Analysis of Scientific Production on Interorganizational Networks Study Field Outros Idiomas

ID:
51564
Resumo:
PURPOSE – The present study seeks to answer the following research question: what is the profile of the academic production related to the interorganizational networks in the period between 2006 and 2016? Thus, this study aims to characterize the academic production about the subject interorganizational networks available in national journals with Concept “A” (Qualis Capes), in the period between 2006 and 2016. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH – This paper uses national journals with Concept “A” of the Qualis classification (2016) for journal selection. In total, 12 “A” concept journals were identified. However, it was decided to analyze ten of them. The procedures suggested by Crossan and Apaydin (2010) for conducting bibliometric studies were adopted. It has been identified that 77 articles were published in eight journals. The R 3.3.2 and R Studio 1.0.136 software were used. The IGRAPH 0.5.5-2 extension (package) was used to analyze graphs and co-authorship networks (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). This extension is able to manipulate networks with millions of vertices and edges and provides a series of functions to analyze the properties of social networks, such as subnetworks, intermediation, centrality, among other characteristics (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). Correspondence analysis (CA) was also performed. CA is a multivariate exploratory technique that converts a data matrix into a graphical representation, so that rows and columns are represented by points in a graph (Greenacre and Hastie, 1987). This extension is dedicated to the multivariate analysis of data and allows the manipulation of different types of variables (quantitative or categorical). In the present research, multiple CA (MCA) was applied – indicated when the elements are described as categorical variables (Lê et al., 2008). The characteristics considered for carrying out MCA were the “main term”, “research approach”, “type of research”, “constructs” and “research strategies”. By using the FactoMineR 1.34 extension, the hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC) function was used (Husson et al., 2007; Lê et al., 2008). This function allows creating clusters from the characteristics of the articles analyzed and highlights the justifications for the groupings created. The function allows forming as many clusters the researcher wishes, being of its attribution to analyze a division that best represents the characteristics of the data (Husson, Josse, and Pagès, 2010). Husson et al. (2010) suggest that an analysis should be performed from the hierarchical tree, thus the number of clusters can be defined considering the overall appearance (or shape) of the tree formed. At last, a word cloud was created using the Wordcloud 2.5 extension (Fellows, 2013). The noticed advantage of using this extension is that it does not separate the terms that form a keyword when generating the cloud. It has been used for the keywords of the 77 articles analyzed; however, it has been decided to keep those that presented frequency greater than or equal to two. By avoiding occasional terms, a more intelligible cloud was obtained. FINDINGS – The present study was not able to verify if the journals analyzed by Andrighi et al. (2011) have influenced others to publish on the subject, as suggested by the Bradford’s Law. The standard “success breeds success”, suggested by the Bradford’s Law, was not confirmed. The so-called nuclear zone (Brookes, 1969; Novaretti et al., 2015) is composed of the journals Brazilian Administration Review (BAR), Revista de Administração Contemporânea (RAC), Revista de Administração Pública (RAP) and Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Neg_ocios (RBGN). The journal RAC stands out for having been the one that has increased its annual average of publication in relation to the theme, when compared with the findings of Andrighi et al. (2011). The journals BAR and RBGN stand out because they are in the nuclear zone, even though they were not considered in the work of Andrighi et al. (2011). It should be noted that all the analyzed journals have in common the fact of addressing the themes of management and administration and, more specifically, making room for the “competitiveness” and “cooperation” constructs. These constructs are related to the theme of networks and were the most recurrent in the articles analyzed. “Cooperation” (29), “competitiveness” (27), “knowledge” (12), “learning” (6) and “trust” (3) were the “constructs” used to compose the 77 articles analyzed. In turn, “network” (49), “alliance” (18) and “cluster” (9) were the “main term” most used in the articles. This implies that the topic of cooperation is more linked to a vision of strategy. As occurred in the research of Andrighi et al. (2011), the term “network” is the most recurrent; in addition, the growth of space obtained by the term “alliance” stands out. The terms “network” and “alliance” were the most used by the articles, being predominant in 87 per cent of the research. In the present research, the predominance of the term “network” may have occurred because its concept is broader and it is used in the literature in different ways, even in contradictory ways (Andrighi et al., 2011; Schommer, 2001). In turn, the term “alliance” may have been recurrent because it has a wide dispersion of published issues, such as governance structure, cooperation, knowledge transfer and trust (Lima and Campos Filho, 2009). By using the HCPC function of the FactoMineR extension, the articles were grouped according to their characteristics, and then three clusters were formed. By analyzing the generated results, it is assumed that the division into three clusters was the one that best represented the data. Cluster 1 is characterized by descriptive, quantitative, half documentary and half survey research studies, being “cluster” the main term. Cluster 2 is characterized by exploratory case studies with qualitative–quantitative analyzes. Cluster 3 is characterized by theoretical tests. The Zipf’s law points out that a small group of words occurs many times; however, when considering the most recurrent words Networks (9), Strategic Alliances (8), Cooperation (8), Interorganizational Networks (8) and Alliances (6) show that they were present in only about 10 per cent of the works. Lotka’s Law, which states that few authors publish much and many authors publish little, was not confirmed. The authors who presented