Search

Objective: This article presents the process data research approach as an opportunity to improve management studies and to create a roadmap for beginners. Process research is a sidelined way to conduct qualitative studies. The fundamental concern of the process approach is to capture and apprehend the meanings attributed to organizational phenomena directly in the field of research, aiming to understand and answer the questions of 'how' and 'why' events change over time. Method: This study reviews selected recent research on innovation management that used process research criteria (temporal orientation, units of analysis, sample, data, analytical strategies, and conceptual products) as the back-drop. Main Results: The main result of this paper is the creation of a ro-admap for applying the process research approach. Also, it highlights ele-ments of improvement for management studies from the process data approach. Relevance / Originality: This study provides several examples of qualitative process research in innovation. The proposed roadmap helps increase the rigor and uses of this research approach. Theoretical / Methodological Contributions: We offer an academic discussion on process research's role in improving (innovation) management studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the role of universities as orchestrators of the development of a regional ecosystem that is conducive to innovation and entrepreneurship. We argue that universities in emerging economies, due to many social challenges, must go beyond their missions of teaching, research, and collaboration with industry for innovation. We present a unique case study of an alliance of three universities in Porto Alegre, Brazil that, in addition to being competitors in the above-mentioned missions, are orchestrating a network of stakeholders in this region to develop an ecosystem for innovation and entrepreneurship. We demonstrate that universities perform several orchestration processes that are consistent with the literature, such as fostering knowledge mobility, managing innovation appropriability, and increasing network stability. Furthermore, we found differences in how innovation ecosystems are orchestrated as compared to firm networks. In the case of innovation ecosystems, appropriability reaches the broader region, and the benefits are not limited to participant stakeholders. Such orchestration processes emerge when universities take on leadership positions in the region; they can influence the beginning of collective actions and projects as well as transfer responsibility, delegating power to other actors in the network. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The innovation literature is growing rapidly, and a primary concern revolves around the contexts that foster and enhance innovation and entrepreneurial outcomes. Research on innovation environments still requires further development. This paper sheds light on fostering and developing innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities from the institutional work perspective, emphasizing the need to institutionalize collaboration. The paper employs the case study method with a process data approach. The study took place in two Latin American cities, Porto Alegre and Florianópolis, within a cultural context characterized by a non-cooperative background. The findings are linked to the institutionalization of collaboration in the development of innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems, unfolding in three phases involving three groups of roles: leaders, supporters, and the community. The practices are associated with the leader's group in the first phase (Preparing for Collaboration). The second phase (Strengthening Collaboration) expands the practices and adjusts the focus to the supporter's group. Additionally, the third phase (Disseminating Collaboration) continues to broaden the scope and gains relevance for the community's group. Therefore, the evolution of the phases is connected to the expansion of the range of institutionalization practices and a focus on the most active roles. These results carry significant implications for the theory and practice of innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem emergence, offering insights into the phases and roles critical for fostering innovation environments. Furthermore, they can provide practical guidance for other cities or regions aiming to cultivate robust innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems. • The process of fostering and developing an innovation an entrepreneurial ecosystem in cities with the institutional work perspective considers the need to institutionalize the collaboration. • The study was conducted in two cities with a cultural context of non-cooperation background. • Institutionalizing collaboration for the innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem occurs in three phases: Preparing for Collaboration, Strengthening Collaboration and Disseminating Collaboration. • Innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem development involve three groups of roles: leaders, supporters, and community. • The evolution of the phases is related to the expansion of the range of institutionalization practices and to the focus on the roles most involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]