Analysis of scientific production on interorganizational networks study field

Rafael Araújo Sousa Farias; Valmir Emil Hoffmann

doi:10.1108/inmr-02-2018-006

Analysis of scientific production on interorganizational networks study field

Farias, Rafael Araújo Sousa; Hoffmann, Valmir Emil 2018-06-06 00:00:00 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 © Rafael Araújo Sousa Farias and Valmir Emil Hoﬀmann. Published in the Innovation & Management Review. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Innovation & Management Review Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to pp. 92-115 Emerald Publishing Limited full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at 2515-8961 DOI 10.1108/INMR-02-2018-006 http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Administração Contemporânea (RAC), Revista de Administração Pública (RAP) and Revista Brasileira de Analysis of Gestão de Negocios (RBGN). The journal RAC stands out for having been the one that has increased its annual scientiﬁc 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 production 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. 93 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 “Thestrengthofweakties” (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 INMR criticized or just to be another reference in the text. The lack of this analysis can be considered a fragility of 15,1 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’sLaw 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. Keywords Network, Bibliometrics, Cluster, Alliance, Interorganizational relationship Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction The theme of interorganizational networks gained prominence in the 1970s, with studies by economists and sociologists based on the analysis of the relationship between companies and the formation of strategic business networks (Powell and Smith-Doerr, 1994). Subsequently, the need to develop studies in the business area was noticed, as there was dissonance between the terms adopted by sociologists and economists and those businesses (Halinen and Törnroos, 1998). Many studies demonstrate the importance of companies seeking interorganizational networks as a way to gain competitive advantage in the market (Atouba and Shumate, 2010; Balestrin et al.,2010; Carter et al., 2015; Kunzler and Bulgacov, 2011; Lai et al., 2012; Müller-Seitz, 2011; Turrini et al.,2010). Although the number of research studies has increased, especially in the past two decades, academic production has been dispersed and fragmented (Borgatti and Foster, 2003; Ferreira et al., 2014; Möller and Rajala, 2007; Moran et al.,2010). On this issue, Ferreira et al. (2014) afﬁrm that the theme has been analyzed from different lenses and contexts, to mention its formation process, transaction and management costs, the general characteristics, complexity, selection of partners, performance, the creation of value and longevity. The same fragmentation and dispersion of academic production can be observed in the Brazilian scenario (Balestrin et al.,2010, Cunha and Carrieri, 2003, Mascena et al., 2013), in which the subject can be considered current and, despite increasing interest, with theoretical development still not signiﬁcant (Balestrin et al.,2010). Even with the advances promoted by the literature, it can still be afﬁrmed that there is a lack of knowledge about the way in which the ﬁeld has been developed (Vale and Lopes, 2010) and, moreover, this gap is most evident when the research carried out in Africa and South America (Alves et al.,2013). Polysemy, a feature of the theme (Jarillo, 1988; Powell, 1990; Ring and Van De Ven, 1992), is another factor that emphasizes the importance of Analysis of analyzing how the subject is being studied. Although previous bibliometric works (Alves scientiﬁc et al., 2013; Balestrin et al.,2010; Cunha and Carrieri, 2003; Ferreira et al., 2014; Lima and production Campos Filho, 2009; Mascena et al., 2013) have demonstrated the attributes of the analyzed productions, they did not point out how their epistemological characteristics were related, what can be seen as a research opportunity. In addition, considering that the theme in the national scenario is recent, it can be afﬁrmed that there is a structured ﬁeld of studies in Brazil that needs to be studied, so that even new research problems may arise (Balestrin et al.,2010; Ferreira et al., 2014). In this context, the present study seeks to answer the following research question: RQ: 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. The study will be conducted through the application of bibliometrics. The use of this technique is justiﬁed by collaborating with the appreciation of the proﬁle and the pattern of growth of research on the subject, besides demonstrating methodological and conceptual aspects used to discuss the subject in Brazil. Studies that analyze the proﬁle of academic production and the epistemological foundations of a certain area of knowledge help in the development of scientiﬁc production, even if the subject already has legitimacy and maturity (Coelho et al., 2009; Meirelles and Gonçalves, 2005). In addition, bibliometrics allow the comparison between the production of different social sciences (Dias et al.,2013). 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. Referring to the delimitation, it is important to highlight the conceptual, temporal and spatial aspects of the research (Marconi and Lakatos, 2010). The study will address 77 scientiﬁc articles, published in eight journals in the area of administration, accounting and tourism classiﬁed with the Concept “A” (Qualis Capes). The years from 2006 to 2016 will be analyzed, and the central theme of the research is interorganizational networks. 2. Theoretical reference This chapter presents the theoretical basis of the main concepts addressed in the study. The chapter deals with the issues of interorganizational networks and bibliometrics, which together form the heart of the study. 2.1 Interorganizational networks The search for efﬁciency and the globalization of markets interfere in the competitiveness of companies, causing them to look for new ways of organizing themselves (Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Puffal and Puffal, 2014; Sacomano Neto and Truzzi, 2004). Current competitive circumstances require companies to often operate at low cost, being able to innovate and meeting market needs, delivering quality products and adapting quickly to changes in their INMR environment (Mitrega and Pfajfar, 2015). Often, traditional companies are too rigid and fail 15,1 to adapt to changes in time (Jarillo, 1993; Raposo et al.,2014). Faced with this rapidly changing scenario, companies can work together – networking – to improve the performance of all those involved in relationships (Gnyawali and Madhavan, 2001; Gulati, 2007; Mitrega and Pfajfar, 2015). The development of the concept of interorganizational networks was highlighted when authors like Aldrich and Williamson began to develop studies focused on the analysis of interorganizational relationships (Martes et al., 2006). Since then, once the changes in the market and the new forms of relationships between companies had already been perceived, networks became a strategic option to compete and a possible source of competitive advantage for its members (Dyer and Singh, 1998; Prim et al.,2016; Verschoore et al.,2016). There are many types of interorganizational networks, such as joint ventures, strategic alliances, industrial districts and local productive arrangements (Magalhães et al.,2009; Powell, 1990). These types have different concepts, but similar characteristics, as they are arrangements formed voluntarily by several agents (Gulati, 1998; Lastres and Cassiolato, 2003), which have strategic relevance for those involved (Gulati et al.,2000), aiming at obtaining or maintaining long-term competitive advantages (Gulati et al., 2000; Jarillo, 1988); there is consistency between business goals (Jarillo, 1988). It is also emphasized that the established relationships are, at the same time, dynamic and complex (Ring and Andrew, 1994). There are many advantages that can be gained by companies that participate in networks, such as a combination of information and skills (Amato Neto, 2000; Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Kraatz, 1998; Powell, 1987); use of know-how of other companies (Amato Neto, 2000; Gulati et al.,2000; Kraatz, 1998); division of the burden when carrying out technological research (Amato Neto, 2000); sharing of the risks and costs of exploring new or complex opportunities (Amato Neto, 2000; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004); reduction of costs of production, transaction, information and conﬂict resolution (Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Ebers and Grandori, 1997; Jarillo, 1988); resource sharing, improved procurement and resource generation (Amato Neto, 2000; Balestrin and Vargas, 2004; Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998; Barney, 1999; Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Human and Provan, 1997; Vermeulen and Barkema, 2001); strengthening of purchasing power by scale gain (Amato Neto, 2000; Koza and Lewin, 1998; Waarden, 1992); closer relationship with universities and state agencies (Human and Provan, 1997); adaptation to new scenarios (Casarotto and Pires, 1998); the achievement of objectives that could not be achieved in isolation (Dyer and Singh, 1998); and, ﬁnally, increased organizational learning and innovation, because of the dissemination of information and knowledge (Balestrin and Vargas, 2004; Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998; Dyer and Singh, 1998; Human and Provan, 1997; Powell, 1990; Vermeulen and Barkema, 2001). Despite their beneﬁts, interorganizational networks present risks, difﬁculties and disadvantages. From the empirical point of view, there is evidence of a signiﬁcant number of companies that fail to participate in this type of organization (Pereira et al., 2010; Sadowski and Duysters, 2008; Varadarajan and Cunningham, 1995). The strategic idiosyncrasies of each company can cause incompatibility between their actions, so there is the challenge of bringing together the interests of different entrepreneurs, so that the network helps each company to achieve its speciﬁc objectives, in addition to allowing everyone to participate in decision-making processes (Böhe and Silva, 2004). Although there are authors who point out that being involved in a network does not necessarily mean that companies lose their managerial and ﬁnancial autonomy Ribault et al. (1995),for Burt (2004) there is an ideal position in the network in which an actor obtains structural autonomy, which suggests that Analysis of if this position is not achieved, this autonomy is at least partly lower. In addition, there are scientiﬁc difﬁculties in assessing value creation arising from relationships, mainly because of the production complexity of its structure and the different interests of managers (Das and Teng, 2003; Sherer, 2003). Moreover, opportunistic behavior is a concern of companies that participate in networks, which can generate costs to create a structure of governance and supervision (Gulati et al., 2000). The fear of opportunistic attitudes increases the need for bureaucratic contracts and control by the organization’s governance (Williamson, 1985). Another obstacle identiﬁed is that managers have encountered difﬁculties in dealing with the complexity of these environments (Bastl et al.,2010; Subramanian and Ishak, 1998). As presented, networks can bring advantages and disadvantages to companies. This model of organization generates a space for the social approximation between the managers and enables open discussions among the difﬁculties and opportunities faced by companies (Perrow, 1992). This view of analyzing interorganizational networks as a social network is gaining ground in scientiﬁc research in administration (Machado-da-Silva and Coser, 2006; Marteleto and Silva, 2004; Molina-Morales et al.,2015; Molina-Morales et al.,2013; Sforzi, 2015). Thus, issues such as honesty, commitment, cooperation and trust are fundamental to the sustainability of relationships between companies (Padula and Dagnino, 2007), and the greatest barrier to the formation and growth of networks is the lack of trust between the parties and the fear of opportunistic behavior on the part of the partners (Böhe and Silva, 2004). 2.2 Bibliometrics Bibliometrics is a technique used in studies on the scientiﬁc production of a certain area of knowledge. It aims to raise, analyze, monitor, map and evaluate scientiﬁc publications, using qualitative and statistical techniques (Negra and Silva, 2013). Among others, it aims to identify trends, technical aspects and methodological procedures used by researchers in a given area (Negra and Silva, 2013). Bibliometrics comes from library science and information science, being characterized as an instrument of evaluation and analysis of scientiﬁc production (Glãnzel, 2014; Glãnzel et al., 2006). Bibliometrics was originally named as a statistical bibliography (Hulme, 1922), and the expression “bibliometrics” was created by Otlet (1934) (Araújo, 2006; Negra and Silva, 2013). However, the term became popular from Pritchard’s article (Pritchard, 1969) entitled “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?” (Araújo, 2006; Negra and Silva, 2013). Depending on the area of knowledge, researchers may come across a vast amount of scientiﬁc research, which may hinder the process of identifying relevant information, works and researchers (Tejeda-Lorente et al.,2014). This situation may lead researchers, especially the less experienced, to disregard information that could be signiﬁcant (Pereira et al., 2016). The relevance of bibliometric research explains the large number of studies of this type in Brazil, distributed by a wide variety of areas of knowledge (Araújo and Alvarenga, 2011). Some studies have analyzed, through bibliometrics, national studies on the subject of interorganizational networks (Alves et al., 2013; Andrighi et al., 2011; Balestrin et al.,2010; Cunha and Carrieri, 2003; Mascena et al.,2013). Bibliometric studies, in general, are based on three main laws: Lotka’s Law (scientiﬁc productivity), Bradford’s Law (periodic dispersion) and Zipf’s Law (word frequency) (Araújo, 2006). Lotka’s Law considers that few researchers, who are considered to be more prestigious in a certain area of knowledge, produce many works and, on the other hand, many researchers, considered of lesser prestige, produce few works (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005; Voos, 1974). INMR Lotka’s Law was developed from the discovery of Voos (1974): most of the scientiﬁc 15,1 literature in a given area of knowledge is produced by a small number of authors (Araújo, 2006). Bradford’s Law states that publications in scientiﬁc journals follow a pattern in which the “mechanism of success generates success” (Brookes, 1969). The ﬁrst articles produced on a particular subject tend to be submitted to a small group of journals and, if accepted and published, these journals attract further studies on the subject. Consequently, other scientiﬁc journals are accepting articles on the subject (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005). This law is related to the dispersion of scientiﬁc research published in periodicals, which may be divided in descending order of publications and classiﬁed into zones. The area made up of journals with more publications on a topic is called the nuclear zone (Brookes, 1969; Novaretti et al.,2015). The Bradford Law is useful, as it allows researchers to estimate the degree of relevance of scientiﬁc journals in a given area of knowledge (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005). Finally, the Zipf’s Law is based on the words occurrence frequency of a scientiﬁc text and the concentration of terms and keywords for a certain area of knowledge (Pao, 1978). The law states that a small group of words occurs many times throughout the text and many words are rarely used, and it is possible to list them in a ranking system (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005; Novaretti et al., 2015, Pao, 1978). There is a tendency for authors to practice the principle of least effort and to economize on the use of words, thus tending to use the same word several times (Araújo, 2006). Therefore, if the words used in a text are listed in decreasing order, the ﬁrst ones in the list will be indicative of the subject of the document (Araújo, 2006). 