological forecast.
Porter and Cunningham (2005) state that, in the information age, organizations should
strongly employ external information to support innovations. The acquisition of their
information may be supported by a set of prospection and mining techniques. According to
the authors mentioned above, information collection on the macro environment in which the
organization places itself, allows for a continuous learning process, turned to planning and
supporting strategic decisions. It is possible to indicate, as from this review that the set of
procedures presented in the literature which answers the question on how to identify relevant
knowledge to the organization may be denominated by ‘technological prospection and
environment scanning’ process.
The second capability, assimilation, represented by the question: ‘How do information and
knowledge acquired are accessed, integrated, and understood by the relevant individuals?’
finds support in the literature on knowledge management. Ashton and Klavans (1997) point
to the importance of distribution of the information collected in prospection so that the latter
be used and interpreted by the Professional with the greatest potential to use it. Allen (1977)
points to the importance of interpersonal relationship and contact for the flow of knowledge
in the organization. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1997), in turn, present the model of the
knowledge spiral to demonstrate how knowledge can be socialized, externalized, combined,
and internalized. Hildreth and Kimble (2002) discuss the forms by which tacit knowledge,
which they denominated as ‘soft’ may be shared and managed. Kimble et al. (2000) argue
that the growing internationalization with the consequent increase in complexity and volume
of available information increase the need for sharing and diffusion of organization
knowledge. Thus, one understands that assimilation capability can be represented by the
‘knowledge diffusion’ process.
The third capability, transformation, represented by the question ‘How does the organization
use knowledge assimilated to redefine its actions?’ finds support in the literature on
technological planning. Porter et al. (1991) define technological planning as the dimension of
planning which defines the process by which technological change will support an
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
organization’s strategy. According to Gelle and Kerhu (2003), an organization, in this
process, should recognize the need for technological change as from constant environment
monitoring, identifying both the form by which its technological base may provide
opportunities for the organization, as the changes and development needed to respond to
changes in the environment. Roussel et al. (1991) emphasize that the need for information
prospection in the environment and the judging of this information are basic for the
organization to be able to plan the development of its technologies.
Phaal, Farrukh and Probert (2004a) point out that technological planning should warrant
consistency between two worlds, the commercial and the technological. The first with the
definition of consumer needs and the positioning of the company to meet the latter, and the
second with the technological trends and development definitions adopted by the company.
Thus, transformation capability can be represented by the ‘technological planning process’.
The last capability, exploration, represented by the question: ‘How does the organization use
assimilated knowledge to redefine its actions?’ is that which bears a more generic character.
The use of this knowledge may occur in different forms, such as in the development of a new
product (Wheelwright et al., 1992; Goffin and Mitchel, 2005), in the technology transfer
(Chesbrough, 2006), in the development of a strategic alliance (Dyer et al., 2001), among
others. Thus, to keep the wide character of this capability, one understands that the
‘technological development’ process is outlined in a good approximation to represent
exploration capability.
Integrating process to conform dynamic capability
As pointed out, these four capabilities, now already featured in processes, do not comprise, in
an isolated fashion, a dynamic capability, as they will not be enough to reconfigure the
resources of an organization to provoke or respond to environment changes. This is
reasonable since, pointed out by Zahra and George (2002), it is not the four individual
capabilities, but rather the integration among them which configure dynamic capability.
Thus, it is basic for one to discuss what integration requirements are among these activities,
both to guide organizations towards designing their process, that is, the sequence of activities
by which they will perform these tasks, and to allow for defining techniques and supporting
tools. Figure 2 presents the reference framework, in which integration requirements are
highlighted by numbersIII.
III
The numbers do not represent any type of sequence among integrations. They are only identifiers for the
arches between processes.
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
Technological
prospection
10
2
1
9
11
6
Knowledge
diffusion
5
Technological
planning
12
7
4
8
Technological
development
3
Figure 2: Reference Framework
The first necessary integration (arrow 1) is that the information collected and treated in
technological prospection should subsidize the planning process. The greater the amount and
quality of available information, the better the capacity of planning process participants to
foresee the changes which will occur, understand their possible impacts upon the
organization and, thus, make the strategic decisions on how the organization will respond to
this dynamics.