the highest number of publications, T. Diana L. v. A. de Macedo-Soares (6); Jorge Renato Verschoore (6); Alsones Balestrin (5); Douglas Wegner (4); Humberto Elias Garcia Lopes (4), participated in less than 10 per cent of the works. Thus, the authorship was characterized by many researchers publishing few works, what can be an effect of the behavior of these authors, who prefer to publish in network. The centrality of the relations between the authors was analyzed and, in addition, the intermediation points of the network were identified. The present study also analyzed all the references used by the 77 articles that compose the study. The main author of each of the references used was identified. Among the 30 identified authors, Yin and Hair Jr. stand out for books related to fundamentals and research methodologies. Borgatti and Eisenhardt developed research on the topic of interorganizational networks and also created works for methodological foundations. Powell was the most frequently mentioned author (28) and had more different works referenced (9). Powell stands out for the production of articles published in periodicals, not books. Porter’s situation is the opposite.Most of the quotations made to the author come from his books, especially the work “Competitive strategy” (Porter, 1980). All authors identified are foreigners, with the exception of Balestrin. Marshall, Polanyi, Granovetter and Williamson are authors of works considered seminal, being them, respectively, “Principles of economics” (Marshall, 1890), “Personal knowledge: towards a post critical philosophy” (Polanyi, 1958) and “The strength of weak ties” (Granovetter, 1973) and “Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications” (Williamson, 1975). RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS – Like all research, it has limitations. The first one derives from the selection criteria of the periodicals to be analyzed. The cut referring to the journals of greater impact excludes most of the national articles. These studies may contain important contributions to the knowledge of the national publication profile. In addition, the choice to analyze the journals disregards other types of work, such as books, scientific events, dissertations and thesis and reports. The choice of articles published in journals is based on the fact that these are a “certified knowledge”, as the studies are peer-reviewed, and in the case of the Qualis “A” stratum, a review of exogenous quality is supposed on this production. Despite its flaws, this system can be considered reliable to evaluate scientific knowledge (Bedeian, 2004; Shugan, 2007). The analysis of the most recent articles may have been hampered by a temporal issue. In addition, the choice of keywords, a necessary step, leaves out other studies. Another limitation refers to the fact that the articles have been analyzed and classified by the authors, which presupposes the use of their value judgments, at least to some extent. Other limitations refer to the bibliometric techniques employed. The main authors referenced in the studies were demonstrated, that is, those authors who have been used as a theoretical reference for studies of interorganizational networks. However, the circumstances under which these citations occurred were not analyzed. For example, an author may be quoted to use the contribution of his/her study, to be criticized or just to be another reference in the text. The lack of this analysis can be considered a fragility of the study. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS – This text was started talking about the dispersion of the studies on networks in the country. Previous work has been used, theoretically and empirically demonstrating this fact. Zipf’s Law applied to bibliometrics, as described by Guedes and Borschiver (2005), Novaretti et al. (2015) and Pao (1978), was not confirmed in this study, which seems to be an indicative fact that the research on this theme in Brazil presents fragmentation as an intrinsic characteristic. That is, it must remain fragmented, as this would be its own way to evolve. This is evident especially when comparing the study of Andrighi et al. (2011) and its results. With several but continuous temporal cut-outs, and the same keywords, the maintenance of this dispersion is evident. This is also a contribution of this study. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS – The study contributed to updating the research profile, mainly after the triennium 2013-2015 of Qualis Capes’ evaluations. It also added to the mapping of recent Brazilian academic production related to interorganizational networks, completing studies by Alves et al. (2013), Andrighi et al. (2011), Balestrin et al. (2010), Cunha and Carrieri (2003) and Mascena et al. (2013). Thus, it is believed that the research reached the proposed objectives, despite its limitations. ORIGINALITY/VALUE – The present research is also justified by helping to understand the subject being useful for researchers, educators and students, in general, in the task of demonstrating gaps and opportunities of future researches and collaborating with the elaboration of a research agenda (Baumgartner and Pieters, 2003). The work has updated bibliometrics on the subject and allows comparisons with previous bibliometric studies (Alves et al., 2013; Andrighi et al., 2011; Balestrin et al., 2010; Cunha and Carrieri, 2003; Ferreira et al., 2014; Lima and Campos Filho, 2009; Mascena et al., 2013). It is believed that the present study differs from the others because of the analysis performed, the way the data were treated, with techniques that are rarely used simultaneously, going beyond the descriptive statistics.
Citação ABNT:
FARIAS, R. A. S.; HOFFMANN, V. E. Analysis of Scientific Production on Interorganizational Networks Study Field. Revista de Administração e Inovação, v. 15, n. 1, p. 92-115, 2018.
Citação APA:
Farias, R. A. S., & Hoffmann, V. E. (2018). Analysis of Scientific Production on Interorganizational Networks Study Field. Revista de Administração e Inovação, 15(1), 92-115.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-02-2018-006
Link Permanente:
http://www.spell.org.br/documentos/ver/51564/analysis-of-scientific-production-on-interorganizational-networks-study-field/i/pt-br
Tipo de documento:
Artigo
Idioma:
Inglês
Referências:
Alves, J.N.; Pereira, B.A.D.; Andrade, T. Reis, E. (2013). Confiança, aprendizagem e conhecimento nos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: diagnóstico e análise dos avanços sobre o tema. Revista Eletrônica de Administração, v. 76, n. 3, pp. 709-737.