3. Methodological aspects This paper uses national journals with Concept “A” of the Qualis classiﬁcation (2016) for journal selection. In its assessment, the Qualis Capes classiﬁcation considers the indexing parameters of journals and their impact factor (using the JCR of ISI) (Andrighi et al., 2011; Ribeiro and Santos, 2015), which raises the quality of the evaluation (Beuren and de. Souza, 2008). The Concept “A” represents the highest quality stage of national scientiﬁc production (Nascimento and Beuren, 2011). In total, 12 “A” concept journals were identiﬁed. However, it was decided to analyze ten of them. The two unanalyzed journals – Cadernos de Saúde Pública and the Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society – do not follow the scope of the research. In this way, the following journals participated in the research: Brazilian Administration Review (BAR), Cadernos (EBAPE), Dados, Organizações & Sociedade (O&S), Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negocios (RBGN), Revista Contabilidade & Finanças (RC&F), Revista de Administração da USP (RAUSP), Revista de Administração Contemporânea (RAC), Revista de Administração de Empresas (RAE)and Revista de Administração Pública (RAP). The procedures suggested by Crossan and Apaydin (2010) for conducting bibliometric studies were adopted: determination of selection criteria for scientiﬁc articles and the use of search terms; obtaining and grouping of articles; tabulation and classiﬁcation of ﬁndings; and presentation and analysis of results. To select the articles, the following criteria were determined: Analysis of search of the works directly on the periodicals website and, when not possible, using scientiﬁc the Scielo electronic repository; production searches occurred in October 2016; in the searches, the “all text ﬁelds” option was used; temporary cut from 2006 to 2016; and the following terms were used to search for articles: alliance, cluster, network and partnership. The same terms were used by Andrighi et al. (2011). A total of 565 articles were identiﬁed, all available in a comprehensive manner and free of charge. The articles were downloaded and saved and then transported to a bibliographic management software (Mendeley®), in which the following ﬁlters were applied: At least one of the search terms should be present in the title, abstract or keywords of the article. After the titles and abstracts were read, the papers that were unaligned to the research theme were excluded – it was considered to be misaligned to the research theme a study that, although using the term “alliance”, “cluster”, “network” or “partnership”, did not do so in the sense of arrangements formed voluntarily by several agents, with strategic relevance for those involved, aiming at obtaining or maintaining competitive advantages in the long term with consistency between objectives and business purposes. After performing these procedures, 77 articles were selected to participate in the study, coming from eight different journals. These articles were read in full and their information was tabulated, according to Table I, with the help of Microsoft Excel 2007® software. The same criteria were used by Andrighi et al. (2011). These authors justify the choice of these categories: the “main term” category used by the articles is similar to that carried out by Carter et al. (2007) and has the objective similar to the work done by Gallon et al. (2007); the “constructs” analyzed are distinct but related to each other – their analysis can trace a parameter of hegemony of terms used; and the “research approach” and the “type of research” allow to analyze the methodology applied by the studies – the option to study the research methodologies was also carried out by Gallon and Cunha (2007) and Gallon et al. (2007). In the last part suggested by Crossan and Apaydin (2010), the articles should be analyzed. 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 Article Year of Research Type of Research title Journal publication Main term approach research Constructs strategies 2006 Alliance Qualitative– Descriptive Competitiveness Case –– – Cluster Quantitative Explanatory Cooperation Documentary Table I. 2016 Network Qualitative Exploratory Knowledge Essay Criteria used to partnership Quantitative Theoretical Learning Survey tabulate the essay Trust characteristics of Source: Elaborated by the authors (2016), from Andrighi et al. (2011, p. 38) articles Nepusz, 2006). This extension is able to manipulate networks with millions of vertices and INMR edges and provides a series of functions to analyze the properties of social networks, such 15,1 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). Thus, it summarizes and simpliﬁes a set of data and represents them in a two-dimensional graph (Lê et al., 2008). For this, the FactoMineR 1.34 extension was used (Lê et al.,2008). 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 the MCA were the “main term”, “research approach”, “type of research”, “constructs” and “research strategies” (Table I). 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. Thus, searches with more features in common will belong to the same cluster. 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 et al., 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. It should be noted that the greater the number of clusters formed, the greater the heterogeneity of its elements. 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. 4. Data presentation and analysis From the year 2002, according to Andrighi et al. (2011), there has been an expansion of publications on the subject. The authors highlighted the fact that the RAE journal published a special call (v. 46, n. 3, 2006) on the subject, as an indication that the subject was on the rise. However, only one article published in this issue focused on the topic of interorganizational networks. Moreover, this trend of growth was not conﬁrmed in subsequent years. The publications on the subject are characterized by stability, not growth. Table II shows the distribution of articles by journals and years. The work of Andrighi et al. (2011) identiﬁed articles in seven journals, while the present research detected articles in eight journals. 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 journals that had published the most on the subject (RAE and RAP) between 2000 and 2005 (Andrighi et al.,2011) had their annual average of publication reduced. The RAP was identiﬁed by that study as the main journal – ten publications, which represented 25 per cent of the total articles found. However, half of these ten publications were identiﬁed in the year 2000. After that, RAP started publishing one or two articles per year. This tendency of few publications remained in the analysis identiﬁed by the present research. Analysis of Year RAE RAUSP EBAPE O&S BAR RAP RBGN RAC Total (U) Total (%) scientiﬁc 2006 1 1 1 3 4 production 2007 2 1 4 7 9 2008 1 3 2 1 1 1 9 12 2009 1 3 2 2 8 10 2010 1 2 2 4 9 12 2011 1 2 1 2 6 8 2012 1 2 1 1 1 6 8 2013 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 11 14 2014 1 1 3 1 2 4 12 16 2015 1 1 1 3 4 2016 1 2 3 4 Table II. Total (U) 4 5 8 9 10 10 12 19 77 Distribution of Total (%) 5 6 10 12 13 13 16 25 100 articles by journals Source: Elaborated by the authors (2016) and years It should be noted that the journals BAR and RAC are edited by the National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Administration (ANPAD). As pointed out by Balestrin et al. (2010), ANPAD promoted two events, one in 2006 and another in 2008, which had in their central axis the theme of interorganizational networks, being: the XXIV Symposium on Management of Technological Innovation (2006), whose theme was “Innovation in networks and networks of innovation”, and the Organizational Studies Meeting (2008), which deﬁned “Intra and interorganizational networks and relationships” as one of its topics of interest. In addition to these events, ANPAD promotes others, such as EnANPAD and 3Es. The present study analyzed whether the articles published in the BAR and RAC had been ﬁrst published in the ANPAD events, to identify if there is a tendency for the articles to be published in ANPAD events and later to be published in articles also published by the association. Of the ten articles identiﬁed in the BAR, three had been published in ANPAD events; and, of the 19 articles published in the RAC, ﬁve had been published in ANPAD events. The so-called nuclear zone (Brookes, 1969; Novaretti et al.,2015) is composed of the journals BAR, RAC, RAP and 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). BAR and RBGN are the ones that have published the most studies on the subject in the past four years. It should be noted that the journals BAR and RBGN did not carry out special editions on the analyzed subject, thus, the publications identiﬁed come from the periodical editions. Regarding the period from 2013 onwards, to identify if the editors-in-chief of the BAR and RBGN have a research proﬁle focused on the theme, their Lattes curricula were analyzed. The BAR editors-in-chief of the period (Dr Jorge Manoel Teixeira Carneiro and Dr Salomão Alencar de Farias) do not have the interorganizational networks theme in their areas of interest. In turn, the RBGN editor-in-chief of the period (Dr João Maurício Gama Boaventura) has the interorganizational networks theme in his area of interest. However, it cannot be said that there is a relation between the areas of interest of the editors and the themes published in the journals edited by them. It is difﬁcult to identify which are the variables that most inﬂuence a topic to be published in periodical data. For example, when analyzing the information contained in the BAR, EBAPE, O&S, RAC, RAE, RAP, RAUSP and RBGN journals’ electronic pages, it is possible to note that they do not use the word INMR “network” to describe the objectives and scope of the journals, and even so, they are among 15,1 the national journals that published the most on the subject. 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. Research studies that address the themes “network” and “alliance” together are recurrent in the literature, as demonstrated by Lima and Campos Filho (2009). 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). In addition, the term “alliance” is widely used when studying the strategy theme (Cunha and Carrieri, 2003). By using the HCPC function of the FactoMineR extension, the articles were grouped according to their characteristics, and then three clusters were formed. The characteristics considered for the formation of the clusters were the “main term”, “research approach”, “type of research”, “constructs” and “research strategies”. Figure 1 demonstrates the clusters. 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, Figure 1. Hierarchical clusters half documentary and half survey research studies, being “cluster” the main term. Cluster 2 Analysis of is characterized by exploratory case studies with qualitative–quantitative analyzes. scientiﬁc Cluster 3 is characterized by theoretical tests. production It should be noted that, in the tabulation of data, the theoretical essays have always had the “research approach” and “research strategy” columns classiﬁed as “essay (research approach)” and “essay (research strategies)”, for simpliﬁcation. Thus, there was more cohesion between this type of research (noticeable in the graph analysis). In turn, it is seen that Cluster 1 and Cluster 2 have their elements more spaced apart. It can be stated, for example, that Article 71 (Cluster 1) has more characteristics in common with Article 23 (Cluster 2) than with Article 56 (also of the Cluster 2). Figure 2 represents a graphical demonstration of the correlation between the characteristics of the articles. There are two sets of characteristics that correlate positively. The “main term” and “constructs” used to conduct the researches, as well as the “research strategies”, “type of research” and “research approach”. The way this correlation takes place is clearer in Figure 3. Figure 3 shows a perceptual map resulting from the MCA, based on the characteristics of the articles. It should be noted that the term “partnership” was used only by one of the 77 articles analyzed. Thus, its representation in Figure 3 should be minimized. The term was added in the ﬁgure generation so as to not distort the representation of the other elements. Andrighi et al. (2011) stated that national surveys predominantly present this proﬁle: a qualitative approach with case studies in small companies. This proﬁle was maintained and the exploratory character is also veriﬁed. Balestrin et al. (2010) and Mascena et al. (2013) also wrote that, in the Brazilian context, studies on interorganizational networks are characterized as being, mostly, empirical and qualitative. In many cases, the articles in the area do not go much further into theoretical discussions (Mascena et al.,2013), sum up to report the experiences in their local context (Alves et al., 2013), are based on only one case and do not perform longitudinal analyzes (Cunha and Carrieri, 2003). According to Balestrin et al. (2010), one of the factors that may explain the large number of qualitative and cross- sectional studies in Brazil is given by the fact that research is predominantly exploratory – which indicates that the theme is still developing in the Brazilian scenario. A counterpoint to this justiﬁcation of Balestrin et al. (2010) may be the fact that many of these papers originate in master’s dissertations, whose term tends to be 24 months, which hinders research with a longitudinal cut and, in general, seem to result in more descriptive work. The term “network” was grouped with the “case” research strategy and with the “qualitative” research approach, as occurred in the work of Andrighi et al. (2011). In the same study, the term “cluster” was close to the “cooperation” construct and “quantitative” Figure 2. Correlation between the characteristics of the articles INMR 15,1 Figure 3. Perceptual map research approach, which is in line with the ﬁrst works that addressed the topic of networks in Brazil (Amato Neto, 2000; Casarotto and Pires, 1998). In the present research, the term “cluster” maintained the “quantitative” characteristic; however, it showed a smaller approximation to the “cooperation” construct. The closest constructs to the term “cluster” were “trust”, “knowledge” and “competitiveness”– in that order. This situation indicates that more work – when compared to Andrighi et al. (2011) – is collectively analyzing “clusters” and “trust”. Mascena et al. (2013) also point out that there is a strong relationship between the term “cluster” and the “trust” construct. This relationship is understandable, as one of the main theoretical approaches used to study clusters is precisely the trust existing between the actors of the cluster (Newlands, 2003; Perry, 2005). As pointed out by Alves et al. (2013), the topic of networks has been approached from two perspectives: transaction cost theory (TCT) and resource-based view (RBV). Referring to studies on interorganizational cooperation networks in the Brazilian context, Balestrin et al. (2010) also highlight the great presence of TCT and also the resource dependency theory (RDT). The TCT emphasizes that a network will be more efﬁcient through the cooperation of its actors to reduce costs and increase the network’s competitiveness; in turn, RBV and RDT emphasize the role of the network as a source of complementary “learning” and “knowledge” resources (Alves et al.,2013, Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). In this sense, it can be observed that, in Figure 3, the four constructs that are closest to the term “network” are precisely those that relate to TCT, RBV and RDT: “learning”, “cooperation”, “competitiveness” and “knowledge”. The existing relationship identiﬁed by the present research between the term “alliance” and the “knowledge” and “learning” constructs was also observed by Ferreira et al. (2014). As pointed out by Hamel (1991), one of the reasons that lead companies to form alliances is the search for learning. In addition, one of the main theoretical ﬂows that underpin alliances Analysis of research refers to the gain of knowledge and learning (Ferreira et al., 2014). scientiﬁc In addition, a word cloud was generated – Figure 4 – from the keywords of the 77 articles production with the objective of identifying the most frequent ones. The word cloud (Figure 4) does not separate the terms that make up a keyword and those that presented frequency greater than or equal to two were maintained. In this way, it can be seen that Zipf’s Law was not conﬁrmed. The 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. However, Zipf’s Law argues that all the words of all texts, not only the keywords, should be analyzed, as in the present research. Thus, the exclusive analysis of the keywords, although contributing to the understanding of the theme, presents itself as a limitation of the research. It should be noted that in Brazil, in the area of administration, one does not use a standardization of subjects, as it is perceived in other sciences, like in Economics. A map of the relations between the authors of the articles was made. In all, the 77 papers were produced by 153 different authors. Initially, an image with all authors was generated. However, the chart was unclear and showed irrelevant information. Then, a second image was generated considering only the works in which there was the participation of authors who produced two or more articles. Thus, Figure 5 represents the co-authorship and the relationships of 65 authors. The graph is programmed to show the proximity between the authors, using colors. Authors who have binding (edge) and equal colors are closer than those who have binding but present different colors. The resulting representation of the interactions had its vertices adjusted manually (with the tkplot function), to facilitate the visualization of the map. Figure 5 shows the network of co-authorship relations, and each vertex represents an author. 