Leading the Diffusion of Intellectual Capital Management Practices in Science Parks
In: H. Shipton, P. Budhwar, P. Sparrow and A. Brown, Eds., Human Resource Management, Innovation and Performance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, London (2016)
19 Pages Posted: 2 Feb 2018
Date Written: December 1, 2016
This chapter discusses how leadership interventions in science parks can promote the diffusion of intellectual capital management (ICM) practices. It focuses on how operationalization operationalisation of the different social interactions leads to the accommodation of suitable mechanisms for diffusion of those practices associated with ICM among tenants in of science parks, under the theoretical notion of the ecosystem. This issue is becoming important in the case of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), as intellectual capital is likely to be the key source of competitive advantage (European Commission, 2006; Huggins & Weir, 2012). SMEs generally have advantages over established companies in terms of learning (Davenport, 2005; Lee et al., 2010). In order to prevent science parks from becoming just real estate brokerage entities, managers and policy makers need to undertake a range of boundary-spanning activities to optimise the mobility of intangible and tangible knowledge and resources. This notion reflects the fact that science park management could, and should, harness ideas for strategic change when they seek to unleash an SME’s entrepreneurial potential. This chapter explores the ways in which leadership interventions in science park ecosystems may orchestrate tenants’ management insight and strategic foresight. It also outlines their contributions to the development of ICM practices in SMEs by propagating co-specialisation opportunities whilst understanding the cognitive consonance of the various roles played by tenants and other stakeholders in the science park ecosystem, not simply by resource or geography. This chapter is useful to the directors and CEOs of science parks for four primary reasons: First, to clarify the relationships between the science park and its key players; second, to build an understanding of the different social mechanisms for diffusion of intellectual capital management practices; third, to understand the cognitive patterns in possible adaptation preferences and conditions within SMEs; and fourth, to educate managers about the types and roles of external agents’ involvements in the diffusion of ICM practices.
Keywords: Innovation Ecosystem, Intellectual Capital Management, Innovation Diffusion, Management Practices, Science Parks, SMEs
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation