Eliminando la división cualitativo-cuantitativo en estudios sobre transferencia de conocimiento
el uso de QCA en la exploración de las relaciones universidad-empresa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24197/st.1.2022.154-186Palabras clave:
Knowledge transfer, universities, SMEs, local innovation systems, QCA.Resumen
Este artículo utiliza el Análisis Cualitativo Comparado (QCA) para estudiar procesos de transferencia de conocimiento difíciles de observar debido a la ausencia de fuentes de datos estandarizados. Estudia las relaciones entre universidad y empresa focalizando en las posibilidades de las empresas de contratar proyectos y servicios de I+D en un sistema local de innovación. El artículo realiza contribuciones de carácter metodológico y sustantivo. En primer lugar, las aproximaciones cualitativas de carácter micro y meso se acercan a la tradición de los estudios cuantitativos sobre la ciencia a través de un proceso que ilustra la construcción de dimensiones cuantificables y sus posibilidades de análisis. En segundo lugar, el análisis muestra los condicionantes que influyen en que las pequeñas y medianas empresas no intensivas en I+D utilicen conocimiento de la universidad. Las conclusiones resaltan las posibilidades de fertilización cruzada de esta metodología con otros enfoques en el estudio empírico de la ciencia y la innovación.
Descargas
Referencias
REFERENCIAS
Adame-Sánchez, C., González-Cruz, T. F., y Martínez-Fuentes, C. (2016). Do firms implement work–life balance policies to benefit their workers or themselves? Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5519-5523. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.164.
Álvarez-Coque, J. M. G., Mas-Verdú, F., y Roig-Tierno, N. (2017). Technological innovation versus non-technological innovation: different conditions in different regional contexts? Quality & Quantity, 51(5), 1955-1967. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0394-2.
Benneworth, P. (Ed.) (2019). Universities and regional economic development. Engaging with the periphery, Londres: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315168357.
Borgman, C. (2015). Big Data, Little Data, No Data. Scholarship in the Networked World. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9963.001.0001.
Bozeman, B., Fay, D., y Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8.
Brown, R. (2016). Mission impossible? Entrepreneurial universities and peripheral regional innovation systems. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 189-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1145575.
Büchel, F., Humprecht, E., Castro-Herrero, L., Engesser, S. and Brüggemann, M. (2016). Building empirical typologies with QCA: Toward a classification of media systems. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(2), 209-232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161215626567.
Buganza, T., Colombo, G., y Landoni, P. (2014). Small and medium enterprises’ collaborations with universities for new product development: An analysis of the different phases. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 21(1), 69–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-10-2013-0160.
Caliari, T. and Chiarini, T. (2018). Analysis of scientific research groups with greater productive applicability in Brazil: capacities and interactions with firms. Apuntes. Revista de ciencias sociales, 45(82), 71-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21678/apuntes.82.864.
Cámara de Comercio de Córdoba (2017). Actividades económicas. Recuperado de http://camaracordoba.com/es/servicio-de-certificaciones/Como-ser-competitivo.
Cobo-Benita, J. R., Rodríguez-Segura, E., Ortiz-Marcos, I., y Ballesteros-Sánchez, L. (2016). Innovation projects performance: Analyzing the impact of organizational characteristics. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1357-1360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.107.
Cohen, W. M., y Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective onlearning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553.
Cooper, B.,y Glaesser, J. (2016). Exploring the robustness of set theoretic findings from a large n fsQCA: an illustration from the sociology of education. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(4), 445-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1033799.
Copus, A., Skuras, D., y Tsegenidi, K. (2008). Innovation and peripherality: An empirical comparative study of SMEs in six European Union member countries. Economic Geography, 84(1), 51-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2008.tb00391.x.
Corral de Zubielqui, G., Jones, J., Seet, P. S., y Lindsay, N. (2015). Knowledge transfer between actors in the innovation system: a study of higher education institutions (HEIS) and SMES. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 30(3/4), 436-458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-07-2013-0152.
Corral de Zubielqui, G., Lindsay, N., Lindsay, W., y Jones, J. (2018). Knowledge quality, innovation and firm performance: a study of knowledge transfer in SMEs, 53(1), 145-164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0046-0.
Curado, C., Muñoz-Pascual, L., y Galende, J. (2018). Antecedents to innovation performance in SMEs: A mixed methods approach. Journal of Business Research, 89, 206-215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.056.
Dada, O., y Fogg, H. (2016). Organizational learning, entrepreneurial orientation, and the role of university engagement in SMEs. International Small Business Journal, 34(1), 86-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242614542852.
Dusa, Adrian (2019). QCA with R. A Comprehensive Resource. Springer International Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75668-4.