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. Figure 4. Cloud made with keywords of the analyzed articles INMR 15,1 Figure 5. Network of co- authoring relationships The centrality of the relations between the authors was analyzed and, in addition, the intermediation points of the network were identiﬁed. This information is represented by Figure 6. Figure 6 shows the results obtained. The closer to the red color, the greater the author’s centrality – considering the number of edges that point to the vertex, and the intermediation points are indicated by the arrows (Aquino, 2014). The concepts of centrality and intermediation should not be confused. It should be noted that the analysis of the intermediation points aims to identify the vertices (authors) that more often represent the shortest path between two other vertices in a network (Aquino, 2014). For example, the Figure 6. Centrality of the network with intermediation points author Manuel Portugal Ferreira is not characterized as a point of intermediation, unlike the Analysis of author Valmir Emil Hoffmann (Figure 6). This is because Hoffmann, although less central scientiﬁc than Ferreira, mediates between more authors and therefore, more often, is the shortest path production between two vertices that wish to connect. In addition to the centrality and intermediation analyzes, alpha centrality and large groups’ analyses were performed (Aquino, 2014; Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). Both the analyses did not produce results. The software was not equipped with enough information to determine the alpha centrality – which considers the importance of exogenous factors in determining centrality (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). Already in the case of the analysis of the large groups, it was not possible to be performed because the data did not form a directed network. The present study also analyzed all the references used by the 77 articles that compose the study, a procedure similar to that performed by Alves et al. (2013) and Ferreira et al. (2014). The main author of each of the references used was identiﬁed. Table III shows the main most recurrent authors. Among the 30 mentioned authors, Yin and Hair Jr. stand out for books related to fundamentals and research methodologies, that is, they do not research the area of Authors Frequency Powell, Walter W. 28 Porter, Michael Eugene 27 Granovetter, Mark S. 26 Gulati, Ranjay 25 Williamson, Oliver 22 Dyer, Jeffrey 21 Balestrin, Alsones 19 Castells, Manuel 15 Grandori, Anna 15 Ring, Peter Smith 14 Jarillo, José Carlos 13 Nohria, Nitin 13 Yin, Robert K. 13 Provan, Keith 12 Barney, Jay 11 Dimaggio, Paul J. 11 Doz, Yves L. 11 Ebers, Mark 11 Gomes-Casseres, B. 11 Borgatti, Steve P. 10 Burt, Ronald S. 10 Child, John 10 Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. 10 Hair JR., Joseph F. 10 Jones, Candace 10 Kale, Prashant 10 Marshall, Alfred 10 Podolny, Joel M. 10 Table III. Prahalad, Coimbatore K. 10 Most referenced Rowley, Tim 10 authors (as the main Source: Elaborated by the authors (2016) author of the study) interorganizational networks. Borgatti and Eisenhardt developed research on the topic of INMR interorganizational networks and also created works for methodological foundations. 15,1 Borgatti stands out for the work “UCINET for Windows: software for social network analysis” (Borgatti et al.,2002) and Eisenhardt for the work “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges” (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). Powell was the most frequently mentioned author (28) and had more different works referenced (9). In addition, the article “Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization” (Powell, 1990) was the most frequently mentioned work (18). 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 demonstrated in Table III are foreigners, with the exception of Balestrin. The most referenced works of the author are the article “A dimensão estratégica das redes horizontais de PMES: teorização e evidências” (Balestrin and Vargas, 2004) and the book Redes de cooperação empresarial: estratégias de gestão na nova economia (Balestrin and Verschoore, 2000). 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), “The strength of weak ties” (Granovetter, 1973) and “Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications” (Williamson, 1975). Finally, it should be pointed out that of the 100 references most used by the articles, 45 are books, and besides the work of Porter (1980), stands out “the society in network” of Castells (1996). 5. Conclusion The objective of the present work was 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. The central themes of this research were interorganizational networks and bibliometrics. It was sought to identify the proﬁle of the national scientiﬁc production on the networks subject, through the use of bibliometrics. In all, 77 articles published between the years 2006 and 2016, in eight journals, were analyzed. 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. 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. 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. Analysis of The choice of articles published in journals is based on the fact that these are a “certiﬁed scientiﬁc knowledge”, as the studies are peer-reviewed, and in the case of the Qualis “A” stratum, a production 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. It is perceived that this area of knowledge presents opportunities for future research. Future works can carry out analyzes that compare contents of national and international articles. In these studies, the realization of sociograms would demonstrate the relationship between authors and institutions. Moreover, the comparison between all the academic production on the theme (referring to the periodicals) would make it possible to ascertain which periodicals provide more spaces in their publications for the networks theme. Future research may seek to understand, within the topic of interorganizational networks, which are the hot topics. In addition, a table comparing the number of publications of each author, with the number of times that each author was cited, can contribute to the debate. It is suggested that research studies analyze which theories were used by the empirical studies. Studies can also perform comparisons between the performance of companies that have chosen to participate in interorganizational networks and companies acting in isolation. Another opportunity is to carry out studies that compare the performance of different interorganizational networks operating in the same segment. For example, the clusters of Calçados de Franca – SP and Calçados de Jaú – SP. As can be seen, there are many research opportunities on the subject, especially in the national scenario, in which research is needed to help understanding the phenomenon of interorganizational networks. References Alves, J.N., Pereira, B.A.D., Andrade, T. and Reis, E. (2013), “Conﬁança, aprendizagem e conhecimento nos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: diagnostico e análise dos avanços sobre o tema”, Revista Eletrônica de Administração, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 709-737. Amato Neto, J. (2000), Redes de Cooperação Produtiva e Clusters Regionais: Oportunidades Para as Pequenas e Médias Empresas, 1st ed., Atlas, São Paulo, SP. Andrighi, F.F., Hoffmann, V.E. and Andrade, M.A.R. (2011), “Análise da produção cientíﬁca no campo de estudo das redes em periodicos nacionais e internacionais”, Revista de Administração e Inovação, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 29-54. Aquino, J.A. (2014), R Para Cientistas Sociais, EDITUS, Ilhéus, BA. Araújo, C.A. (2006), “Bibliometria: evolução historica e questões atuais”, Revista em Questão, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 11-32. Araújo, R.F. and Alvarenga, L. (2011), “A bibliometria na pesquisa cientíﬁca da pos-graduação brasileira de 1987 a 2007”, Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, Vol. 16 No. 31, pp. 51-70. Atouba, Y. and Shumate, M. (2010), “Interorganizational networking patterns among development INMR organizations”, Journal of Communication, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 293-317. 15,1 Balestrin, A. and Vargas, L.M. (2004), “A dimensão estratégica das redes horizontais de PMEs: teorizações e evidências”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 8 (especial), pp. 203-227. Balestrin, A. and Verschoore, J. (2000), Redes de Cooperação Empresarial: Estratégias de Gestão na Nova Economia, 1st ed., Bookman, Porto Alegre, RS. Balestrin, A.,Vershoore,J.and ReyesJunior,E.(2010), “O campo de estudo sobre redes de cooperação interorganizacional no Brasil”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 458-477. Barkema, H.G. and Vermeulen, F. (1998), “International expansion through start-up or acquisition: a learning perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 7-23. Barney, J.B. (1999), “How a ﬁrm’s capabilities affect boundary decisions”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 137-145. Bastl, M., Grubic, T., Templar, S., Harrison, A. and Fan, I. (2010), “Inter-organisational costing approaches: the inhibiting factors”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 65-88. Baumgartner, H. and Pieters, R. (2003), “The structural inﬂuence of marketing journals: a citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67 No. 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, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 198-216. Beuren, I.M. and de. Souza, J.C. (2008), “Em busca de um delineamento de proposta Para classiﬁcação dos periodicos internacionais de contabilidade Para o Qualis Capes”, Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, Vol. 19 No. 46, pp. 44-58. Böhe, D.M. and 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.P. and Foster, P.C. (2003), “The network paradigm in organizational research: a review and typology”, Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 991-1013. Borgatti, S., Everett, M. and Freeman, L. (2002), Ucinet for Windows: software for Social Network Analysis, 1st ed., Analytic Technologies, Harvard. Brookes, B.C. (1969), “Bradford’s law and the bibliography of science”, Nature, Vol. 224 No. 5223, pp. 953-956. Burt, R. (2004), “Structural holes and good ideas”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 110 No. 2, pp. 349-399. Carter, C.R., Leuschner, R. and 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, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 15-28. Carter, C.R., Rogers, D.S. and Choi, T.Y. (2015), “Toward the theory of the supply chain”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 89-97. Casarotto, N. and 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, 1st ed., Atlas, São Paulo, SP. Castells, M. (1996), A sociedade em Rede: A Era da Informação – Economia, Sociedade e Cultura, 1st ed., Paz e Terra, São Paulo, SP. Coelho, A.L., de, A.L., Pavão, Y.M.P. and Bandeira-de-Mello, R. (2009), “Aproduçãocientíﬁca direcionada a visão baseada em recursos (Resource-Vased View – RBV) no Brasil e no exterior”, Revista Brasileira de Docência, Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração,Vol. 1 No.2, pp. 177-207. Crossan, M.M. and Apaydin, M. (2010), “A multi-dimensional framework of organizational Analysis of innovation: a systematic review of the literature”, Journal of Management Studies,Vol.47 scientiﬁc No. 6, pp. 1154-1191. production Csárdi, G. and Nepusz, T. (2006), “The igraph software package for complex network research”, InterJournal Complex Systems, 1695, Disponível em: http://igraph.sf.net (acesso em 2 November 2017). Cunha, C.R. and Carrieri, A.P. (2003), “Mapeando as relações interorganizacionais na teoria organizacional: garimpando os principais periodicos brasileiros sobre gestão”, Anais Do Encontro da Associação Nacional de Pos-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração - EnAnpad, Atibaia, SP, p. 27, Recuperado de www.anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnANPAD/ enanpad_2003/TEO/2003_TEO616.pdf Das, T.K. and Teng, B.S. (2003), “Partner analysis and alliance performance”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 279-308. Dias, T., Birochi, R., Deambrosis, A.M., Darosi, G.C.M. and 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, Recuperado de www.anpad.org.br/diversos/ trabalhos/EnEPQ/enepq_2013/2013_EnEPQ128.pdf Dyer, J. and Singh, H. (1998), “The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 660-679. Ebers, M. and Grandori, A. (1997), “The form, costs and development Fukuyama, dynamics of inter- organizational networking”, in Ebers, M. (Ed.), The Formation of Inter-Organizational Networks, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32. Fellows, I. (2013), Package ‘wordcloud’, Disponível em: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ wordcloud/wordcloud.pdf (Acesso em 2 November 2017). Ferreira, M.P., Storopoli, J.E. and Serra, F.R. (2014), “Two decades of research on strategic alliances: analysis of citations, co-citations and themes researched”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 18 (especial), pp. 109-133. Gallon, A.V. and 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, Recuperado de www.anpad.org.br/ admin/pdf/ENEPQ15.pdf Gallon, A.V., Souza, F.C., Rover, S. and Ensslin, S.R. (2007), “Estratégias metodologicas 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, Recuperado de www. anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnEPQ/enepq_2007/ENEPQ43.pdf Glãnzel, W. (2014), “Analysis of co-authorship patterns at the individual level”, Transinformação, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 229-238. Glãnzel, W., Debackere, K., Thijs, B. and Schubert, A. (2006), “A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy”, Scientometrics, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 263-277. Gnyawali, D.R. and Madhavan, R. (2001), “Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a strutuctural embeddedness perspective”, Academy of Management Rewiew, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 431-445. Granovetter, M. (1973), “The strength of weak ties”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp. 1360-1380. Greenacre, M. and Hastie, T. (1987), “The geometric interpretation of correspondence analysis”, Journal INMR of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 82 No. 398, pp. 437-447. 15,1 Guedes, V.L.S. and 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 tecnologica”, Anais do Encontro Nacional de Ciências da Informação – ENANCIB, Salvador, BA, p. 6. Gulati, R. (1998), “Alliances and networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 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. and Zaheer, A. (2000), “Strategic networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 203-215. Halinen, A. and Törnroos, J.A. (1998), “The role of embeddedness in the evolution of business networks”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 187-205. Hamel, G. (1991), “Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12 (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, 1st ed., Grafton, London. Human, S.E. and Provan, K.G. (1997), “An emergent theory of structure and outcomes in small-ﬁrm strategic manufacturing network”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 368-403. Husson, F., Josse, J. and Pagès, J. (2010), “Principal component methods – hierarchical clustering – partitional clustering: why would we need to choose for visualizing data?”, Applied Mathematics Department, Disponível em: www.agrocampus-ouest.fr/math/ (acesso em 2 November 2017). Husson, F., Josse, J., Lê, S. and Mazet, J. (2007), FactoMineR: factor analysis and data mining with R. R package version 1.04, Disponível em: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR (acesso em 2 November 2017). Jarillo, J.C. (1988), “On strategic networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 31-41. Jarillo, J.C. (1993), Strategic Networks: creating the Borderless Organization, 1st ed., Butterworth- Heinemann, Oxford. Koza, M.P. and Lewin, A.Y. (1998), “The co-evolution of strategic alliances”, Organization Science, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 255-264. Kraatz, M.S. (1998), “Learning by association: inter-organizational networks and adaptation to environmental change”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 621-643. Kunzler, M.T. and 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, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 1363-1393. Lai, C.S., Franke, T.F. and Gan, W.B. (2012), “Opposite effects of fear conditioning and extinction on dendritic spine remodelling”, Nature, Vol. 483 No. 1, pp. 87-91. Lastres, M.M.H. and Cassiolato, J.E. (2003), Novas Políticas na Era do Conhecimento: o Foco em Arranjos Produtivos e Inovativos Locais, 1st ed., RedeSist, Rio de Janeiro, RJ. Lê, S., Josse, J. and Husson, F. (2008), “FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis”, Journal of Statistical Software, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-18, Disponível em: www. jstatsoft.org/v25/i01/ (acesso em 2 November 2017). Lima, F.G.S.N. and Campos Filho, L.A.N. (2009), “Mapeamento do estudo contemporâneo em alianças e redes estratégicas”, RBGN – Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Negocios, Vol. 11 No. 31, pp. 168-182. Machado-da-Silva, C.L. and Coser, C. (2006), “Rede de relações interorganizacionais no campo organizacional de videira-SC”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 9-45. Magalhães, J.M., Daubt, C.G. and Phonlor, P.R. (2009), “Vantagens proporcionadas às pequenas Analysis of e médias empresas por meio da união em redes de cooperação no contexto do venture Capital”, scientiﬁc Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 583-603. production Marconi, M.A. and Lakatos, E.M. (2010), Fundamento de Metodologia Cientíﬁca, 7th ed., Atlas, São Paulo, SP. Marshall, A. (1890), Principles of Economics, 1st ed., MaCmillan, Londres. Marteleto, R.M. and Silva, A.B.O. (2004), “Redes e Capital social: o enfoque da informação Para o desenvolvimento local”, Ciência da Informação, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 41-49. Martes, A., Bulgacov, S., Nascimento, M., Gonçalves, S. and Augusto, P. (2006), “Forum – redes sociais e interorganizacionais”, Revista de Administração de Empresas, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 0-15. Mascena, K.M.C., Figueiredo, F.C. and 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, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 454-468. Meirelles, A.M. and Gonçalves, C.A. (2005), Uma abordagem multiparadigmática Para a disciplina estratégia. Anais do Encontro de Estudos em Estratégia (3es), Associação Nacional de Pos- Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração – ANPAD, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, p. 2. Mitrega, M. and Pfajfar, G. (2015), “Business relationship process management as company dynamic capability improving relationship portfolio”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 193-203. Molina-Morales, F.X., Belso-Martínez, J.A., Más-Verdú, F. and Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2015), “Formation and dissolution of inter-ﬁrm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 7, pp. 1557-1562. Molina-Morales, F.X., Capo-Vicedo, J., Martínez-Fernández, M.T. and 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, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 773-789. Möller, K.K. and Rajala, A. (2007), “Rise of strategic nets: new modes of value creation”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 895-908. Moran, M.R., Souza, F.F., Boaventura, J.M.G., Marinho, B.L. and Fischmann, A.A. (2010), “Alianças estratégicas: uma análise bibliométrica da produção cientíﬁca entre 1989 e 2008”, Revista de Ciências da Administração, Vol. 12 No. 