It is obvious, however, that, independently of this information, there is great uncertainty
associated to this type of planning, which makes it impossible to accurately forecast how the
future will behave. Thus (arrow 2), the planning set forth should drive continuous
environment monitoring, in which the hypotheses taken on during the strategy formulation
process are systematically tested, so as to identify bias-generating events and, therefore, the
need for plan update. This plan further ensures an orientation on which technological
prospection shall be carried out at a greater depth, warranting that specific and detailed
information is collected to support action in the areas of greater interest in the organization.
These requirements (1 and 2) ensure that the planning is kept “alive” regarding the
environment, that is, changes to the environment shall be organically incorporated to
planning.
These decisions made upon planning drive projects and actions which should be made upon
technological development (arrow 3). That is, this decision-making on what to do should take
into account issues such as resource availability, workload, and portfolio balance, among
others (Goffin and Mitchell, 2005). As pointed out these projects and actions may have
different forms, depending on the features of technologies and company action sector such
as: technology transfer, licensing, partnerships, product development, basic research,
outsourcing, acquisitions, among others.
A series of deviations occurs on account of the uncertainties associated to these activities,
and these may be positive, such as a new compound which may be used for other purposes
than those initially foreseen, or negative, a technological setback or delay in a project.
Anyway, this deviation should give rise to a constant evaluation as to the impacts brought
upon planning (arrow 4). Therefore, in addition to keeping this planning alive regarding the
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
environment, one is assured that the actions actually performed shall be organic with the
planning (arrows 3 and 4).
This organicity between the environment and actions performed, as assured by requirements
1, 2, 3 and 4, supports one of the tasks of greater complexity in innovation management:
portfolio management. Resource mobilizing to create new projects is not an immediate task,
on account of the need for very specialized knowledge and experiences. Project
discontinuation is, conversely much more complicated. Burgelman and Sayles (1986), Jain
and Triandis (1997), Chiesa (2001) and Sapienza (2004) emphasize its inertia and cultural
impact, in which the project ownership feeling generates great resistance by the researcher to
abandon it. The planning formulation process, from the viewpoint of a dynamic capability is
more important than the result generated. Involvement in this process (arrow 5) allows
individuals, such as pointed out by Cohen and Levinthal (1990), to form a systemic view of
the activities and strategic path outlined for the organization. The diffusion of this knowledge
allows for increasing the organization’s awareness, as the individuals shall be better prepared
to perceive and evaluate the impact of their actions as well as those of external events upon
technological strategy as a whole. Moreover, this participation allows for greater
understanding of which areas are involved in which activities and of the available
competences in each of those. Thus, knowledge flow may be improved, as an area or
individual is in better conditions to evaluate where certain knowledge may be better
exploited.
The reverse sense of this relationship (arrow 6) stresses that knowledge diffusion is a basic
factor for greater planning process effectiveness. A certain degree of knowledge overlapping
among the various areas of the organization is needed so that these may envisage
opportunities as from knowledge combinations, establish a common language, prioritize
actions and define the path to be followed by the organization, thereby reinforcing strategic
decision making.
Several items of knowledge and experiences are naturally generated along the development
activities. These should spillover (arrow 7) to beyond the area which generated them,
allowing for their use by all of the organization’s stakeholders. Thus, the diffusion structure
should ensure the possibility of systematizing and distributing of this knowledge. On the
other hand, the new knowledge distributed by the diffusion process (arrow 8) be they from
the prospection or planning processes, or from the development itself carried out in another
part of the organization, can be used along a specific project or development action, thereby
improving the quality of its result and the company’s problem resolution capacity.
The information and knowledge identified and collected in an external environment should
be systematized and spread (arrow 9) both actively, that is, by the identification of a potential
user and making him/her aware as to knowledge, or passively, that is being always available
and easy to access when any user comes to procure it. Throughout the diffusion process, the
heterogeneity of the knowledge of individuals who interact and the process of assimilation of
each one of these will naturally generate challenges and need for further external information
(arrow 10), which shall guide the technological prospection process.
Ultimately, along the various development actions, researchers may need to identify and
access knowledge outside the organization, such as: Who masters this technology?; Is there
any kind of solution to this problem?; Thus, they may orient (arrow 11) the information
prospection process in a very specific manner to the solution of a problem. The reverse sense
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
(arrow 12) that is, the information which answers specific researcher’s needs, should also be
ensured.
These integration requirements, as pointed out, are basic for these capabilities to operate as a
dynamic which allows the organization to use external knowledge to recombine its resources
and therefore influence, or adapt to the environment. The lack of these integrations may be
one of the reasons why certain organizations are not able to effectively respond to the
environment dynamics despite carrying out the correct procedures at each one of the
processes presented.