Edge, D. (1995). Reinventing the wheel. In Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. S. Jasanoff, G.E. Markle, J.C. Petersen and T. Pinch, 3-23. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fan, D., Cui, L., Li, Y., y Zhu, C. J. (2016). Localized learning by emerging multinational enterprises in developed host countries: A fuzzy-set analysis of Chinese foreign direct investment in Australia. International Business Review, 25(1), 187-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2014.12.005.
Fan, D., Li, Y., y Chen, L. (2017). Configuring innovative societies: The crossvergent role of cultural and institutional varieties. Technovation, 66, 43-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.05.003.
Fernández, R., Revuelto, L., y Simón, V. (2018). Survival of new social ventures. An approach based on qualitative comparative analysis fsQCA. CIRIEC-ESPAÑA Revista de Economía Pública Social y Cooperativa, (92), 183-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7203/CIRIEC-E.92.10735.
Fernández-Esquinas, M., y Pinto, H. (2014). The Role of Universities in Urban Regeneration: Reframing the Analytical Approach, European Planning Studies, 22(7), 1462-1483. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013.791967.
Fernández-Esquinas, M., Pinto, H., Pérez-Yruela, M., y Santos-Pereira, T. (2016). Tracing the flows of knowledge transfer: Latent dimensions and determinants of university–industry interactions in peripheral innovation systems, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 13, 266-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.013.
Fernández-Esquinas, M., Pedraza Rodríguez, J.A., Muñoz Benito, R., y Sánchez-Rodríguez, M.I. (2019). Relaciones universidad-empresa y transferencia de conocimiento: Un diagnóstico del sistema local de innovación, Córdoba: Consejo Social de la Universidad de Córdoba / UCO Press. Obtenido en: https://www.uco.es/servicios/ucopress/images/librosgratuitos/978-84-9927-444-7/ebook.html.
Franklin, M. I. (2012). Understanding Research. Coping with the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118863.
Gherardini, A, y Nucciotti, A. (2017). Yesterday’s giants and invisible colleges of today. A study on the ‘knowledge transfer’ scientific domain, Scientometrics, 112(1), 255–271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2394-y.
Goertz, G., y Starr, H. (2003). The substantive importance of necessary condition hypotheses. Necessary conditions: Theory, methodology, and applications, 65-94.
Hallin, D. C. and Mancini, P. (2017). Ten years after comparing media systems: What have we learned?. Political Communication, 34(2), 155-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1233158.
Huggins, R., Johnston, A., y Stride, C. (2012). Knowledge networks and universities: Locational and organisational aspects of knowledge transfer interactions. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24(7-8), 475-502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2011.618192.
Humprecht, E. and Büchel, F. (2013). More of the same or marketplace of opinions? A cross-national comparison of diversity in online news reporting. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(4), 436-461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161213497595.
Kraus, S., Burtscher, J., Niemand, T., Roig-Tierno, N., y Syrjä, P. (2017). Configurational paths to social performance in SMEs: The interplay of innovation, sustainability, resources and achievement motivation. Sustainability, 9(10), 1828. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101828.
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kwiotkowska, A. (2018). Barriers to the development of spin-offs: a fuzzy-set-theoretic approach. Operations Research and Decisions, 28(4), 31-46.
Leydesdorff, L. (1989). The relations between qualitative theory and scientometric methods in science and technology studies, Scientometrics, 15(5-6), 333-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017058.
Li, R., Tao, Q., y Wang, Y. (2015, July). A qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) of innovation network attributes. In 2015 International Conference on Logistics, Informatics and Service Sciences (LISS) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
Marcos-Marne, H. (2016). Autonomist and secessionist parties in post-communist democracies. Structural and institutional factors in the study of a dynamic phenomenon. National Identities, 18(4), 379-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14608944.2015.1075482.
Martin, R., y Simmie, J. (2008). Path dependence and local innovation systems in city-regions. Innovation, Management Policy & Practice, 10(2-3), 183–196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.183.
Meuer, J., Rupietta, C., y Backes-Gellner, U. (2015). Layers of co-existing innovation systems. Research policy, 44(4), 888-910. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.01.013.
Moed, H. F., Glänzel, W., y Schmoch, U. (2004). Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S & T Systems. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9.
Oana, I. E. and Schneider, C. Q. (2018). SetMethods: an add-on R package for advanced QCA. R J. XX, 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2018-031.
Padilla-Meléndez, A., Del Aguila-Obra, A. R., y Lockett, N. (2013). Shifting sands: Regional perspectives on the role of social capital in supporting open innovation through knowledge transfer and exchange with small and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 31(3), 296-318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242612467659.
Pappas, N. (2018). Hotel decision-making during multiple crises: A chaordic perspective. Tourism Management, 68, 450-464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.04.009.
Parida, V., Patel, P. C., Frishammar, J., y Wincent, J. (2017). Managing the front-end phase of process innovation under conditions of high uncertainty. Quality & Quantity, 51(5), 1983-2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0376-4.