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, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 428-433. Nascimento, S. and Beuren, I.M. (2011), “Redes sociais na produção cientíﬁca dos programas de pos- graduação de ciências contábeis do Brasil”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 47-66. Negra, C.A.S. and 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, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 1-10. Newlands, D. (2003), “Competition and cooperation in industrial clusters: the implications for public policy”, European Planning Studies, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 521-532. Novaretti, M.C.Z., Quitério, L.M. and Santos, E.V. (2015), “Gestão em unidades de terapia intensiva brasileiras: estudo bibliométrico dos últimos 10 anos”, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 16-33. Otlet, P. (1934), Traité de Documentation: le Livre sur le Livre, Theorie et Pratique, 1st ed., Editions Mundaneum, Brussels, BEL. Padula, G. and Dagnino, G.B. (2007), “Untangling the rise of coopetition: the intrusion of coopetition in a cooperative game structure”, International Studies of Management and Organizations, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 32-53. Pao, M.L. (1978), “Automatic text analysis based on transition phenomena of word occurrences”, INMR Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 121-124. 15,1 Pereira, B.A.D., Alves, J.N. and Silva, P.E. (2010), “O lado obscuro dos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: por que as empresas saem dos processos cooperativos?”, Espacios, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 25-27. Pereira, F.C., Verocai, H.D., Cordeiro, V.R. and Gomes, C.F.S. (2016), “Sistemas de informação e inovação: um estudo bibliométrico”, Revista de Gestão da Tecnologia e Sistemas de Informação, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 81-100. Perrow, C. (1992), “Small-ﬁrms networks”, in Nohria, N. and Eccles, R.G. (Eds), Networks and Organizations: structure, Form, and Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Perry, M. (2005), Business Clusters: An International Perspective, 1st ed., Routledge, New York, NY. Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. (1978), The External Control of Organization: A Resource Perspective, 1st ed., Harper and Row, New York, NY. Polanyi, M. (1958), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post Critical Philosophy, 1st ed., Routledge London. Porter, M.E. (1980), Competitive Strategy – Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, 1st ed., The Free Press, New York, NY. Powell, W.W. (1987), “Hybrid organizational arrangements: new forms or transitional development?”, California Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 67-87. Powell, W.W. (1990), “Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12 No. 11, pp. 95-336. Powell, W. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1994), “Networks and economic life”, in Smelser, N.J. and Swedberg, R. (Ed.), Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), “Co-creating unique value with customers”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 4-9. Prim, A.L., Amal, M. and Carvalho, L. (2016), “Regional cluster, innovation and export performance: an empirical study”, Brazilian Administration Review, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 1-26. Pritchard, A. (1969), “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 348-349. Puffal, D.P. and 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, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 63-86. Raposo, M.L., Ferreira, J.J.M. and Fernandes, C.I. (2014), “Local and cross-border SME cooperation: effects on innovation and performance”, Revista Europea de Direccion y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 157-165. Ribault, M., Martinet, B. and Lebidois, D. (1995), A gestão das tecnologias (Coleção gestão & inovação), 1st ed., Publicações Dom Quixote, Lisboa, POR. Ribeiro, H.C.M. and Santos, M.C. (2015), “Perﬁl e evolução da produção cientíﬁca do tema governança corporativa nos periodicos qualis/capes nacionais: uma análise bibliométrica e de redes sociais”, Contabilidade, Gestão e Governança, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 04-27. Ring, P.S. and Andrew, H.V.V. (1994), “Development processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 90-118. Ring, P.S. and Van De Ven, A.H. (1992), “Structuring cooperative relationships between organization”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13 No. 7, pp. 483-498. Sacomano Neto, M. and Truzzi, O.M.S. (2004), “Conﬁgurações estruturais e relacionais da rede de fornecedores: uma resenha compreensiva”, Revista de Administração, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 255-263. Sadowski,B.and Duysters,G.(2008), “Strategic technology alliance termination: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 05-320. Schommer, P.C. (2001), Gestão de Organizações Sem Fins Lucrativos: Algumas Questões Sobre as Analysis of “Especiﬁcidades” do Campo e o Perﬁl Dos Gestores, Anais do Congresso Nacional das APAES, scientiﬁc Fortaleza, CE, p. 12. production Sforzi, F. (2015), “Rethinking the industrial district: 35 years later”, Investigaciones Regionales – Journal of Regional Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 11-29. Sherer, S.A. (2003), “Critical success factors for manufacturing networks as perceived by network coordinators”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 321-345. Shugan, S.M. (2007), “The editor’s secrets”, Marketing Science, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 589-595. Subramanian, R. and Ishak, S.T. (1998), “Competitor analysis practices of US companies: an empirical investigation”, Management International Review, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 7-23. Tejeda-Lorente, A., Porcel, C., Peis, E., Sanz, R. and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2014), “A quality based recommender system to disseminate information in a university digital library”, Information Sciences, Vol. 261 No. 1, pp. 52-69. Turrini, A., Cristofoli, D., Frosini, F. and Nasi, G. (2010), “Networking literature about determinants of network effectiveness”, Public Administration, Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 528-550. Vale, G.M.V. and Lopes, H.E.G. (2010), “Cooperação e alianças: perspectivas teoricas e suas articulações no contexto do pensamento estratégico”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 722-737. Varadarajan, P.R. and Cunningham, M.H. (1995), “Strategic alliances: a synthesis of conceptual foundations”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 282-296. Vermeulen, F. and Barkema, H. (2001), “Learning through acquisitions”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 457-476. Verschoore, J.R., Balestrin, A. and Teixeira, R. (2016), “Network management and associated ﬁrms’ outcomes: multilevel analysis in the Southern Brazilian context”, Journal of Management and Governance, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 211-232. Voos, H. (1974), “Lotka and information science”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 270-272. Waarden, F.V. (1992), “Emergence and development of business interest associations: an example from The Netherlands”, Organization Studies, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 521-562. Williamson, O. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: analysis and Antitrust Implications, 1st ed., The Free Press, New York, NY. Williamson, O. (1985), The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: ﬁrms, Markets, Relational Contracting, 1st ed., Free Press, New York, NY. Further reading Hoffmann, V.E., Molina-Morales, F.X. and Martínez-Fernández, M.T. (2007), “Redes de empresas: proposta de uma tipologia Para classiﬁcação aplicada na indústria de cerâmica de revestimento”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 11 (n. especial), pp. 103-127. Sacomano Neto, M. and Paulillo, L.F.O. (2012), “Estruturas de Governança em Arranjos Produtivos Locais: um estudo comparativo nos arranjos calçadistas e sucroalcooleiro no estado de São Paulo”, Rev. Adm. Pública, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 1131-1155. Corresponding author Rafael Araújo Sousa Farias can be contacted at: farias-rafael@hotmail.com For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Innovation & Management Review Emerald Publishing http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/emerald-publishing/analysis-of-scientific-production-on-interorganizational-networks-DQv0kP0Knj

Loading next page...

References (132)

(2013)
Package ‘wordcloud’, Disponível em: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ wordcloud/wordcloud.pdf (Acesso em 2 November 2017)
V. Hoffmann, F. Molina-Morales, M. Martínez-Fernández (2007)
Redes de empresas: proposta de uma tipologia para classificação aplicada na indústria de cerâmica de revestimento
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 11
A. Turrini, D. Cristofoli, F. Frosini, G. Nasi (2009)
NETWORKING LITERATURE ABOUT DETERMINANTS OF NETWORK EFFECTIVENESS
Public Administration, 88
A. Bedeian (2004)
Peer Review and the Social Construction of Knowledge in the Management Discipline
Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3
Clóvis Machado-da-Silva, C. Coser (2006)
Rede de relações interorganizacionais no campo organizacional de Videira-SC
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 10
S. Sherer (2003)
Critical Success Factors for Manufacturing Networks as Perceived by Network Coordinators
Journal of Small Business Management, 41
C. Prahalad, V. Ramaswamy (2004)
Co‐creating unique value with customers
Strategy & Leadership, 32
B. Brookes (1969)
Bradford's Law and the Bibliography of Science
Nature, 224
Gábor Csárdi, T. Nepusz (2006)
The igraph software package for complex network research
, 1695
Dimas Fernandes, V. Ponte, H. Moura, M. Luca, Marcelle Oliveira (2008)
Os impactos da resolução n. 2.682 e dos programas de reestruturação do Sistema Financeiro Nacional no nível de provisionamento da carteira de crédito do setor bancário
Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 19
Marko Bastl, T. Grubic, S. Templar, A. Harrison, I. Fan (2010)
Inter‐organisational costing approaches: the inhibiting factors
The International Journal of Logistics Management, 21
J. Neto (2000)
Redes de cooperação produtiva e clusters regionais: oportunidades para as pequenas e médias empresas
Confiança, aprendizagem e conhecimento nos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: diagnóstico e análise dos avanços sobre o tema
Revista Eletrônica de Administração, 76
S. Human, K. Provan (1997)
An Emergent Theory of Structure and Outcomes in Small-Firm Strategic Manufacturing Networks
Academy of Management Journal, 40
(2001)
Gestão de Organizações Sem Fins Lucrativos: Algumas Questões Sobre as “Especificidades
K. Möller, A. Rajala (2007)
Rise of strategic nets — New modes of value creation
Industrial Marketing Management, 36
F. Andrighi, V. Hoffmann, Marcos Andrade (2011)
Análise da produção científica no campo de estudo das redes em periódicos nacionais e internacionais
RAI: Revista de Administração e Inovação, 8
(2007)
produção científica em capital intelectual: uma análise de 2000 a 2006
S. Lê, J. Josse, François Husson (2008)
FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis
Journal of Statistical Software, 25
M. Greenacre, T. Hastie (1987)
The Geometric Interpretation of Correspondence Analysis
Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82
K. Eisenhardt, Melissa Graebner (2007)
Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges
Academy of Management Journal, 50
Alsones Balestrin, L. Vargas (2004)
A dimensão estratégica das redes horizontais de PMEs: teorizações e evidências
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 8
G. Padula, G. Dagnino (2007)
Untangling the Rise of Coopetition: The Intrusion of Competition in a Cooperative Game Structure
International Studies of Management & Organization, 37
(2010)
O lado obscuro dos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: por que as empresas saem dos processos cooperativos?
H. Lastres, José Cassiolato (2010)
Novas políticas na Era do Conhecimento: o foco em arranjos produtivos e inovativos locais
, 8
(2002)
Ucinet for Windows: software for Social Network Analysis, 1st ed., Analytic Technologies, Harvard
H. Barkema, F. Vermeulen (1998)
International Expansion Through Start-Up or Acquisition: A Learning Perspective
Academy of Management Journal, 41
R. Gulati, N. Nohria, A. Zaheer (2000)
STRATEGIC NETWORKS
P. Laat (1997)
The Formation of Inter-Organizational Networks
Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization
Organizational Behavior, 12
W. Dugger (1987)
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
Journal of Economic Issues, 21
(2007)
Investigando os estudos etnográficos publicados nos anais do Enanpad: uma análise de 2000 a 2006
R. Subramanian, S. Ishak (1998)
Organizational Determinants of Exporting: Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Insights
Management International Review, 38
Steven Shugan (2007)
The Editor's Secrets
Marketing Science, 26
A bibliometria na pesquisa científica da pós-graduação brasileira de 1987 a 2007
Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, 16
An emergent theory of structure and outcomes in small-firm strategic manufacturing network
Academy of Management Journal, 40
S. Borgatti, P. Foster (2003)
The Network Paradigm in Organizational Research: A Review and Typology
Journal of Management, 29
Gordon Müller-Seitz (2011)
Leadership in Interorganizational Networks: A Literature Review and Suggestions for Future Research
International Strategy & Policy eJournal
F. Vermeulen, H. Barkema (2001)
Learning Through Acquisitions
Academy of Management Journal, 44
Fórum – redes sociais e interorganizacionais
Revista de Administração de Empresas, 46
M. Pao (1978)
Automatic text analysis based on transition phenomena of word occurrences
J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., 29
(2007)
FactoMineR: factor analysis and data mining with R. R package version 1.04, Disponível em: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR (acesso em 2 November 2017)
F. Molina-Morales, J. Belso-Martínez, F. Mas-Verdu, L. Martínez-Cháfer (2015)
Formation and dissolution of inter-firm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters
Journal of Business Research, 68
I. Beuren, J. Souza (2008)
Em busca de um delineamento de proposta para classificação dos periódicos internacionais de contabilidade para o Qualis CAPES
Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 19
Márcio Moran, F. Souza, João Boaventura, Bernadete Marinho, A. Fischmann (2010)
Alianças Estratégicas: uma análise bibliométrica da produção científica entre 1989 e 2008
Revista de Ciências da Administração : RCA, 12
E. Hulme (1923)
Statistical bibliography in relation to the growth of modern civilization
Economica
J. Magalhães, Cláudio Daudt, Patrícia Phonlor (2009)
Vantagens proporcionadas às pequenas e médias empresas por meio da união em redes de cooperação no contexto do venture capital
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 13
P. Varadarajan, M. Cunningham (1995)
Strategic alliances: A synthesis of conceptual foundations
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23
Keysa Mascena, F. Figueiredo, João Boaventura (2013)
Clusters e APL's: análise bibliométrica das publicações nacionais no período de 2000 a 2011
Rae-revista De Administracao De Empresas, 53
J. Josse (2010)
Principal component methods - hierarchical clustering - partitional clustering: why would we need to choose for visualizing data?
M. Mitręga, Gregor Pfajfar (2015)
Business relationship process management as company dynamic capability improving relationship portfolio
Industrial Marketing Management, 46
Mali Kunzler, Sergio Bulgacov (2011)
As estratégias competitivas e colaborativas e os resultados individuais e coletivos no associativismo rural em Quatro Pontes (PR)
, 45
O dilema de crescimento em redes de cooperação: o caso da Panimel
Gláucia Vale, H. Lopes (2010)
Cooperação e alianças: perspectivas teóricas e suas articulações no contexto do pensamento estratégico
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 14
Fernanda Pereira, Henrique Verocai, Vinícius Cordeiro, Carlos Gomes (2016)
SISTEMAS DE INFORMAÇÃO E INOVAÇÃO: UM ESTUDO BIBLIOMÉTRICO INFORMATION SYSTEMS (IS) AND INNOVATION: BIBLIOMETRIC STUDY
Strategic networks
Strategic Management Journal, 21
Ana Martes, Sergio Bulgacov, Maurício Nascimento, S. Gonçalves, Paulo Augusto (2004)
Redes sociais e interorganizacionais
Rae-revista De Administracao De Empresas, 46
Bm Sadowski, G. Duysters (2008)
Strategic technology alliance termination: An empirical investigation
Journal of Engineering and Technology, 25
Aino Halinen, Jan-Åke Törnroos (1998)
The role of embeddedness in the evolution of business networks
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 14
Matthew Kraatz (1998)
Learning by Association? Interorganizational Networks and Adaptation to Environmental Change
Academy of Management Journal, 41
H. Baumgartner, R. Pieters (2003)
The Structural Influence of Marketing Journals: A Citation Analysis of the Discipline and its Subareas over Time
Journal of Marketing, 67
W. Powell, Lorel Smith-Dor (2003)
Networks and Economic life
Economic Sociology, 4
(1998)
Competitor analysis practices of US companies : an empirical investigation
W. Powell (1987)
Hybrid Organizational Arrangements: New Form or Transitional Development?