Framework application to a vaccine manufacturer
The reference framework was used to orient the organizational solution project at a vaccine
manufacturer in Latin America. On account of the growing dynamism and high development
costs for new vaccines, this company had a strong need to develop its absorptive capacity so
that it would be able to use its externally-available knowledge in a more efficient manner,
which would ensure its competitiveness in this market.
The development of this project was carried out by the group of researchers and with constant
liaison with the executives, managers and professionals involved in technological planning
and development. The understanding of the context and of particular features of the
organization as well as the proposal for a solution to implement the processes and
requirements for reference framework integration was possible as from this integration, and
was centered upon four techniques: the technology roadmap, tech mining, communities of
practice and gatekeepers. The relationship logic between these techniques is presented in
Figure 3 below.
Gateke
Roadmap
Technology
tecnológico
roadmap
Com
u
Technological
planning
s
ni
d es
da
Knowledge
diffusion
Tech m
in
i
rs
ng
ep
e
Technological
prospection
of
de prát
ica
Technological
development
Figure 3: Vaccine manufacturer solution
In this solution, the roadmap, as it is an easy-to-use instrument, contemplating several
perspectives, such as market, products, and technologies, and enforcing consistency among
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
then, takes on a central role, this being the mechanism supporting the governance of various
activities linked to planning and technological development (Phaal et al., 2004b; Kostof et al.
2004).
The second element is the tech mining technique, as proposed by Porter and Cunningham
(2005), an evolution of bibliometric analyses using text mining technologies to deal with
great volumes of data and acquire information to support the planning and decision-making
process. In this solution, tech mining bears an important role in the constant monitoring of
the external environment, and in the acquisition, systematization, and analysis of external
data. It is important to point out that this technique is based on explicit knowledge, that is,
which is in some way published and documented.
The third element is the gatekeeper, proposed by Allen (1977) as the Professional who, for
having great technical knowledge and being inserted in scientific communities, is in
permanent contact with the external environment, acting as bridge for the spreading of
knowledge acquired in external personnel contact, for the other professionals in the
organization. In this solution, the figure of the gatekeeper performs both the role of searching
for tacit knowledge in the external environment, and that of diffusion promoter for this
knowledge internally, acting as an information distribution role.
The fourth element of this solution is the use of communities of practice. These may be
understood as a set of participants who as from the sharing of their experiences develop
knowledge, values and a common identity, developing a shared world vision (Hislop, 2004).
These bear a fundamental role as mechanism for spreading knowledge beyond the formal
hierarchical structures. In this solution, these communities, associated to the figure of the
gatekeeper, bear a basic role of, in addition to recording and spreading knowledge acquired
externally, creating a sharing of the vision, languages, perceptions among the organization
members, which is of utmost importance for the exchange and incorporation of new
knowledge to the already-existing base.
The use of framework application proved useful to guide the solution design once it provided
the main guidelines to integrate the existence solutions already used by organization, as
gatekeepers, and news solutions not already used, as roadmaps.
This case study combined with the scenario-based analyses realized with the executives from
different industries provided the first steps of this ongoing research to ground the reference
framework technological rules. Application of these proposals to other cases is already
necessary and is part of author’s research program.
Conclusion
This article has presented a reference framework to support the Project for organizational
solutions oriented to absorptive capacity development. As from the bibliographic review
presented, one could perceive that the absorptive capacity concept, despite its wide use,
undergoes a number of distortions which end up by generating challenges on its validity and
varied understanding on its contributions. As from the thematic analysis of the different
perspectives by which the construct has been used, it can be identified that two paths were
important for the theme to advance.
The first consist of approaching absorptive capacity as from the dynamic capability
perspective assuring, thereby, an evolutionary vision of the relationship between the
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
organization and the environment in which this is inserted. The second consists of adopting a
practical perspective of this construct, so that managers may project and manage this
capability in their organizations. The design research approach was adopted for such aim, and
served as a basis for the conceptual representation of the absorptive capacity construct into
four processes and twelve integration requirements among them, thereby assuring a dynamic
character to this set.
An applied case to a vaccine manufacturer was presented to illustrate the manner by which
the framework resulting from this research can support the organizational solution project.