Amato Neto, J. (2000), Redes de Cooperação Produtiva e Clusters Regionais: Oportunidades Para as Pequenas e Médias Empresas. 1 ed. Atlas, São Paulo, SP.

Andrighi, F. F.; Hoffmann, V. E.; Andrade, M. A. R. (2011). Análise da produção científica no campo de estudo das redes em periódicos nacionais e internacionais. Revista de Administração e Inovação, v. 8, n. 1, pp. 29-54.

Aquino, J. A. (2014). R Para Cientistas Sociais, EDITUS, Ilhéus, BA.

Araújo, C.A. (2006). Bibliometria: evolução histórica e questões atuais. Revista em Questão, v. 12, n. 1, pp. 11-32.

Araújo, R.F. Alvarenga, L. (2011). A bibliometria na pesquisa científica da pós-graduação brasileira de 1987 a 2007. Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, v. 16, n. 31, pp. 51-70

Atouba, Y.; Shumate, M. (2010). Interorganizational networking patterns among development organizations. Journal of Communication, v. 60, n. 2, pp. 293-317.

Balestrin, A.; Vargas, L.M. (2004). A dimensão estratégica das redes horizontais de PMEs: teorizações e evidências. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 8, n. especial, pp. 203-227.

Balestrin, A.; Verschoore, J. (2000), Redes de Cooperação Empresarial: Estratégias de Gestão na Nova Economia 1 ed. Bookman, Porto Alegre, RS.