California Management Review, 30
Michael Hahsler, K. Hornik, C. Buchta (2008)
Getting Things in Order: An Introduction to the R Package seriation
Journal of Statistical Software, 25
Rodrigo Azevedo (1999)
CASTELLS, Manuel. A Era da Informação: Economia, Sociedade e Cultura Vol. 2 - O Poder da Identidade. São Paulo, Ed. Paz e Terra, 1999.
Sociologias, 1
J. Jarillo (1993)
Strategic Networks: Creating the Borderless Organization
Sistemas de informação e inovação: um estudo bibliométrico
Revista de Gestão da Tecnologia e Sistemas de Informação, 13
Simone Wannemaker (2016)
Personal Knowledge Towards A Post Critical Philosophy
Jörg Raab (2018)
Powell (1990): Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization
Schlüsselwerke der Netzwerkforschung
Glessia Silva, Antonio Dacorso, V. Costa, L. Sério (2016)
Relationships and partnerships in small companies: strengthening the business through external agents
Bar. Brazilian Administration Review, 13
Jeffrey Dyer, Harbir Singh (1998)
The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage
Academy of Management Review, 23
(2013)
A construção do conhecimento sobre estratégia: uma análise da produção científica recente (2003-2011), na perspectiva de Burrel e Morgan
Álvaro Tejeda-Lorente, C. Porcel, E. Peis, Rosa Sanz, E. Herrera-Viedma (2014)
A quality based recommender system to disseminate information in a university digital library
Inf. Sci., 261
C. Lai, T. Franke, W. Gan (2012)
Opposite effects of fear conditioning and extinction on dendritic spine remodelling
Nature, 483
M. Ferreira, J. Storópoli, F. Serra (2014)
Two Decades of Research on Strategic Alliances: Analysis of Citations, Co-citations and Themes Researched
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 18
Alexandre Prim, M. Amal, Luciano Carvalho (2016)
Regional Cluster, Innovation and Export Performance: An Empirical Study
Bar. Brazilian Administration Review, 13
H. Ribeiro, Marianne Santos (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, 18
T. Das, Bing-Sheng Teng (2003)
Partner analysis and alliance performance
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 19
P. Ring, A. Ven (1994)
Developmental Processes of Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships
Academy of Management Review, 19
R. Gulati (1998)
Alliances and networks
Strategic Management Journal, 19
Alsones Balestrin, J. Verschoore, Edgar Junior (2010)
O campo de estudo sobre redes de cooperação interorganizacional no Brasil
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 14
Mark Granovetter (1973)
The Strength of Weak Ties
American Journal of Sociology, 78
Leadership in interorganizational networks: a literature review and suggestions for future research
International Journal of Management Reviews, 14
M. Novaretti, L. Quitério, Edzângela Santos (2015)
Gestão em Unidades de Terapia Intensiva Brasileiras: Estudo Bibliométrico dos Últimos 10 Anos
, 12
A. Pritchard (1969)
Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics
Journal of Documentation, 25
M. Koza, A. Lewin (1998)
The Co-Evolution of Strategic Alliances
Organization Science, 9
R. Burt (2004)
Structural Holes and Good Ideas1
American Journal of Sociology, 110
Bibliometria: evolução histórica e questões atuais
Revista em Questão, 12
Small-firms networks
Devi Gnyawali, Ravi Madhavan (2001)
Cooperative Networks and Competitive Dynamics: a Structural Embeddedness Perspective
Academy of Management Review, 26
The form, costs and development Fukuyama, dynamics of inter-organizational networking
D. Newlands (2003)
Competition and Cooperation in Industrial Clusters: The Implications for Public Policy
European Planning Studies, 11
植田敬子 (1992)
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism--Firms,Markets,Relational Contracting/Oliver E.Williamson(1985) (生活問題への経済学的アプロ-チのために--文献リストおよび書評紹介-1- ) -- (書評紹介)
B. Loasby (1979)
The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective
The Economic Journal, 89
Carlos Negra, A. Silva (2013)
Perfil bibliométrico da produção científica da revista brasileira de aprendizagem aberta e a distância no período de 2002 a 2012
, 11
Mário Neto, L. Paulillo (2012)
Estruturas de governança em arranjos produtivos locais: um estudo comparativo nos arranjos calçadistas e sucroalcooleiro no estado de São Paulo
, 46
G. Hamel (1991)
Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances
Southern Medical Journal, 12
W. Ouchi, O. Williamson (1977)
Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 22
Daniel Puffal, Clair Puffal (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, 1
C. Carter, R. Leuschner, D. Rogers (2007)
A Social Network Analysis of the Journal of Supply Chain Management: Knowledge Generation, Knowledge Diffusion and Thought Leadership
Journal of Supply Chain Management, 43
P. Ring, A. Ven (1992)
Structuring cooperative relationships between organizations
Southern Medical Journal, 13
(1996)
1996),A sociedade em Rede: A Era da Informação – Economia
W. Glänzel (2014)
Analysis of co-authorship patterns at the individual level
Transinformacao, 26
R. Gulati (2007)
Managing Network Resources: Alliances, Affiliations, and Other Relational Assets
On strategic networks
Strategic Management Journal, 9
(2003)
Mapeando as relações interorganizacionais na teoria organizacional : garimpando os principais peri odicos brasileiros sobre gestão
(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
C. Carter, D. Rogers, Thomas Choi (2015)
Toward the Theory of the Supply Chain
Supply Chain Management eJournal
F. Sforzi (2015)
Rethinking the industrial district: 35 years later
Investigaciones Regionales - Journal of Regional Research
R. Marteleto, A. Silva (2004)
Redes e Capital Social: o enfoque da informação para o desenvolvimento local
, 33
(2005)
Uma abordagem multiparadigmática Para a disciplina estratégia
F. Waarden (1992)
Emergence and Development of Business Interest Associations. An Example from The Netherlands
Organization Studies, 13
(2009)
A produção científica direcionada a visão baseada em recursos (Resource-Vased View – RBV) no Brasil e no exterior
(1998)
Redes de pequenas e médias empresas e desenvolvimento local: estratégias Para a conquista da competitividade global com a base na experiência Italiana
N. Nohria, R. Eccles (1992)
Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action
M. Crossan, Marina Apaydin (2010)
A Multi-Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature
IO: Productivity
F. Molina-Moralesa, Josep Capó-Vicedob, Teresa Martínez-Fernándeza, Manuel Expósito-Langab (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, 92
J. Verschoore, Alsones Balestrin, Rafael Teixeira (2017)
Network management and associated firms’ outcomes: multilevel analysis in the southern Brazilian context
Journal of Management & Governance, 21
Sabrina Nascimento, I. Beuren (2011)
Redes sociais na produção científica dos programas de pós-graduação de ciências contábeis do Brasil
RAC: Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 15
Henry Voos (1974)
Lotka and information science
J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., 25
M. Raposo, J. Ferreira, C. Fernandes (2014)
Local and cross-border SME cooperation: Effects on innovation and performance
Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, 23
Mário Truzzi (2004)
Configurações estruturais e relacionais da rede de fornecedores: uma resenha compreensiva
, 39
K. Debackere, B. Thijs, A. Schubert (2006)
A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy
Scientometrics, 67
J. Barney (1999)
How a Firm's Capabilities Affect Boundary Decisions
Sloan Management Review, 40
(1995)
A gestão das tecnologias (Coleção gestão & inovação)
F. Lima, Lui Filho (2009)
Mapeamento do Estudo Contemporâneo em Alianças e Redes Estratégicas
Revista Brasileira de Gestão De Negócios, 11
V. Guedes, S. Borschiver, Guedes Am (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
(2005)
Business Clusters: An International Perspective
Michael Porter (1980)
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
Estratégias metodológicas da produção científica em capital intelectual: uma análise de 2000 a 2006
Yannick Atouba, M. Shumate (2010)
Interorganizational Networking Patterns Among Development Organizations
Journal of Communication, 60

Publisher: Emerald Publishing
Copyright: © Rafael Araújo Sousa Farias and Valmir Emil Hoffmann.
ISSN: 2515-8961
DOI: 10.1108/inmr-02-2018-006
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

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 © Rafael Araújo Sousa Farias and Valmir Emil Hoﬀmann. Published in the Innovation & Management Review. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Innovation & Management Review Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to pp. 92-115 Emerald Publishing Limited full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at 2515-8961 DOI 10.1108/INMR-02-2018-006 http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Administração Contemporânea (RAC), Revista de Administração Pública (RAP) and Revista Brasileira de Analysis of Gestão de Negocios (RBGN). The journal RAC stands out for having been the one that has increased its annual scientiﬁc 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 production 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. 93 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 “Thestrengthofweakties” (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 INMR criticized or just to be another reference in the text. The lack of this analysis can be considered a fragility of 15,1 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’sLaw 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. Keywords Network, Bibliometrics, Cluster, Alliance, Interorganizational relationship Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction The theme of interorganizational networks gained prominence in the 1970s, with studies by economists and sociologists based on the analysis of the relationship between companies and the formation of strategic business networks (Powell and Smith-Doerr, 1994). Subsequently, the need to develop studies in the business area was noticed, as there was dissonance between the terms adopted by sociologists and economists and those businesses (Halinen and Törnroos, 1998). Many studies demonstrate the importance of companies seeking interorganizational networks as a way to gain competitive advantage in the market (Atouba and Shumate, 2010; Balestrin et al.,2010; Carter et al., 2015; Kunzler and Bulgacov, 2011; Lai et al., 2012; Müller-Seitz, 2011; Turrini et al.,2010). Although the number of research studies has increased, especially in the past two decades, academic production has been dispersed and fragmented (Borgatti and Foster, 2003; Ferreira et al., 2014; Möller and Rajala, 2007; Moran et al.,2010). On this issue, Ferreira et al. (2014) afﬁrm that the theme has been analyzed from different lenses and contexts, to mention its formation process, transaction and management costs, the general characteristics, complexity, selection of partners, performance, the creation of value and longevity. The same fragmentation and dispersion of academic production can be observed in the Brazilian scenario (Balestrin et al.,2010, Cunha and Carrieri, 2003, Mascena et al., 2013), in which the subject can be considered current and, despite increasing interest, with theoretical development still not signiﬁcant (Balestrin et al.,2010). Even with the advances promoted by the literature, it can still be afﬁrmed that there is a lack of knowledge about the way in which the ﬁeld has been developed (Vale and Lopes, 2010) and, moreover, this gap is most evident when the research carried out in Africa and South America (Alves et al.,2013). Polysemy, a feature of the theme (Jarillo, 1988; Powell, 1990; Ring and Van De Ven, 1992), is another factor that emphasizes the importance of Analysis of analyzing how the subject is being studied. Although previous bibliometric works (Alves scientiﬁc et al., 2013; Balestrin et al.,2010; Cunha and Carrieri, 2003; Ferreira et al., 2014; Lima and production Campos Filho, 2009; Mascena et al., 2013) have demonstrated the attributes of the analyzed productions, they did not point out how their epistemological characteristics were related, what can be seen as a research opportunity. In addition, considering that the theme in the national scenario is recent, it can be afﬁrmed that there is a structured ﬁeld of studies in Brazil that needs to be studied, so that even new research problems may arise (Balestrin et al.,2010; Ferreira et al., 2014). In this context, the present study seeks to answer the following research question: RQ: 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. The study will be conducted through the application of bibliometrics. The use of this technique is justiﬁed by collaborating with the appreciation of the proﬁle and the pattern of growth of research on the subject, besides demonstrating methodological and conceptual aspects used to discuss the subject in Brazil. Studies that analyze the proﬁle of academic production and the epistemological foundations of a certain area of knowledge help in the development of scientiﬁc production, even if the subject already has legitimacy and maturity (Coelho et al., 2009; Meirelles and Gonçalves, 2005). In addition, bibliometrics allow the comparison between the production of different social sciences (Dias et al.,2013). 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. Referring to the delimitation, it is important to highlight the conceptual, temporal and spatial aspects of the research (Marconi and Lakatos, 2010). The study will address 77 scientiﬁc articles, published in eight journals in the area of administration, accounting and tourism classiﬁed with the Concept “A” (Qualis Capes). The years from 2006 to 2016 will be analyzed, and the central theme of the research is interorganizational networks. 2. Theoretical reference This chapter presents the theoretical basis of the main concepts addressed in the study. The chapter deals with the issues of interorganizational networks and bibliometrics, which together form the heart of the study. 2.1 Interorganizational networks The search for efﬁciency and the globalization of markets interfere in the competitiveness of companies, causing them to look for new ways of organizing themselves (Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Puffal and Puffal, 2014; Sacomano Neto and Truzzi, 2004). Current competitive circumstances require companies to often operate at low cost, being able to innovate and meeting market needs, delivering quality products and adapting quickly to changes in their INMR environment (Mitrega and Pfajfar, 2015). Often, traditional companies are too rigid and fail 15,1 to adapt to changes in time (Jarillo, 1993; Raposo et al.,2014). Faced with this rapidly changing scenario, companies can work together – networking – to improve the performance of all those involved in relationships (Gnyawali and Madhavan, 2001; Gulati, 2007; Mitrega and Pfajfar, 2015). The development of the concept of interorganizational networks was highlighted when authors like Aldrich and Williamson began to develop studies focused on the analysis of interorganizational relationships (Martes et al., 2006). Since then, once the changes in the market and the new forms of relationships between companies had already been perceived, networks became a strategic option to compete and a possible source of competitive advantage for its members (Dyer and Singh, 1998; Prim et al.,2016; Verschoore et al.,2016). There are many types of interorganizational networks, such as joint ventures, strategic alliances, industrial districts and local productive arrangements (Magalhães et al.,2009; Powell, 1990). These types have different concepts, but similar characteristics, as they are arrangements formed voluntarily by several agents (Gulati, 1998; Lastres and Cassiolato, 2003), which have strategic relevance for those involved (Gulati et al.,2000), aiming at obtaining or maintaining long-term competitive advantages (Gulati et al., 2000; Jarillo, 1988); there is consistency between business goals (Jarillo, 1988). It is also emphasized that the established relationships are, at the same time, dynamic and complex (Ring and Andrew, 1994). There are many advantages that can be gained by companies that participate in networks, such as a combination of information and skills (Amato Neto, 2000; Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Kraatz, 1998; Powell, 1987); use of know-how of other companies (Amato Neto, 2000; Gulati et al.,2000; Kraatz, 1998); division of the burden when carrying out technological research (Amato Neto, 2000); sharing of the risks and costs of exploring new or complex opportunities (Amato Neto, 2000; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004); reduction of costs of production, transaction, information and conﬂict resolution (Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Ebers and Grandori, 1997; Jarillo, 1988); resource sharing, improved procurement and resource generation (Amato Neto, 2000; Balestrin and Vargas, 2004; Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998; Barney, 1999; Casarotto and Pires, 1998; Human and Provan, 1997; Vermeulen and Barkema, 2001); strengthening of purchasing power by scale gain (Amato Neto, 2000; Koza and Lewin, 1998; Waarden, 1992); closer relationship with universities and state agencies (Human and Provan, 1997); adaptation to new scenarios (Casarotto and Pires, 1998); the achievement of objectives that could not be achieved in isolation (Dyer and Singh, 1998); and, ﬁnally, increased organizational learning and