This research brings up two main implications. The first, from a theoretical point of view, is
that this work contributes to the consolidation of the concept as a dynamic capability, a need
pointed out by several authors such as Lane et al. (2006), Zahra and George (2002) and Van
Den Bosch et al. (1998) as critical to the advancement of the theme. The second, from a
practical point of view, is the construction of a framework orienting the specific solutions
project which every organization should put in place. This framework can be adapted to
different situations as from the design research approach without losing its scientific
strictness, for knowledge building as from it. Thus, as from application in different cases and
specific context, these technological rules can be continuously improved upon.
References
Ahuja, G. and Katila, R. (2001). "Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring
firms: A longitudinal study." Strategic Management Journal 22(3): 197-220.
Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the flow of technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press.
Ashton, W. B. and Klavans, R. A. (1997). An introduction to technical intelligence in business. Keeping abreast
of science and technology: technical intelligence in business. W. B. Ashton and R. A. Klavans. Columbus,
Ohio, Batelle Press.
Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J. and Almeida, J. G. (2000). "Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and
imitability on international growth." Academy of Management Journal 43: 909–924.
Barkema, H. G. and Vermeulen, F. (1998). "International expansion through start-up or acquisition: A learning
perspective." Academy of Management Journal 41: 7–26.
Beise, M. and Stahl, H. (1999). "Public research and industrial innovations in Germany." Research Policy 28:
397–422.
Bhagat, R. S., Kedia, B. L., Harveston, P. D. and Triandis, H. C. (2002). "Cultural variations in the cross-border
transfer of organizational knowledge: An integrative framework." Academy of Management Review 27:
204–221.
Bierly, P. and Chakrabarti, A. (1996). "Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry."
Strategic Management Journal 17: 123–135.
Bowman, E. H. and Hurry, D. (1993). "Strategy through the option lens: An integrated view of resource
investments and the incremental-choice process." Academy of Management Review 18: 760-782.
Bunge, M. (1967). Scientific Research II: The Search for Truth. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Burgelman, R. A. and SAYLES, L. R. (1986). Corporate Innovation: Strategy, Structure, and Managerial Skills,
Free Press.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003a). "The era of open innovation." Mit Sloan Management Review 44(3): 35-41.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003b). Open innovation. The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology.
Boston, Massachusetts, Harvard Business School Press.
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape Boston,
Harvard Business School Press.
Chiesa, V. (2001). R & D Strategy and Organisation: Managing Technical Change in Dynamic Contexts.
Christensen, C. (1997a). "Patterns in the evolution of product competition." European Management Journal
15(2): 117-127.
Christensen, C. M. (1997b). The innovator’s dilemma. Boston, Massachusetts, Harvard Busisness School
Publishing.
Christensen, C. M. and Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator's solution: Creating and sustaining successful
growth. Boston, Massachusetts, Harvard Business School Publishing.
Christensen, C. M. and Rosenbloom, R. S. (1995). "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological
paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network." Research Policy 24(2): 233-257.
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1989). "Innovation and Learning - the 2 Faces of R-and-D." Economic
Journal 99(397): 569-596.
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1990). "Absorptive-Capacity - a New Perspective on Learning and
Innovation." Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128-152.
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1994). "Fortune Favors the Prepared Firm." Management Science 40(2):
227-251.
Collis, D. and Montgomery, C. (1997). Corporate Strategy: Resources and the Scope of the Firm. Chicago,
Irwin.
Daft, R. (2002). Organizações - Teoria e Projetos, Thomson Pioneira.
Daim, T. U., Rueda, G., Martin, H. and Gerdsri, P. (2006). "Forecasting emerging technologies: Use of
bibliometrics and patent analysis." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 73(8): 981-1012.
Dyer, J. H., Kale, P. and Singh, H. (2001). "How to make strategic alliances work." Mit Sloan Management
Review 42(4): 37-43.
Dyer, J. H. and Singh, H. (1998). "The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational
competitive advantage." Academy of Management Review 23(4): 660-679.
Eisenhardt, K. M. and Martin, J. A. (2000). "Dynamic capabilities: What are they?" Strategic Management
Journal 21(10-11): 1105-1121.
Emory, W. C. (1985). Business Research Methods. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Evenson, R. and Kislev, Y. (1975). Agricultural research and productivity. New Haven, Yale University Press.
Fontaine, M. A. and Millen, D. R. (2004). Understanding the Benefits and Impact of Communities of Practice.
Kowledge networks: innovation throuh communities of practice. P. Hildreth and C. Kimble. London, Idea
Group Publishing.