Balestrin, A.; Vershoore, J.; Reyes Junior, E. (2010). O campo de estudo sobre redes de cooperação interorganizacional no Brasil. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 14, n. 3, pp. 458-477.

Barkema, H.G.; Vermeulen, F. (1998). International expansion through start-up or acquisition: a learning perspective. Academy of Management Journal, v. 41, n. 1, pp. 7-23.

Barney, J. B. (1999). How a firm’s capabilities affect boundary decisions. Sloan Management Review, v. 40, n. 3, pp. 137-145.

Bastl, M.; Grubic, T.; Templar, S.; Harrison, A.; Fan, I. (2010). Inter-organisational costing approaches: the inhibiting factors. The International Journal of Logistics Management, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 65-88.

Baumgartner, H.; Pieters, R. (2003). The structural influence of marketing journals: a citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time. Journal of Marketing, v. 67, n. 2, pp. 123-139.

Bedeian, A.G. (2004). Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, v. 3, n. 2, pp. 198-216.

Beuren, I. M.; de Souza, J. C. (2008). Em busca de um delineamento de proposta Para classificação dos periódicos internacionais de contabilidade Para o Qualis Capes. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, v. 19, n. 46, pp. 44-58.

Böhe, D. M.; Silva, K. M. (2004). O dilema de crescimento em redes de cooperação: o caso da Panimel. In Verschoore, J. R. (Ed.), Redes de cooperação: uma nova organização de pequenas e médias empresas no Rio Grande Do Sul, FEE, Porto Alegre, RS.

Borgatti, S.; Everett, M.; Freeman, L. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: software for Social Network Analysis.1 ed. Analytic Technologies, Harvard.

Borgatti, S.P.; Foster, P. C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: a review and typology. Journal of Management, v. 29, n. 6, pp. 991-1013.

Brookes, B. C. (1969). Bradford’s law and the bibliography of science. Nature, v. 224, n. 5223, pp. 953-956.

Burt, R. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. The American Journal of Sociology, v. 110, n. 2, pp. 349-399.

Carter, C. R.; Leuschner, R.; Rogers, D. S. (2007). A social network analysis of the Journal of Supply Chain Management: knowledge generation, knowledge diffusion and thought leadership. Journal of Supply Chain Management, v. 43, n. 2, pp. 15-28.

Carter, C. R.; Rogers, D. S.; Choi, T. Y. (2015). Toward the theory of the supply chain. Journal of Supply Chain Management, v. 51, n. 2, pp. 89-97.

Casarotto, N.; Pires, L. H. (1998). Redes de pequenas e médias empresas e desenvolvimento local: estratégias Para a conquista da competitividade global com a base na experiência Italiana. 1 ed. Atlas, São Paulo, SP.

Castells, M. (1996), A sociedade em Rede: A Era da Informação – Economia, Sociedade e Cultura. 1 ed. Paz e Terra, São Paulo, SP.

Coelho, A. L.; Pavão, Y. M. P.; Bandeira-de-Mello, R. (2009). A produção científica direcionada a visão baseada em recursos (Resource-Vased View – RBV) no Brasil e no exterior. Revista Brasileira de Docência, Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração, v. 1, n. 2, pp. 177-207.

Crossan, M. M.; Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, v. 47, n. 6, pp. 1154-1191.

Csárdi, G.; Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal Complex Systems, 1695. http://igraph.sf.net.

Cunha, C. R. Carrieri, A. P. (2003). Mapeando as relações interorganizacionais na teoria organizacional: garimpando os principais periódicos brasileiros sobre gestão. Anais do Encontro da Associação Nacional de Pós-graduação e Pesquisa em Administração - EnAnpad. Atibaia, SP. p. 27. www.anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnANPAD/enanpad_2003/TEO/2003_TEO616.pdf

Das, T. K. Teng, B. S. (2003). Partner analysis and alliance performance. Scandinavian Journal of Management, v. 19, n. 3, pp. 279-308.