innovation, because of the dissemination of information and knowledge (Balestrin and Vargas, 2004; Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998; Dyer and Singh, 1998; Human and Provan, 1997; Powell, 1990; Vermeulen and Barkema, 2001). Despite their beneﬁts, interorganizational networks present risks, difﬁculties and disadvantages. From the empirical point of view, there is evidence of a signiﬁcant number of companies that fail to participate in this type of organization (Pereira et al., 2010; Sadowski and Duysters, 2008; Varadarajan and Cunningham, 1995). The strategic idiosyncrasies of each company can cause incompatibility between their actions, so there is the challenge of bringing together the interests of different entrepreneurs, so that the network helps each company to achieve its speciﬁc objectives, in addition to allowing everyone to participate in decision-making processes (Böhe and Silva, 2004). Although there are authors who point out that being involved in a network does not necessarily mean that companies lose their managerial and ﬁnancial autonomy Ribault et al. (1995),for Burt (2004) there is an ideal position in the network in which an actor obtains structural autonomy, which suggests that Analysis of if this position is not achieved, this autonomy is at least partly lower. In addition, there are scientiﬁc difﬁculties in assessing value creation arising from relationships, mainly because of the production complexity of its structure and the different interests of managers (Das and Teng, 2003; Sherer, 2003). Moreover, opportunistic behavior is a concern of companies that participate in networks, which can generate costs to create a structure of governance and supervision (Gulati et al., 2000). The fear of opportunistic attitudes increases the need for bureaucratic contracts and control by the organization’s governance (Williamson, 1985). Another obstacle identiﬁed is that managers have encountered difﬁculties in dealing with the complexity of these environments (Bastl et al.,2010; Subramanian and Ishak, 1998). As presented, networks can bring advantages and disadvantages to companies. This model of organization generates a space for the social approximation between the managers and enables open discussions among the difﬁculties and opportunities faced by companies (Perrow, 1992). This view of analyzing interorganizational networks as a social network is gaining ground in scientiﬁc research in administration (Machado-da-Silva and Coser, 2006; Marteleto and Silva, 2004; Molina-Morales et al.,2015; Molina-Morales et al.,2013; Sforzi, 2015). Thus, issues such as honesty, commitment, cooperation and trust are fundamental to the sustainability of relationships between companies (Padula and Dagnino, 2007), and the greatest barrier to the formation and growth of networks is the lack of trust between the parties and the fear of opportunistic behavior on the part of the partners (Böhe and Silva, 2004). 2.2 Bibliometrics Bibliometrics is a technique used in studies on the scientiﬁc production of a certain area of knowledge. It aims to raise, analyze, monitor, map and evaluate scientiﬁc publications, using qualitative and statistical techniques (Negra and Silva, 2013). Among others, it aims to identify trends, technical aspects and methodological procedures used by researchers in a given area (Negra and Silva, 2013). Bibliometrics comes from library science and information science, being characterized as an instrument of evaluation and analysis of scientiﬁc production (Glãnzel, 2014; Glãnzel et al., 2006). Bibliometrics was originally named as a statistical bibliography (Hulme, 1922), and the expression “bibliometrics” was created by Otlet (1934) (Araújo, 2006; Negra and Silva, 2013). However, the term became popular from Pritchard’s article (Pritchard, 1969) entitled “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?” (Araújo, 2006; Negra and Silva, 2013). Depending on the area of knowledge, researchers may come across a vast amount of scientiﬁc research, which may hinder the process of identifying relevant information, works and researchers (Tejeda-Lorente et al.,2014). This situation may lead researchers, especially the less experienced, to disregard information that could be signiﬁcant (Pereira et al., 2016). The relevance of bibliometric research explains the large number of studies of this type in Brazil, distributed by a wide variety of areas of knowledge (Araújo and Alvarenga, 2011). Some studies have analyzed, through bibliometrics, national studies on the subject of interorganizational networks (Alves et al., 2013; Andrighi et al., 2011; Balestrin et al.,2010; Cunha and Carrieri, 2003; Mascena et al.,2013). Bibliometric studies, in general, are based on three main laws: Lotka’s Law (scientiﬁc productivity), Bradford’s Law (periodic dispersion) and Zipf’s Law (word frequency) (Araújo, 2006). Lotka’s Law considers that few researchers, who are considered to be more prestigious in a certain area of knowledge, produce many works and, on the other hand, many researchers, considered of lesser prestige, produce few works (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005; Voos, 1974). INMR Lotka’s Law was developed from the discovery of Voos (1974): most of the scientiﬁc 15,1 literature in a given area of knowledge is produced by a small number of authors (Araújo, 2006). Bradford’s Law states that publications in scientiﬁc journals follow a pattern in which the “mechanism of success generates success” (Brookes, 1969). The ﬁrst articles produced on a particular subject tend to be submitted to a small group of journals and, if accepted and published, these journals attract further studies on the subject. Consequently, other scientiﬁc journals are accepting articles on the subject (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005). This law is related to the dispersion of scientiﬁc research published in periodicals, which may be divided in descending order of publications and classiﬁed into zones. The area made up of journals with more publications on a topic is called the nuclear zone (Brookes, 1969; Novaretti et al.,2015). The Bradford Law is useful, as it allows researchers to estimate the degree of relevance of scientiﬁc journals in a given area of knowledge (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005). Finally, the Zipf’s Law is based on the words occurrence frequency of a scientiﬁc text and the concentration of terms and keywords for a certain area of knowledge (Pao, 1978). The law states that a small group of words occurs many times throughout the text and many words are rarely used, and it is possible to list them in a ranking system (Guedes and Borschiver, 2005; Novaretti et al., 2015, Pao, 1978). There is a tendency for authors to practice the principle of least effort and to economize on the use of words, thus tending to use the same word several times (Araújo, 2006). Therefore, if the words used in a text are listed in decreasing order, the ﬁrst ones in the list will be indicative of the subject of the document (Araújo, 2006). 3. Methodological aspects This paper uses national journals with Concept “A” of the Qualis classiﬁcation (2016) for journal selection. In its assessment, the Qualis Capes classiﬁcation considers the indexing parameters of journals and their impact factor (using the JCR of ISI) (Andrighi et al., 2011; Ribeiro and Santos, 2015), which raises the quality of the evaluation (Beuren and de. Souza, 2008). The Concept “A” represents the highest quality stage of national scientiﬁc production (Nascimento and Beuren, 2011). In total, 12 “A” concept journals were identiﬁed. However, it was decided to analyze ten of them. The two unanalyzed journals – Cadernos de Saúde Pública and the Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society – do not follow the scope of the research. In this way, the following journals participated in the research: Brazilian Administration Review (BAR), Cadernos (EBAPE), Dados, Organizações & Sociedade (O&S), Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negocios (RBGN), Revista Contabilidade & Finanças (RC&F), Revista de Administração da USP (RAUSP), Revista de Administração Contemporânea (RAC), Revista de Administração de Empresas (RAE)and Revista de Administração Pública (RAP). The procedures suggested by Crossan and Apaydin (2010) for conducting bibliometric studies were adopted: determination of selection criteria for scientiﬁc articles and the use of search terms; obtaining and grouping of articles; tabulation and classiﬁcation of ﬁndings; and presentation and analysis of results. To select the articles, the following criteria were determined: Analysis of search of the works directly on the periodicals website and, when not possible, using scientiﬁc the Scielo electronic repository; production searches occurred in October 2016; in the searches, the “all text ﬁelds” option was used; temporary cut from 2006 to 2016; and the following terms were used to search for articles: alliance, cluster, network and partnership. The same terms were used by Andrighi et al. (2011). A total of 565 articles were identiﬁed, all available in a comprehensive manner and free of charge. The articles were downloaded and saved and then transported to a bibliographic management software (Mendeley®), in which the following ﬁlters were applied: At least one of the search terms should be present in the title, abstract or keywords of the article. After the titles and abstracts were read, the papers that were unaligned to the research theme were excluded – it was considered to be misaligned to the research theme a study that, although using the term “alliance”, “cluster”, “network” or “partnership”, did not do so in the sense of arrangements formed voluntarily by several agents, with strategic relevance for those involved, aiming at obtaining or maintaining competitive advantages in the long term with consistency between objectives and business purposes. After performing these procedures, 77 articles were selected to participate in the study, coming from eight different journals. These articles were read in full and their information was tabulated, according to Table I, with the help of Microsoft Excel 2007® software. The same criteria were used by Andrighi et al. (2011). These authors justify the choice of these categories: the “main term” category used by the articles is similar to that carried out by Carter et al. (2007) and has the objective similar to the work done by Gallon et al. (2007); the “constructs” analyzed are distinct but related to each other – their analysis can trace a parameter of hegemony of terms used; and the “research approach” and the “type of research” allow to analyze the methodology applied by the studies – the option to study the research methodologies was also carried out by Gallon and Cunha (2007) and Gallon et al. (2007). In the last part suggested by Crossan and Apaydin (2010), the articles should be analyzed. 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 Article Year of Research Type of Research title Journal publication Main term approach research Constructs strategies 2006 Alliance Qualitative– Descriptive Competitiveness Case –– – Cluster Quantitative Explanatory Cooperation Documentary Table I. 2016 Network Qualitative Exploratory Knowledge Essay Criteria used to partnership Quantitative Theoretical Learning Survey tabulate the essay Trust characteristics of Source: Elaborated by the authors (2016), from Andrighi et al. (2011, p. 38) articles Nepusz, 2006). This extension is able to manipulate networks with millions of vertices and INMR edges and provides a series of functions to analyze the properties of social networks, such 15,1 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). Thus, it summarizes and simpliﬁes a set of data and represents them in a two-dimensional graph (Lê et al., 2008). For this, the FactoMineR 1.34 extension was used (Lê et al.,2008). 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 the MCA were the “main term”, “research approach”, “type of research”, “constructs” and “research strategies” (Table I). 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. Thus, searches with more features in common will belong to the same cluster. 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 et al., 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. It should be noted that the greater the number of clusters formed, the greater the heterogeneity of its elements. 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. 4. Data presentation and analysis From the year 2002, according to Andrighi et al. (2011), there has been an expansion of publications on the subject. The authors highlighted the fact that the RAE journal published a special call (v. 46, n. 3, 2006) on the subject, as an indication that the subject was on the rise. However, only one article published in this issue focused on the topic of interorganizational networks. Moreover, this trend of growth was not conﬁrmed in subsequent years. The publications on the subject are characterized by stability, not growth. Table II shows the distribution of articles by journals and years. The work of Andrighi et al. (2011) identiﬁed articles in seven journals, while the present research detected articles in eight journals. 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 journals that had published the most on the subject (RAE and RAP) between 2000 and 2005 (Andrighi et al.,2011) had their annual average of publication reduced. The RAP was identiﬁed by that study as the main journal – ten publications, which represented 25 per cent of the total articles found. However, half of these ten publications were identiﬁed in the year 2000. After that, RAP started publishing one or two articles per year. This tendency of few publications remained in the analysis identiﬁed by the present research. Analysis of Year RAE RAUSP EBAPE O&S BAR RAP RBGN RAC Total (U) Total (%) scientiﬁc 2006 1 1 1 3 4 production 2007 2 1 4 7 9 2008 1 3 2 1 1 1 9 12 2009 1 3 2 2 8 10 2010 1 2 2 4 9 12 2011 1 2 1 2 6 8 2012 1 2 1 1 1 6 8 2013 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 11 14 2014 1 1 3 1 2 4 12 16 2015 1 1 1 3 4 2016 1 2 3 4 Table II. Total (U) 4 5 8 9 10 10 12 19 77 Distribution of Total (%) 5 6 10 12 13 13 16 25 100 articles by journals Source: Elaborated by the authors (2016) and years It should be noted that the journals BAR and RAC are edited by the National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Administration (ANPAD). As pointed out by Balestrin et al. (2010), ANPAD promoted two events, one in 2006 and another in 2008, which had in their central axis the theme of interorganizational networks, being: the XXIV Symposium on Management of Technological Innovation (2006), whose theme was “Innovation in networks and networks of innovation”, and the Organizational Studies Meeting (2008), which deﬁned “Intra and interorganizational networks and relationships” as one of its topics of interest. In addition to these events, ANPAD promotes others, such as EnANPAD and 3Es. The present study analyzed whether the articles published in the BAR and RAC had been ﬁrst published in the ANPAD events, to identify if there is a tendency for the articles to be published in ANPAD events and later to be published in articles also published by the association. Of the ten articles identiﬁed in the BAR, three had been published in ANPAD events; and, of the 19 articles published in the RAC, ﬁve had been published in ANPAD events. The so-called nuclear zone (Brookes, 1969; Novaretti et al.,2015) is composed of the journals BAR, RAC, RAP and 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). BAR and RBGN are the ones that have published the most studies on the subject in the past four years. It should be noted that the journals BAR and RBGN did not carry out special editions on the analyzed subject, thus, the publications identiﬁed come from the periodical editions. Regarding the period from 2013 onwards, to identify if the editors-in-chief of the BAR and RBGN have a research proﬁle focused on the theme, their Lattes curricula were analyzed. The BAR editors-in-chief of the period (Dr Jorge Manoel Teixeira Carneiro and Dr Salomão Alencar de Farias) do not have the interorganizational networks theme in their areas of interest. In turn, the RBGN editor-in-chief of the period (Dr João Maurício Gama Boaventura) has the interorganizational networks theme in his area of interest. However, it cannot be said that there is a relation between the areas of interest of the editors and the themes published in the journals edited by them. It is difﬁcult to identify which are the variables that most inﬂuence a topic to be published in periodical data. For example, when analyzing the information contained in the BAR, EBAPE, O&S, RAC, RAE, RAP, RAUSP and RBGN journals’ electronic pages, it is possible to note that they do not use the word INMR “network” to describe the objectives and scope of the journals, and even so, they are among 15,1 the national journals that published the most on the subject. 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. Research studies that address the themes “network” and “alliance” together are recurrent in the literature, as demonstrated by Lima and Campos Filho (2009). 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). In addition, the term “alliance” is widely used when studying the strategy theme (Cunha and Carrieri, 2003). By using the HCPC function of the FactoMineR extension, the articles were grouped according to their characteristics, and then three clusters were formed. The characteristics considered for the formation of the clusters were the “main term”, “research approach”, “type of research”, “constructs” and “research strategies”. Figure 1 demonstrates the clusters. 