Galbraith, J. (1995). Designing Organizations: An Executive Briefing on Strategy, Structure, and Process,
Jossey-Bass.
Galunic, D. C. and Rodan, S. (1998). "Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the
potential for Schumpeterian innovation." Strategic Management Journal 19: 1193–1201.
Garud, R. and Nayyar, P. R. (1994). "Transformative capacity: Continual structuring by intertemporal
technology transfer." Strategic Management Journal 15: 365–385.
Goffin, K. and Mitchell, R. (2005). Innovation management: Strategy and implementation using the pentathlon
framework. London, Palgrave Macmillan.
Gupta, A. K. and Govindarajan, V. (2000). "Knowledge flows within the multinational corporation." Strategic
Management Journal 21: 473–496.
Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K. (1990). "The Core Competence of the Corporation." Harvard Business Review
May-June.
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004). "Design science in Information Systems research."
Mis Quarterly 28(1): 75-105.
Hildreth, P. and Kimble, C., Eds. (2004). Kowledge networks: innovation throuh communities of practice.
London, Idea Group Publishing.
Hislop, D. (2004). The Paradox of Communities of Practice: Knowledge Sharing Between Communities.
Kowledge networks: innovation throuh communities of practice. P. Hildreth and C. Kimble. London, Idea
Group Publishing.
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
Hitt, M. A., Dacin, M. T., Levitas, E., Arregle, J. L. and Borza, A. (2000). "Partner selection in emerging and
developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives." Academy of
Management Journal 43: 449–476.
Isobe, T., Makino, S. and Montgomery, D. B. (2000). "Resource commitment, entry timing, and market
performance of foreign direct investments in emerging economies: The case of Japanese international joint
ventures in China." Academy of Management Journal 43: 468–484.
Jain, R. K. and Triandis, H. C. (1997). Management of Research and Development Organizations: Managing
the Unmanageable.
Jones, G. K., Lanctot, A. and Teegen, H. J. (2001). "Determinant and performance impact of external
technology acquisition." Journal of Business Venturing 16: 255–283.
Kim, D. J. and Kogut, B. (1996). "Technological platforms and diversifications." Organization Science 17: 283301.
Kim, L. (1998). "Crisis construction and organizational learning: Capability building in catching-up at Hyundai
Motor." Organization Science 9(4): 506-521.
Kimble, C., LI, F. and Barlow, A. (2000 ). Effective virtual teams through communities of practice, University
of Strathclyde Management Science.
Kostoff, R. N., Boylan, R. and Simons, G. R. (2004). "Disruptive technology roadmaps." Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 71(1-2): 141-159.
Koza, M. and Lewin, A. Y. (1998). "The coevolution of strategic alliances." Organization Science 9: 255–264.
London, Idea Group Publishing.
Lane, P. J., Koka, B. R. and Pathak, S. (2006). "The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and
rejuvenation of the construct." Academy of Management Review 31(4): 833-863.
Lane, P. J. and Lubatkin, M. (1998). "Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning." Strategic
Management Journal 19(5): 461-477.
Lane, P. J., Salk, J. E. and Lyles, M. A. (2001). "Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international
joint ventures." Strategic Management Journal 22(12): 1139-1161.
Lang, H. C. (1998). "Technology Intelligence: ihre Gestaltung in Abha¨ngigkeit der Wettbewerbssituation."
Verlag Industrielle Organisation.
Lei, D. and Hitt, M. A. (1995). "Strategic restructuring and outsourcing: The effect of mergers, acquisitions and
LBOs on building firm skills and capabilities." Journal of Management 21: 835–859.
Lesser, E. L. and Fontaine, M. A. (2004). Overcoming Knowledge Barriers with Communities of Practice:
Lessons Learned Through Practical Experience. Kowledge networks: innovation throuh communities of
practice. P. Hildreth and C. Kimble. London, Idea Group Publishing.
Liebeskind, J. P., Oliver, A. L., Zucker, L. and Brewer, M. (1996). "Social networks, learning, and flexibility:
Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms." Organization Science 7: 428–
Manson, N. J. (2006). "Is operations research really research?" Orion 22(2): 155-180.
Martino, J. P. (2003). "A review of selected recent advances in technological forecasting." Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 70(8): 719-733.
Mcgrath, R. G. (1997). "A real options logic for initiating technology positioning investments." Academy of
Management Review 22: 974–996.
Mcmillan, G. S., Narin, F. and Deeds, D. L. (2000). "An analysis of the critical role of public science in
innovation: The case of biotechnology." Research Policy 29: 1–8.