Dias, T.; Birochi, R.; Deambrosis, A. M.; Darosi, G. C. M.; Matos, O .A. (2013). A construção do conhecimento sobre estratégia: uma análise da produção científica recente (2003-2011), na perspectiva de Burrel e Morgan. Anais dos Encontro de Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração e Contabilidade – EnEPQ. Brasília, DF. p. 4. www.anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnEPQ/enepq_2013/2013_EnEPQ128.pdf

Dyer, J.; Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, v. 23, n. 4, pp. 660-679.

Ebers, M. Grandori, A. (1997). The form, costs and development Fukuyama, dynamics of interorganizational networking. In Ebers, M. (Ed.), The Formation of Inter-Organizational Networks, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Eisenhardt, K. M. Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, v. 50, n. 1, pp. 25-32.

Fellows, I. (2013). Package ‘wordcloud’. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/wordcloud/wordcloud.pdf.

Ferreira, M. P.; Storopoli, J. E.; Serra, F. R. (2014). Two decades of research on strategic alliances: analysis of citations, co-citations and themes researched. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 18 (especial), pp. 109-133.

Gallon, A. V.; Cunha, C. J. C. A. (2007). Investigando os estudos etnográficos publicados nos anais do Enanpad: uma análise de 2000 a 2006. Anais do Encontro de Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração e Contabilidade – ENEPQ, Recife, PE, p. 1. www.anpad.org.br/admin/pdf/ENEPQ15.pdf

Gallon, A. V.; Souza, F. C.; Rover, S.; Ensslin, S. R. (2007). Estratégias metodológicas da produção científica em capital intelectual: uma análise de 2000 a 2006. Anais do Encontro de Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração e Contabilidade – ENEPQ, Recife, PE, p. 1. www.anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnEPQ/enepq_2007/ENEPQ43.pdf

Glãnzel, W. (2014). Analysis of co-authorship patterns at the individual level. Transinformação, v. 26, n. 3, pp. 229-238.

Glãnzel, W.; Debackere, K.; Thijs, B. Schubert, A. (2006). A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy. Scientometrics, v. 67, n. 2, pp. 263-277.

Gnyawali, D. R.; Madhavan, R. (2001). Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a strutuctural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Rewiew, v. 26, n. 3, pp. 431-445.

Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, v. 78, n. 6, pp. 1360-1380.

Greenacre, M.; Hastie, T. (1987). The geometric interpretation of correspondence analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 82, n. 398, pp. 437-447.

Guedes, V. L. S.; Borschiver, S. (2005). Bibliometria: uma ferramenta estatística para a gestão da informação e do conhecimento, em sistemas de informação, de comunicação e de avaliação científica e tecnológica. Anais do Encontro Nacional de Ciências da Informação – ENANCIB, Salvador, BA, p. 6.

Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, v. 19, n. 4, pp. 293-317.

Gulati, R. (2007). Managing Networks Resources – Alliances, Affiliations and Other Relational Assets. 1st ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Gulati, R.; Nohria, N. Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, v. 21, n. 3, pp. 203-215.

Halinen, A. Törnroos, J. A. (1998). The role of embeddedness in the evolution of business networks. Scandinavian Journal of Management, v. 14, n. 3, pp. 187-205.

Hamel, G. (1991). Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, v. 12, n. especial, pp. 83-103.

Hulme, E. (1922). Statistical Bibliography in Relation to the Growth of Modern Civilization: two Lectures Delivered in the University of Cambridge in May 1922. 1 ed. Grafton, London.

Human, S. E.; Provan, K. G. (1997). An emergent theory of structure and outcomes in small-firm strategic manufacturing network. Academy of Management Journal, v. 40, n. 2, pp. 368-403.

Husson, F.; Josse, J.; Lê, S. Mazet, J. (2007). FactoMineR: factor analysis and data mining with R. R package version 1.04. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR.

Husson, F.; Josse, J.; Pagès, J. (2010). Principal component methods – hierarchical clustering – partitional clustering: why would we need to choose for visualizing data?Applied Mathematics Department. www.agrocampus-ouest.fr/math/.