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, Figure 1. Hierarchical clusters half documentary and half survey research studies, being “cluster” the main term. Cluster 2 Analysis of is characterized by exploratory case studies with qualitative–quantitative analyzes. scientiﬁc Cluster 3 is characterized by theoretical tests. production It should be noted that, in the tabulation of data, the theoretical essays have always had the “research approach” and “research strategy” columns classiﬁed as “essay (research approach)” and “essay (research strategies)”, for simpliﬁcation. Thus, there was more cohesion between this type of research (noticeable in the graph analysis). In turn, it is seen that Cluster 1 and Cluster 2 have their elements more spaced apart. It can be stated, for example, that Article 71 (Cluster 1) has more characteristics in common with Article 23 (Cluster 2) than with Article 56 (also of the Cluster 2). Figure 2 represents a graphical demonstration of the correlation between the characteristics of the articles. There are two sets of characteristics that correlate positively. The “main term” and “constructs” used to conduct the researches, as well as the “research strategies”, “type of research” and “research approach”. The way this correlation takes place is clearer in Figure 3. Figure 3 shows a perceptual map resulting from the MCA, based on the characteristics of the articles. It should be noted that the term “partnership” was used only by one of the 77 articles analyzed. Thus, its representation in Figure 3 should be minimized. The term was added in the ﬁgure generation so as to not distort the representation of the other elements. Andrighi et al. (2011) stated that national surveys predominantly present this proﬁle: a qualitative approach with case studies in small companies. This proﬁle was maintained and the exploratory character is also veriﬁed. Balestrin et al. (2010) and Mascena et al. (2013) also wrote that, in the Brazilian context, studies on interorganizational networks are characterized as being, mostly, empirical and qualitative. In many cases, the articles in the area do not go much further into theoretical discussions (Mascena et al.,2013), sum up to report the experiences in their local context (Alves et al., 2013), are based on only one case and do not perform longitudinal analyzes (Cunha and Carrieri, 2003). According to Balestrin et al. (2010), one of the factors that may explain the large number of qualitative and cross- sectional studies in Brazil is given by the fact that research is predominantly exploratory – which indicates that the theme is still developing in the Brazilian scenario. A counterpoint to this justiﬁcation of Balestrin et al. (2010) may be the fact that many of these papers originate in master’s dissertations, whose term tends to be 24 months, which hinders research with a longitudinal cut and, in general, seem to result in more descriptive work. The term “network” was grouped with the “case” research strategy and with the “qualitative” research approach, as occurred in the work of Andrighi et al. (2011). In the same study, the term “cluster” was close to the “cooperation” construct and “quantitative” Figure 2. Correlation between the characteristics of the articles INMR 15,1 Figure 3. Perceptual map research approach, which is in line with the ﬁrst works that addressed the topic of networks in Brazil (Amato Neto, 2000; Casarotto and Pires, 1998). In the present research, the term “cluster” maintained the “quantitative” characteristic; however, it showed a smaller approximation to the “cooperation” construct. The closest constructs to the term “cluster” were “trust”, “knowledge” and “competitiveness”– in that order. This situation indicates that more work – when compared to Andrighi et al. (2011) – is collectively analyzing “clusters” and “trust”. Mascena et al. (2013) also point out that there is a strong relationship between the term “cluster” and the “trust” construct. This relationship is understandable, as one of the main theoretical approaches used to study clusters is precisely the trust existing between the actors of the cluster (Newlands, 2003; Perry, 2005). As pointed out by Alves et al. (2013), the topic of networks has been approached from two perspectives: transaction cost theory (TCT) and resource-based view (RBV). Referring to studies on interorganizational cooperation networks in the Brazilian context, Balestrin et al. (2010) also highlight the great presence of TCT and also the resource dependency theory (RDT). The TCT emphasizes that a network will be more efﬁcient through the cooperation of its actors to reduce costs and increase the network’s competitiveness; in turn, RBV and RDT emphasize the role of the network as a source of complementary “learning” and “knowledge” resources (Alves et al.,2013, Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). In this sense, it can be observed that, in Figure 3, the four constructs that are closest to the term “network” are precisely those that relate to TCT, RBV and RDT: “learning”, “cooperation”, “competitiveness” and “knowledge”. The existing relationship identiﬁed by the present research between the term “alliance” and the “knowledge” and “learning” constructs was also observed by Ferreira et al. (2014). As pointed out by Hamel (1991), one of the reasons that lead companies to form alliances is the search for learning. In addition, one of the main theoretical ﬂows that underpin alliances Analysis of research refers to the gain of knowledge and learning (Ferreira et al., 2014). scientiﬁc In addition, a word cloud was generated – Figure 4 – from the keywords of the 77 articles production with the objective of identifying the most frequent ones. The word cloud (Figure 4) does not separate the terms that make up a keyword and those that presented frequency greater than or equal to two were maintained. In this way, it can be seen that Zipf’s Law was not conﬁrmed. The 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. However, Zipf’s Law argues that all the words of all texts, not only the keywords, should be analyzed, as in the present research. Thus, the exclusive analysis of the keywords, although contributing to the understanding of the theme, presents itself as a limitation of the research. It should be noted that in Brazil, in the area of administration, one does not use a standardization of subjects, as it is perceived in other sciences, like in Economics. A map of the relations between the authors of the articles was made. In all, the 77 papers were produced by 153 different authors. Initially, an image with all authors was generated. However, the chart was unclear and showed irrelevant information. Then, a second image was generated considering only the works in which there was the participation of authors who produced two or more articles. Thus, Figure 5 represents the co-authorship and the relationships of 65 authors. The graph is programmed to show the proximity between the authors, using colors. Authors who have binding (edge) and equal colors are closer than those who have binding but present different colors. The resulting representation of the interactions had its vertices adjusted manually (with the tkplot function), to facilitate the visualization of the map. Figure 5 shows the network of co-authorship relations, and each vertex represents an author. 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. Figure 4. Cloud made with keywords of the analyzed articles INMR 15,1 Figure 5. Network of co- authoring relationships The centrality of the relations between the authors was analyzed and, in addition, the intermediation points of the network were identiﬁed. This information is represented by Figure 6. Figure 6 shows the results obtained. The closer to the red color, the greater the author’s centrality – considering the number of edges that point to the vertex, and the intermediation points are indicated by the arrows (Aquino, 2014). The concepts of centrality and intermediation should not be confused. It should be noted that the analysis of the intermediation points aims to identify the vertices (authors) that more often represent the shortest path between two other vertices in a network (Aquino, 2014). For example, the Figure 6. Centrality of the network with intermediation points author Manuel Portugal Ferreira is not characterized as a point of intermediation, unlike the Analysis of author Valmir Emil Hoffmann (Figure 6). This is because Hoffmann, although less central scientiﬁc than Ferreira, mediates between more authors and therefore, more often, is the shortest path production between two vertices that wish to connect. In addition to the centrality and intermediation analyzes, alpha centrality and large groups’ analyses were performed (Aquino, 2014; Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). Both the analyses did not produce results. The software was not equipped with enough information to determine the alpha centrality – which considers the importance of exogenous factors in determining centrality (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). Already in the case of the analysis of the large groups, it was not possible to be performed because the data did not form a directed network. The present study also analyzed all the references used by the 77 articles that compose the study, a procedure similar to that performed by Alves et al. (2013) and Ferreira et al. (2014). The main author of each of the references used was identiﬁed. Table III shows the main most recurrent authors. Among the 30 mentioned authors, Yin and Hair Jr. stand out for books related to fundamentals and research methodologies, that is, they do not research the area of Authors Frequency Powell, Walter W. 28 Porter, Michael Eugene 27 Granovetter, Mark S. 26 Gulati, Ranjay 25 Williamson, Oliver 22 Dyer, Jeffrey 21 Balestrin, Alsones 19 Castells, Manuel 15 Grandori, Anna 15 Ring, Peter Smith 14 Jarillo, José Carlos 13 Nohria, Nitin 13 Yin, Robert K. 13 Provan, Keith 12 Barney, Jay 11 Dimaggio, Paul J. 11 Doz, Yves L. 11 Ebers, Mark 11 Gomes-Casseres, B. 11 Borgatti, Steve P. 10 Burt, Ronald S. 10 Child, John 10 Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. 10 Hair JR., Joseph F. 10 Jones, Candace 10 Kale, Prashant 10 Marshall, Alfred 10 Podolny, Joel M. 10 Table III. Prahalad, Coimbatore K. 10 Most referenced Rowley, Tim 10 authors (as the main Source: Elaborated by the authors (2016) author of the study) interorganizational networks. Borgatti and Eisenhardt developed research on the topic of INMR interorganizational networks and also created works for methodological foundations. 15,1 Borgatti stands out for the work “UCINET for Windows: software for social network analysis” (Borgatti et al.,2002) and Eisenhardt for the work “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges” (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). Powell was the most frequently mentioned author (28) and had more different works referenced (9). In addition, the article “Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization” (Powell, 1990) was the most frequently mentioned work (18). 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 demonstrated in Table III are foreigners, with the exception of Balestrin. The most referenced works of the author are the article “A dimensão estratégica das redes horizontais de PMES: teorização e evidências” (Balestrin and Vargas, 2004) and the book Redes de cooperação empresarial: estratégias de gestão na nova economia (Balestrin and Verschoore, 2000). 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), “The strength of weak ties” (Granovetter, 1973) and “Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications” (Williamson, 1975). Finally, it should be pointed out that of the 100 references most used by the articles, 45 are books, and besides the work of Porter (1980), stands out “the society in network” of Castells (1996). 5. Conclusion The objective of the present work was 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. The central themes of this research were interorganizational networks and bibliometrics. It was sought to identify the proﬁle of the national scientiﬁc production on the networks subject, through the use of bibliometrics. In all, 77 articles published between the years 2006 and 2016, in eight journals, were analyzed. 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. 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. 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. Analysis of The choice of articles published in journals is based on the fact that these are a “certiﬁed scientiﬁc knowledge”, as the studies are peer-reviewed, and in the case of the Qualis “A” stratum, a production 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. It is perceived that this area of knowledge presents opportunities for future research. Future works can carry out analyzes that compare contents of national and international articles. In these studies, the realization of sociograms would demonstrate the relationship between authors and institutions. Moreover, the comparison between all the academic production on the theme (referring to the periodicals) would make it possible to ascertain which periodicals provide more spaces in their publications for the networks theme. Future research may seek to understand, within the topic of interorganizational networks, which are the hot topics. In addition, a table comparing the number of publications of each author, with the number of times that each author was cited, can contribute to the debate. It is suggested that research studies analyze which theories were used by the empirical studies. Studies can also perform comparisons between the performance of companies that have chosen to participate in interorganizational networks and companies acting in isolation. Another opportunity is to carry out studies that compare the performance of different interorganizational networks operating in the same segment. For example, the clusters of Calçados de Franca – SP and Calçados de Jaú – SP. As can be seen, there are many research opportunities on the subject, especially in the national scenario, in which research is needed to help understanding the phenomenon of interorganizational networks. References Alves, J.N., Pereira, B.A.D., Andrade, T. and Reis, E. (2013), “Conﬁança, aprendizagem e conhecimento nos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: diagnostico e análise dos avanços sobre o tema”, Revista Eletrônica de Administração, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 709-737. Amato Neto, J. (2000), Redes de Cooperação Produtiva e Clusters Regionais: Oportunidades Para as Pequenas e Médias Empresas, 1st ed., Atlas, São Paulo, SP. Andrighi, F.F., Hoffmann, V.E. and Andrade, M.A.R. (2011), “Análise da produção cientíﬁca no campo de estudo das redes em periodicos nacionais e internacionais”, Revista de Administração e Inovação, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 29-54. Aquino, J.A. (2014), R Para Cientistas Sociais, EDITUS, Ilhéus, BA. Araújo, C.A. (2006), “Bibliometria: evolução historica e questões atuais”, Revista em Questão, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 11-32. Araújo, R.F. and Alvarenga, L. (2011), “A bibliometria na pesquisa cientíﬁca da pos-graduação brasileira de 1987 a 2007”, Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, Vol. 16 No. 31, pp. 51-70. Atouba, Y. and Shumate, M. (2010), “Interorganizational networking patterns among development INMR organizations”, Journal of Communication, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 293-317. 15,1 Balestrin, A. and Vargas, L.M. (2004), “A dimensão estratégica das redes horizontais de PMEs: teorizações e evidências”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 8 (especial), pp. 203-227. Balestrin, A. and Verschoore, J. (2000), Redes de Cooperação Empresarial: Estratégias de Gestão na Nova Economia, 1st ed., Bookman, Porto Alegre, RS. Balestrin, A.,Vershoore,J.and ReyesJunior,E.(2010), “O campo de estudo sobre redes de cooperação interorganizacional no Brasil”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 458-477. Barkema, H.G. and Vermeulen, F. (1998), “International expansion through start-up or acquisition: a learning perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 7-23. Barney, J.B. (1999), “How a ﬁrm’s capabilities affect boundary decisions”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 137-145. Bastl, M., Grubic, T., Templar, S., Harrison, A. and Fan, I. (2010), “Inter-organisational costing approaches: the inhibiting factors”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 65-88. Baumgartner, H. and Pieters, R. (2003), “The structural inﬂuence of marketing journals: a citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67 No. 