Meeus, M. T. H., Oerlemans, L. A. G. and Hage, J. (2001). "Patterns of interactive learning in a high-tech
region." Organization Studies 22(1): 145-172.
Mowery, D. C. (1983). "The relationship intrafirm and contractual forms of industrial research in American
manufacturing, 1900–1940." Explorations in Economic History 20: 351–374.
Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E. and Silverman, B. S. (1996). "Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer."
Strategic Management Journal 17: 77-91.
Nagel, E. (1979). The Structure of Science. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Nonaka, I. (1994). "A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation." Organization Science 5: 14–37.
Clemente, Caulliraux, Meirelles & Proença
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1997) Criação de conhecimento na empresa. Rio de Janeiro, Campus.
Pavlou, P. (2004). IT-enabled Dynamic Capabilities in New Product development: Building a competitive
advantage in turbulent Environments, University of California. Ph.D.
Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York, Oxford University Press.
Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P. and Probert, D. R. (2004a). "A framework for supporting the management of
technological knowledge." International Journal of Technology Management 27(1): 1-15.
Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P. and Probert, D. R. (2004b). "Technology roadmapping--A planning framework for
evolution and revolution." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 71(1-2): 5-26.
Plsek, P., J. Bibby, et al. (2007). "Practical Methods for Extracting Explicit Design Rules Grounded in the
Experience of Organizational Managers." Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 43(1): 153-170.
Porter, A. L., Banks, J., Mason, T. W., Rossini, F. A. and Roper, A. T. (1991). Forecasting and management of
technology, Wiley.
Porter, A. L. and Cunningham, S. W. (2005). Tech mining: exploiting new technologies for competitive
advantage. Hoboken, NJ, John Wiley & Sons.
Proença, A. (1999). "Dinâmica estratégica sob uma perspectiva analítica: Refinando o entendimentp gerencial."
Arché Ano 8 (23).
Romme, A. G. L. and G. Endenburg (2006). "Construction principles and design rules in the case of circular
design." Organization Science 17(2): 287-297.
Roussel, P. A., K. N. Saad, et al. (1991). Third Generation R&D: managing the link to corporate strategy.
Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
Rugman, A. M. and Verbeke, A. (2001). "Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises." Strategic
Management Journal 22: 237–250.
Rumelt, R. and (1984). Towards a Strategic Theory of the Firm. Competitive Strategic Management, Prentice
Hall.
Santangelo, G. D. (2000). "Corporate strategic partnerships in the European information and communications
technology industry." Research Policy 29: 1015–1031.
Sapienza, A. M. (2004). Managing scientists: leadership strategies in research and development, Wiley-Liss.
Saviotti, P. P. (1998). "On the dynamics of appropriability, of tacit and codified knowledge." Research Policy
26: 843–856.
Savioz, P. and Blum, M. (2002). "Strategic forecast tool for SMEs: how the opportunity landscape interacts
with business strategy to anticipate technological trends." Technovation 22(2): 91-100.
Schilling, M. A. (2002). "Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: The impact of learning
orientation, timing, and network externalities." Academy of Management Journal 45: 387–398.
Simon, H. A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Simonin, B. L. (1999). "Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances." Strategic
Management Journal 20: 595–623.
Szulanski, G. (1996). "Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the
firm." Strategic Management Journal 17: 27-43.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997). "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management." Strategic
Management Journal 18(7): 509-533.
Tilton, J. E. (1971). International diffusion of technology: The case of semiconductors. Washington, DC,
Brookings Institution Press.
Tsai, W. P. (2001). "Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and
absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance." Academy of Management Journal 44(5):
996-1004.
van Aken, J. E. (2004). "Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for
field-tested and grounded technological rules." Journal of Management Studies 41(2): 219-246.
van Aken, J. E. (2005). "Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of Mode
2 knowledge production in management." British Journal of Management 16(1): 19-36.
Van den Bosch, F. A. J., Volberda, H. W. and de Boer, M. (1999). "Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and
knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities." Organization Science 10(5):
551-568.
IAMOT Proceedings Instructions for Typing Manuscripts
Wheelwright, S. C. and Clark, K. B. (1992). Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed,
Efficiency, and Quality. New York, The Free Press.
Zahra, S. A. and George, G. (2002). "Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension."
Academy of Management Review 27(2): 185-203.
Zook, C. (2003). Além das fronteiras do Core Business, Campus.