Jarillo, J. C. (1988). On strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, v. 9, n. 1, pp. 31-41.

Jarillo, J. C. (1993). Strategic Networks: creating the Borderless Organization. 1 ed. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.

Koza, M. P.; Lewin, A. Y. (1998). The co-evolution of strategic alliances. Organization Science, v. 9, n. 3, pp. 255-264.

Kraatz, M. S. (1998). Learning by association: inter-organizational networks and adaptation to environmental change. Academy of Management Journal, v. 41, n. 6, pp. 621-643.

Kunzler, M.T.; Bulgacov, S. (2011). As estratégias competitivas e colaborativas e os resultados individuais e coletivos no associativismo rural em Quatro Pontes (PR). Revista de Administração Pública, v. 45, n. 5, pp. 1363-1393.

Lai, C. S.; Franke, T. F.; Gan, W. B. (2012). Opposite effects of fear conditioning and extinction on dendritic spine remodelling. Nature, v. 483, n. 1, pp. 87-91.

Lastres, M. M .H.; Cassiolato, J. E. (2003), Novas Políticas na Era do Conhecimento: o Foco em Arranjos Produtivos e Inovativos Locais. 1 ed. RedeSist, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.

Lê, S.; Josse, J. Husson, F. (2008). FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, v. 25, n. 1, pp. 1-18. www.jstatsoft.org/v25/i01/

Lima, F. G. S. N.; Campos Filho, L. A. N. (2009). Mapeamento do estudo contemporâneo em alianças e redes estratégicas. RBGN – Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Negócios, v. 11, n. 31, pp. 168-182.

Machado-da-Silva, C. L.; Coser, C. (2006). Rede de relações interorganizacionais no campo organizacional de Videira-SC. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 10, n. 4, pp. 9-45.

Magalhães, J. M.; Daubt, C. G.; Phonlor, P. R. (2009). Vantagens proporcionadas às pequenas e médias empresas por meio da união em redes de cooperação no contexto do venture Capital. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 13, n. 4, pp. 583-603.

Marconi, M.A.; Lakatos, E. M. (2010), Fundamento de Metodologia Científica. 7 ed Atlas, São Paulo, SP.

Marshall, A. (1890), Principles of Economics. 1 ed. MaCmillan, Londres.

Marteleto, R. M.; Silva, A. B. O. (2004). Redes e Capital social: o enfoque da informação Para o desenvolvimento local. Ciência da Informação, v. 33, n. 3, pp. 41-49.

Martes, A.; Bulgacov, S.; Nascimento, M.; Gonçalves, S.; Augusto, P. (2006). Fórum – redes sociais e interorganizacionais. Revista de Administração de Empresas, v. 46, n. 3, pp. 1-15.

Mascena, K. M. C.; Figueiredo, F. C.; Boaventura, J. M. G. (2013). Clusters e APL’s: análise bibliométrica das publicações nacionais no período de 2000 a 2011. Revista de Administração de Empresas, v. 53, n. 5, pp. 454-468.

Meirelles, A. M.; Gonçalves, C. A. (2005). Uma abordagem multiparadigmática Para a disciplina estratégia. Anais do Encontro de Estudos em Estratégia (3es). Associação Nacional de Pós-graduação e Pesquisa em Administração – ANPAD, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, p. 2.

Mitrega, M.; Pfajfar, G. (2015). Business relationship process management as company dynamic capability improving relationship portfolio. Industrial Marketing Management, v. 46, n. 1, pp. 193-203.

Molina-Morales, F. X.; Belso-Martínez, J. A.; Más-Verdú, F.; Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2015). Formation and dissolution of inter-firm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters. Journal of Business Research, v. 68, n. 7, pp. 1557-1562.

Molina-Morales, F. X.; Capo-Vicedo, J.; Martínez-Fernández, M. T.; Exposito-Langa, M. (2013). Social Capital in industrial districts: influence of the strength of ties and density of the network on the sense of belonging to the district. Papers in Regional Science, v. 92, n. 4, pp. 773-789

Möller, K. K.; Rajala, A. (2007). Rise of strategic nets: new modes of value creation. Industrial Marketing Management, v. 36, n. 7, pp. 895-908.

