The networking perspective on innovation emphasises the importance of the connectivity of a heterogeneous group of actors and the importance of exploring and exploiting weak ties (Granovetter, 1973) and structural holes (Burt, 2004). The formation and functioning of these kinds of innovation networks can be problematic because of the existence of several challenges between innovating partners, as seen in the previous chapter. These challenges could also be described using the concepts of distance and proximity. In innovation activities there is a need to have the right kind of balance between distance and proximity. In order to use these distances as an innovation potential, there is a growing attention to having intermediaries facilitate innovation processes (van Lente et al., 2003).
Intermediaries emerged as a result of the knowledge complexities and distances between actors (Cillo, 2005) and they play different roles in innovation (Diener and Piller, 2009). Intermediaries act, for example, in the midst of the user and the producer of knowledge (Smedlund, 2006) as a member of the network enabling other actors to innovate (Winch and Courtney, 2007), diffuse and transfer technology (Howells, 2006), in overall product development (Hargadon and Sutton, 1997), in creating networks for the information flow (Howells, 2006), and also in Knowledge Intensive Business Services (KIBS) (Muller and Zenker, 2001). Table 5 gives more information about the different roles of intermediary organisations in innovation activities.
Intermediaries could act at different levels. According to Smedlund (2006), national, regional and local intermediaries have distinct roles from the point of view of the innovation, development and production networks of a regional cluster of small firms. For example, national intermediate organisations support the joint projects in innovation, provide national forums of knowledge sharing, and influence the institutional environment for production. Regional intermediate organisations are related to the overall strategy of the region and promote the co-operation between different actors, form relations and attract anchor tenants to the region. The local intermediaries function as hubs in the networks, coordinate forums of knowledge sharing and provide knowledge intensive business services to firms. In this dissertation, intermediaries are seen as regional actors.
Table 5. Roles of intermediaries.
Study Roles
Smedlund, 2006 The regional intermediaries have the most important role in the creation and supporting of the network dynamics. The most critical roles include forming shared innovation strategies between the actors and attracting anchor tenants to the region.
Winch and Courtney, 2007
Innovation brokers are organisations that are founded especially to undertake an intermediary role, rather than performing that role as a by-product of their principal activities. The key role played by innovation brokers in the innovation process is the independent validation of new ideas, thereby facilitating diffusion. In order to carry out this task, innovation brokers are organized on a not-for-profit basis, typically as a public-private partnership.
Howells, 2006 Intermediaries provide a much wider, more varied and holistic role for their clients in the innovation process than has generally been
acknowledged. Innovation intermediaries may have systemic value in policy terms in an innovation system. This is not only in terms of improving connectedness within a system, particularly through bridging ties, but also in its ―animateur‖ role of creating new possibilities and dynamism within a system.
Hargadon and Sutton, 1997
An organisation acts as a technology broker by introducing solutions where they are not known, and in the process creates new products that are original combinations of existing knowledge from disparate industries.
Muller and Zenker, 2001
KIBS play an important role in innovation systems. They show a considerable innovation and growth potential and support economic development at regional and national levels. KIBS do not only ―transmit‖
knowledge, but in fact they play a crucial role in terms of ―knowledge re-engineering‖.
Intermediaries include third parties, brokers, bridging organisations, technology transfer intermediaries, and boundary organisations. To describe these organisations, Howells (2006) uses the broad term innovation intermediary, which he defines as ―an organisation or body that acts as an agent or broker in any aspect of the innovation process between two or more parties‖. Dalzier (2010) defines innovation intermediaries as organisations that work to enable innovation, either directly by enabling the innovativeness of one or more organisations, or indirectly by enhancing the innovative capacity of regions, nations, or sectors. The focus of her definition is on organisational purpose. That way it is possible to identify a class of organisations that are intermediaries and to
78
distinguish this class of organisations from other organisations. Accordingly, industry and trade associations, economic development agencies, chambers of commerce, science and business parks, business incubators, research consortia and networks and research institutes can all be classified as innovation intermediaries insofar as their organisational purpose is to enable innovation.
The provision of innovation intermediation functions may be more or less central to an organisation's identity, and it may often not be their primary role, as Howells (2006) argues.
Organisations providing intermediation functions do not solely or even wholly restrict themselves to intermediary functions, but also cover more traditional services which do not involve third-party type collaboration. Winch and Courtney (2007) define innovation intermediaries that have brokerage as their main task as innovation brokers. An innovation broker is defined as an organisation acting as a member of a network of actors in an industrial sector that is focused neither on the generation nor the implementation of innovations, but on enabling organisations to innovate.
Furthermore, they state that such brokers represent an additional type of intermediary in innovation networks from those reviewed by Howells (2006) because their sole purpose is to act as a broker, rather than brokerage functions being a by-product of their principal activity. With a similar perspective, van Lente et al. (2003) present a separation between ―traditional‖ innovation intermediaries, who are often also sources or carriers of innovation or are organisationally attached to the sources of the carriers of innovation, and ―new‖ innovation brokers who fulfil a more independent systemic role and adhere more to the role of facilitating innovation.
In this dissertation, innovation intermediaries are considered to be organisations that play a broker role either as their primary role or as a by-product of their other activities. The role of these organisations is close to the view of van Lente et al. (2003) of an intermediary as an independent facilitator of innovation activities in organisations, networks or in a region. The brokerage functions may be carried out by an innovation intermediary or individual (Hargadon, 2002; de Sousa, 2006;
Uotila, 2008). In this dissertation, brokers are considered to be individuals who work in the innovation intermediaries.