Pastor, J. M., Aldás, J., Serrano, L., Benages, E., y Soler, Á. (2018). Estudio de la contribución de la universidad de Córdoba a su entorno económico y social. IVIE.
Peris-Ortiz, M., Devece-Carañana, C. A., y Navarro-García, A. (2018). Organizational learning capability and open innovation. Management Decision, 56(6), 1217-1231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2017-0173.
Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Brostrom, A., D’Este, P., et al. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialization: A review of the literature on university-industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.007.
Pinto, H. Fernández-Esquinas, M., y Uyarra, E. (2014). Universities and Knowledge Intensive Bussiness Services (KIBS) as sources of knowledge for innovative firms in peripheral regions. Regional Studies, 49(11), 1873-1891. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.857396.
Poorkavoos, M., Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S., y Ramanathan, R. (2016). Identifying the configurational paths to innovation in SMEs: A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5843-5854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.067.
Ragin, C. (1987). The Comparative Method. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.
Ramos-Vielba, I., Fernández-Esquinas, M., y Espinosa-de-los-Monteros, E. (2009). Measuring university–industry collaboration in a regional innovation system. Scientometrics, 84(3), 649–667. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0113-z.
Ramos-Vielba, I., y Fernández-Esquinas, M. (2012). Beneath the tip of the Iceberg. Exploring the multiple forms of university-industry linkages, Higuer Education, 64, 237-265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9491-2.
Rasmussen, E., y Borch, O. J. (2010). University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities. Research Policy, 39(5), 602–612. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.02.002.
Rihoux, B., Álamos-Concha, P., Bol, D., Marx, A. and Rezsöhazy, I. (2013). From niche to mainstream method? A comprehensive mapping of QCA applications in journal articles from 1984 to 2011. Political Research Quarterly, 175-184.
Rihoux, B., y Marx, A. (2013). QCA, 25 Years after “The Comparative Method” Mapping, Challenges, and Innovations - Mini-Symposium. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 167-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912912468269.
Schulte, F. (2018). The More, The Better? Assessing the Scope of Regional Autonomy as a Key Condition for Ethnic Conflict Regulation. International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 25(1), 84-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-02501001.
Schneider, C. Q., y C. Wagemann (2012). Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004244.
Tho, N. D., y Trang, N. T. M. (2015). Can knowledge be transferred from business schools to business organizations through in-service training students? SEM and fsQCA findings. Journal of Business Research, 68(6), 1332-1340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.12.003.
Thorpe, R., Holt, R., Macpherson, A., y Pittaway, L. (2005). Using knowledge within small and medium‐sized firms: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(4), 257-281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00116.x.
Tsai, W. (2000). Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic management journal, 21(9), 925-939. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200009)21:9<925::AID-SMJ129>3.0.CO;2-I.
van Raan, Anthony F.J. (Ed.) (1988). Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Venturini, T., Jensen, P., y Latour, B. (2015). Fill in the gap: A new alliance for social and natural sciences. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 18, 1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.2729.
Warren, J. (2017). “The way things get done around here…” Exploring spatial biographies, social policy and governance in the North East of England. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 37(11-12), 655-666. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-04-2016-0048.
Woltmann, S.L., y Alkærsig, L. (2018).Tracing university–industry knowledge transfer through a text mining approach. Scientometrics, 117(1), 449–472. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2849-9.
Woltmann, S.L. (2012). Synergy or separation mode: the relationship between the academic research and the knowledge-transfer activities of Korean academics. Scientometrics, 90(1), 177–200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0513-8.
Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., y Knockaert, M. (2008). Mid-range universities’ linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Research Policy, 37(8), 1205–1223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.021.
Wyatt, S., y Balmer, B. (2007). Home on the Range. What and Where is the Middle in Science and Technology Studies?, Science, Technology & Human Values, 32(6), 619-626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907306085.
Wyatt, S., Milojević, S., Woo Park, Han, y Leydesdorff, L. (2015). Quantitative and Qualitative STS: The intellectual and practical contributions of scientometrics. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2588336.
Descargas
Publicado
Versiones
- 2022-02-17 (3)
- 2022-02-17 (2)
- 2022-02-11 (1)
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 M. Isabel Sánchez-Rodríguez, Manuel Fernámdez-Esquinas, José Antonio Pedraza-Rodriguez, Rocío Muñoz-Benito
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Todos los trabajos publicados en la revista Sociología y Tecnociencia se distribuyen bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).
Los autores continúan como propietarios de sus trabajos, y pueden volver a publicar sus artículos en otro medio sin tener que solicitar autorización, siempre y cuando indiquen que el trabajo fue publicado originariamente en la revista Sociología y Tecnociencia.