Moran, M. R.; Souza, F. F.; Boaventura, J. M. G.; Marinho, B. L.; Fischmann, A. A. (2010). Alianças estratégicas: uma análise bibliométrica da produção científica entre 1989 e 2008. Revista de Ciências da Administração, v. 12, n. 27, pp. 42-62.

Müller-Seitz, G. (2011). Leadership in interorganizational networks: a literature review and suggestions for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, v. 14, n. 4, pp. 428-433.

Nascimento, S.; Beuren, I.M. (2011). Redes sociais na produção científica dos programas de pós-graduação de ciências contábeis do Brasil. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 15, n. 1, pp. 47-66.

Negra, C. A. S.; Silva, A. P. C. (2013). Perfil bibliométrico da produção científica da revista brasileira de aprendizagem aberta e a distância no período de 2002 a 2012. Revista Novas Tecnologias na Educação, v. 11, n. 3, pp. 1-10.

Newlands, D. (2003). Competition and cooperation in industrial clusters: the implications for public policy. European Planning Studies, v. 11, n. 5, pp. 521-532.

Novaretti, M. C. Z.; Quitério, L. M.; Santos, E. V. (2015). Gestão em unidades de terapia intensiva brasileiras: estudo bibliométrico dos últimos 10 anos. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, v. 12, n. 4, pp. 16-33.

Otlet, P. (1934), Traité de Documentation: le Livre sur le Livre, Theorie et Pratique. 1 ed. Editions Mundaneum, Brussels, BEL.

Padula, G.; Dagnino, G. B. (2007). Untangling the rise of coopetition: the intrusion of coopetition in a cooperative game structure. International Studies of Management and Organizations, v. 37, n. 2, pp. 32-53.

Pao, M. L. (1978). Automatic text analysis based on transition phenomena of word occurrences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v. 29, n. 3, pp. 121-124.

Pereira, B. A. D.; Alves, J. N.; Silva, P. E. (2010). O lado obscuro dos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: por que as empresas saem dos processos cooperativos? Espacios, v. 31, n. 4, pp. 25-27.

Pereira, F. C.; Verocai, H. D.; Cordeiro, V. R.; Gomes, C. F. S. (2016). Sistemas de informação e inovação: um estudo bibliométrico. Revista de Gestão da Tecnologia e Sistemas de Informação, v. 13, n. 1, pp. 81-100.

Perrow, C. (1992). Small-firms networks. In Nohria, N.; Eccles, R. G. (Eds), Networks and Organizations: structure, Form, and Action. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Perry, M. (2005). Business Clusters: An International Perspective. 1 ed. Routledge, New York, NY.

Pfeffer, J.; Salancik, G. (1978). The External Control of Organization: A Resource Perspective. 1 ed. Harper and Row, New York, NY.

Polanyi, M. (1958), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post Critical Philosophy. 1 ed. Routledge London.

Porter, M. E. (1980), Competitive Strategy – Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. 1 ed. The Free Press, New York, NY.

Powell, W.; Smith-Doerr, L. (1994). Networks and economic life. In Smelser, N.J.; Swedberg, R. (Ed.), Handbook of Economic Sociology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Powell, W. W. (1987). Hybrid organizational arrangements: new forms or transitional development? California Management Review, v. 30, n. 1, pp. 67-87.

Powell, W.W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, v. 12, n. 11, pp. 95-336.

Prahalad, C. K.; Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy & Leadership, v. 32, n. 3, pp. 4-9.

Prim, A.L.; Amal, M. Carvalho, L. (2016). Regional cluster, innovation and export performance: an empirical study. Brazilian Administration Review, v. 13, n. 2, pp. 1-26.

Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, v. 25, n. 4, pp. 348-349.

Puffal, D. P.; Puffal, C. W. (2014). A Evolução do campo de estudos de redes interorganizacionais: uma análise de publicações internacionais das relações entre empresas. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação, v. 1, n. 3, pp. 63-86.

Raposo, M. L.; Ferreira, J. J. M.; Fernandes, C. I. (2014). Local and cross-border SME cooperation: effects on innovation and performance. Revista Europea de Direccion y Economía de la Empresa, v. 23, n. 4, pp. 157-165.

Ribault, M.; Martinet, B. Lebidois, D. (1995). A gestão das tecnologias. (Coleção gestão & inovação). 1 ed. Publicações Dom Quixote, Lisboa - POR.

Ribeiro, H. C. M.; Santos, M. C. (2015). Perfil e evolução da produção científica do tema governança corporativa nos periódicos qualis/capes nacionais: uma análise bibliométrica e de redes sociais. Contabilidade, Gestão e Governança, v. 18, n. 3, pp. 04-27.

Ring, P. S.; Andrew, H. V. V. (1994). Development processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, v. 19, n. 1, pp. 90-118.

Ring, P. S.; Van De Ven, A. H. (1992). Structuring cooperative relationships between organization. Strategic Management Journal, v. 13, n. 7, pp. 483-498.

Sacomano Neto, M.; Truzzi, O. M. S. (2004). Configurações estruturais e relacionais da rede de fornecedores: uma resenha compreensiva. Revista de Administração, v. 39, n. 3, pp. 255-263.

Sadowski, B.; Duysters, G. (2008). Strategic technology alliance termination: an empirical investigation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, v. 25, n. 4, pp. 05-320.

Schommer, P. C. (2001). Gestão de Organizações Sem Fins Lucrativos: Algumas Questões Sobre as “Especificidades” do Campo e o Perfil Dos Gestores. Anais do Congresso Nacional das APAES, Fortaleza, CE, p. 12.

Sforzi, F. (2015). Rethinking the industrial district: 35 years later. Investigaciones Regionales – Journal of Regional Research, v. 32, n. 1, pp. 11-29.

Sherer, S. A. (2003). Critical success factors for manufacturing networks as perceived by network coordinators. Journal of Small Business Management, v. 41, n. 4, pp. 321-345.

Shugan, S. M. (2007). The editor’s secrets. Marketing Science, v. 26, n. 5, pp. 589-595.

Subramanian, R.; Ishak, S.T. (1998). Competitor analysis practices of US companies: an empirical investigation. Management International Review, v. 38, n. 1, pp. 7-23.

Tejeda-Lorente, A.; Porcel, C.; Peis, E.; Sanz, R.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2014). A quality based recommender system to disseminate information in a university digital library. Information Sciences, v. 261, n. 1, pp. 52-69.

Turrini, A.; Cristofoli, D.; Frosini, F.; Nasi, G. (2010). Networking literature about determinants of network effectiveness. Public Administration, v. 88, n. 2, pp. 528-550.

Vale, G. M. V.; Lopes, H. E. G. (2010). Cooperação e alianças: perspectivas teóricas e suas articulações no contexto do pensamento estratégico. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v. 14, n. 4, pp. 722-737.

Varadarajan, P. R.; Cunningham, M. H. (1995). Strategic alliances: a synthesis of conceptual foundations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, v. 23, n. 4, pp. 282-296.

Vermeulen, F.; Barkema, H. (2001). Learning through acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, v. 44, n. 3, pp. 457-476.

Verschoore, J.R.; Balestrin, A. Teixeira, R. (2016). Network management and associated firms’ outcomes: multilevel analysis in the Southern Brazilian context. Journal of Management and Governance, v. 20, n. 1, pp. 211-232.

Voos, H. (1974). Lotka and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v. 25, n. 4, pp. 270-272.

Waarden, F.V. (1992). Emergence and development of business interest associations: an example from The Netherlands. Organization Studies, v. 13, n. 4, pp. 521-562.

Williamson, O. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: analysis and Antitrust Implications. 1 ed. The Free Press, New York, NY.

Williamson, O. (1985), The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: firms, Markets. Relational Contracting. 1 ed. Free Press, New York, NY.