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, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 198-216. Beuren, I.M. and de. Souza, J.C. (2008), “Em busca de um delineamento de proposta Para classiﬁcação dos periodicos internacionais de contabilidade Para o Qualis Capes”, Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, Vol. 19 No. 46, pp. 44-58. Böhe, D.M. and 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.P. and Foster, P.C. (2003), “The network paradigm in organizational research: a review and typology”, Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 991-1013. Borgatti, S., Everett, M. and Freeman, L. (2002), Ucinet for Windows: software for Social Network Analysis, 1st ed., Analytic Technologies, Harvard. Brookes, B.C. (1969), “Bradford’s law and the bibliography of science”, Nature, Vol. 224 No. 5223, pp. 953-956. Burt, R. (2004), “Structural holes and good ideas”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 110 No. 2, pp. 349-399. Carter, C.R., Leuschner, R. and 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, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 15-28. Carter, C.R., Rogers, D.S. and Choi, T.Y. (2015), “Toward the theory of the supply chain”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 89-97. Casarotto, N. and 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, 1st ed., Atlas, São Paulo, SP. Castells, M. (1996), A sociedade em Rede: A Era da Informação – Economia, Sociedade e Cultura, 1st ed., Paz e Terra, São Paulo, SP. Coelho, A.L., de, A.L., Pavão, Y.M.P. and Bandeira-de-Mello, R. (2009), “Aproduçãocientíﬁca direcionada a visão baseada em recursos (Resource-Vased View – RBV) no Brasil e no exterior”, Revista Brasileira de Docência, Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração,Vol. 1 No.2, pp. 177-207. Crossan, M.M. and Apaydin, M. (2010), “A multi-dimensional framework of organizational Analysis of innovation: a systematic review of the literature”, Journal of Management Studies,Vol.47 scientiﬁc No. 6, pp. 1154-1191. production Csárdi, G. and Nepusz, T. (2006), “The igraph software package for complex network research”, InterJournal Complex Systems, 1695, Disponível em: http://igraph.sf.net (acesso em 2 November 2017). Cunha, C.R. and Carrieri, A.P. (2003), “Mapeando as relações interorganizacionais na teoria organizacional: garimpando os principais periodicos brasileiros sobre gestão”, Anais Do Encontro da Associação Nacional de Pos-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração - EnAnpad, Atibaia, SP, p. 27, Recuperado de www.anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnANPAD/ enanpad_2003/TEO/2003_TEO616.pdf Das, T.K. and Teng, B.S. (2003), “Partner analysis and alliance performance”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 279-308. Dias, T., Birochi, R., Deambrosis, A.M., Darosi, G.C.M. and 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, Recuperado de www.anpad.org.br/diversos/ trabalhos/EnEPQ/enepq_2013/2013_EnEPQ128.pdf Dyer, J. and Singh, H. (1998), “The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 660-679. Ebers, M. and Grandori, A. (1997), “The form, costs and development Fukuyama, dynamics of inter- organizational networking”, in Ebers, M. (Ed.), The Formation of Inter-Organizational Networks, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32. Fellows, I. (2013), Package ‘wordcloud’, Disponível em: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ wordcloud/wordcloud.pdf (Acesso em 2 November 2017). Ferreira, M.P., Storopoli, J.E. and Serra, F.R. (2014), “Two decades of research on strategic alliances: analysis of citations, co-citations and themes researched”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 18 (especial), pp. 109-133. Gallon, A.V. and 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, Recuperado de www.anpad.org.br/ admin/pdf/ENEPQ15.pdf Gallon, A.V., Souza, F.C., Rover, S. and Ensslin, S.R. (2007), “Estratégias metodologicas 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, Recuperado de www. anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/EnEPQ/enepq_2007/ENEPQ43.pdf Glãnzel, W. (2014), “Analysis of co-authorship patterns at the individual level”, Transinformação, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 229-238. Glãnzel, W., Debackere, K., Thijs, B. and Schubert, A. (2006), “A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy”, Scientometrics, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 263-277. Gnyawali, D.R. and Madhavan, R. (2001), “Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a strutuctural embeddedness perspective”, Academy of Management Rewiew, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 431-445. Granovetter, M. (1973), “The strength of weak ties”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp. 1360-1380. Greenacre, M. and Hastie, T. (1987), “The geometric interpretation of correspondence analysis”, Journal INMR of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 82 No. 398, pp. 437-447. 15,1 Guedes, V.L.S. and 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 tecnologica”, Anais do Encontro Nacional de Ciências da Informação – ENANCIB, Salvador, BA, p. 6. Gulati, R. (1998), “Alliances and networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 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. and Zaheer, A. (2000), “Strategic networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 203-215. Halinen, A. and Törnroos, J.A. (1998), “The role of embeddedness in the evolution of business networks”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 187-205. Hamel, G. (1991), “Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12 (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, 1st ed., Grafton, London. Human, S.E. and Provan, K.G. (1997), “An emergent theory of structure and outcomes in small-ﬁrm strategic manufacturing network”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 368-403. Husson, F., Josse, J. and Pagès, J. (2010), “Principal component methods – hierarchical clustering – partitional clustering: why would we need to choose for visualizing data?”, Applied Mathematics Department, Disponível em: www.agrocampus-ouest.fr/math/ (acesso em 2 November 2017). Husson, F., Josse, J., Lê, S. and Mazet, J. (2007), FactoMineR: factor analysis and data mining with R. R package version 1.04, Disponível em: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR (acesso em 2 November 2017). Jarillo, J.C. (1988), “On strategic networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 31-41. Jarillo, J.C. (1993), Strategic Networks: creating the Borderless Organization, 1st ed., Butterworth- Heinemann, Oxford. Koza, M.P. and Lewin, A.Y. (1998), “The co-evolution of strategic alliances”, Organization Science, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 255-264. Kraatz, M.S. (1998), “Learning by association: inter-organizational networks and adaptation to environmental change”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 621-643. Kunzler, M.T. and 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, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 1363-1393. Lai, C.S., Franke, T.F. and Gan, W.B. (2012), “Opposite effects of fear conditioning and extinction on dendritic spine remodelling”, Nature, Vol. 483 No. 1, pp. 87-91. Lastres, M.M.H. and Cassiolato, J.E. (2003), Novas Políticas na Era do Conhecimento: o Foco em Arranjos Produtivos e Inovativos Locais, 1st ed., RedeSist, Rio de Janeiro, RJ. Lê, S., Josse, J. and Husson, F. (2008), “FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis”, Journal of Statistical Software, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-18, Disponível em: www. jstatsoft.org/v25/i01/ (acesso em 2 November 2017). Lima, F.G.S.N. and Campos Filho, L.A.N. (2009), “Mapeamento do estudo contemporâneo em alianças e redes estratégicas”, RBGN – Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Negocios, Vol. 11 No. 31, pp. 168-182. Machado-da-Silva, C.L. and Coser, C. (2006), “Rede de relações interorganizacionais no campo organizacional de videira-SC”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 9-45. Magalhães, J.M., Daubt, C.G. and Phonlor, P.R. (2009), “Vantagens proporcionadas às pequenas Analysis of e médias empresas por meio da união em redes de cooperação no contexto do venture Capital”, scientiﬁc Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 583-603. production Marconi, M.A. and Lakatos, E.M. (2010), Fundamento de Metodologia Cientíﬁca, 7th ed., Atlas, São Paulo, SP. Marshall, A. (1890), Principles of Economics, 1st ed., MaCmillan, Londres. Marteleto, R.M. and Silva, A.B.O. (2004), “Redes e Capital social: o enfoque da informação Para o desenvolvimento local”, Ciência da Informação, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 41-49. Martes, A., Bulgacov, S., Nascimento, M., Gonçalves, S. and Augusto, P. (2006), “Forum – redes sociais e interorganizacionais”, Revista de Administração de Empresas, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 0-15. Mascena, K.M.C., Figueiredo, F.C. and 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, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 454-468. Meirelles, A.M. and Gonçalves, C.A. (2005), Uma abordagem multiparadigmática Para a disciplina estratégia. Anais do Encontro de Estudos em Estratégia (3es), Associação Nacional de Pos- Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração – ANPAD, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, p. 2. Mitrega, M. and Pfajfar, G. (2015), “Business relationship process management as company dynamic capability improving relationship portfolio”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 193-203. Molina-Morales, F.X., Belso-Martínez, J.A., Más-Verdú, F. and Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2015), “Formation and dissolution of inter-ﬁrm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 7, pp. 1557-1562. Molina-Morales, F.X., Capo-Vicedo, J., Martínez-Fernández, M.T. and 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, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 773-789. Möller, K.K. and Rajala, A. (2007), “Rise of strategic nets: new modes of value creation”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 895-908. Moran, M.R., Souza, F.F., Boaventura, J.M.G., Marinho, B.L. and Fischmann, A.A. (2010), “Alianças estratégicas: uma análise bibliométrica da produção cientíﬁca entre 1989 e 2008”, Revista de Ciências da Administração, Vol. 12 No. 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, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 428-433. Nascimento, S. and Beuren, I.M. (2011), “Redes sociais na produção cientíﬁca dos programas de pos- graduação de ciências contábeis do Brasil”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 47-66. Negra, C.A.S. and 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, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 1-10. Newlands, D. (2003), “Competition and cooperation in industrial clusters: the implications for public policy”, European Planning Studies, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 521-532. Novaretti, M.C.Z., Quitério, L.M. and Santos, E.V. (2015), “Gestão em unidades de terapia intensiva brasileiras: estudo bibliométrico dos últimos 10 anos”, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 16-33. Otlet, P. (1934), Traité de Documentation: le Livre sur le Livre, Theorie et Pratique, 1st ed., Editions Mundaneum, Brussels, BEL. Padula, G. and Dagnino, G.B. (2007), “Untangling the rise of coopetition: the intrusion of coopetition in a cooperative game structure”, International Studies of Management and Organizations, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 32-53. Pao, M.L. (1978), “Automatic text analysis based on transition phenomena of word occurrences”, INMR Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 121-124. 15,1 Pereira, B.A.D., Alves, J.N. and Silva, P.E. (2010), “O lado obscuro dos relacionamentos interorganizacionais: por que as empresas saem dos processos cooperativos?”, Espacios, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 25-27. Pereira, F.C., Verocai, H.D., Cordeiro, V.R. and Gomes, C.F.S. (2016), “Sistemas de informação e inovação: um estudo bibliométrico”, Revista de Gestão da Tecnologia e Sistemas de Informação, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 81-100. Perrow, C. (1992), “Small-ﬁrms networks”, in Nohria, N. and Eccles, R.G. (Eds), Networks and Organizations: structure, Form, and Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Perry, M. (2005), Business Clusters: An International Perspective, 1st ed., Routledge, New York, NY. Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. (1978), The External Control of Organization: A Resource Perspective, 1st ed., Harper and Row, New York, NY. Polanyi, M. (1958), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post Critical Philosophy, 1st ed., Routledge London. Porter, M.E. (1980), Competitive Strategy – Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, 1st ed., The Free Press, New York, NY. Powell, W.W. (1987), “Hybrid organizational arrangements: new forms or transitional development?”, California Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 67-87. Powell, W.W. (1990), “Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization”, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12 No. 11, pp. 95-336. Powell, W. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1994), “Networks and economic life”, in Smelser, N.J. and Swedberg, R. (Ed.), Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), “Co-creating unique value with customers”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 4-9. Prim, A.L., Amal, M. and Carvalho, L. (2016), “Regional cluster, innovation and export performance: an empirical study”, Brazilian Administration Review, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 1-26. Pritchard, A. (1969), “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 348-349. Puffal, D.P. and 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, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 63-86. Raposo, M.L., Ferreira, J.J.M. and Fernandes, C.I. (2014), “Local and cross-border SME cooperation: effects on innovation and performance”, Revista Europea de Direccion y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 157-165. Ribault, M., Martinet, B. and Lebidois, D. (1995), A gestão das tecnologias (Coleção gestão & inovação), 1st ed., Publicações Dom Quixote, Lisboa, POR. Ribeiro, H.C.M. and Santos, M.C. (2015), “Perﬁl e evolução da produção cientíﬁca do tema governança corporativa nos periodicos qualis/capes nacionais: uma análise bibliométrica e de redes sociais”, Contabilidade, Gestão e Governança, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 04-27. Ring, P.S. and Andrew, H.V.V. (1994), “Development processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 90-118. Ring, P.S. and Van De Ven, A.H. (1992), “Structuring cooperative relationships between organization”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13 No. 7, pp. 483-498. Sacomano Neto, M. and Truzzi, O.M.S. (2004), “Conﬁgurações estruturais e relacionais da rede de fornecedores: uma resenha compreensiva”, Revista de Administração, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 255-263. Sadowski,B.and Duysters,G.(2008), “Strategic technology alliance termination: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 05-320. Schommer, P.C. (2001), Gestão de Organizações Sem Fins Lucrativos: Algumas Questões Sobre as Analysis of “Especiﬁcidades” do Campo e o Perﬁl Dos Gestores, Anais do Congresso Nacional das APAES, scientiﬁc Fortaleza, CE, p. 12. production Sforzi, F. (2015), “Rethinking the industrial district: 35 years later”, Investigaciones Regionales – Journal of Regional Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 11-29. Sherer, S.A. (2003), “Critical success factors for manufacturing networks as perceived by network coordinators”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 321-345. Shugan, S.M. (2007), “The editor’s secrets”, Marketing Science, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 589-595. Subramanian, R. and Ishak, S.T. (1998), “Competitor analysis practices of US companies: an empirical investigation”, Management International Review, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 7-23. Tejeda-Lorente, A., Porcel, C., Peis, E., Sanz, R. and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2014), “A quality based recommender system to disseminate information in a university digital library”, Information Sciences, Vol. 261 No. 1, pp. 52-69. Turrini, A., Cristofoli, D., Frosini, F. and Nasi, G. (2010), “Networking literature about determinants of network effectiveness”, Public Administration, Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 528-550. Vale, G.M.V. and Lopes, H.E.G. (2010), “Cooperação e alianças: perspectivas teoricas e suas articulações no contexto do pensamento estratégico”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 722-737. Varadarajan, P.R. and Cunningham, M.H. (1995), “Strategic alliances: a synthesis of conceptual foundations”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 282-296. Vermeulen, F. and Barkema, H. (2001), “Learning through acquisitions”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 457-476. Verschoore, J.R., Balestrin, A. and Teixeira, R. (2016), “Network management and associated ﬁrms’ outcomes: multilevel analysis in the Southern Brazilian context”, Journal of Management and Governance, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 211-232. Voos, H. (1974), “Lotka and information science”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 270-272. Waarden, F.V. (1992), “Emergence and development of business interest associations: an example from The Netherlands”, Organization Studies, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 521-562. Williamson, O. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: analysis and Antitrust Implications, 1st ed., The Free Press, New York, NY. Williamson, O. (1985), The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: ﬁrms, Markets, Relational Contracting, 1st ed., Free Press, New York, NY. Further reading Hoffmann, V.E., Molina-Morales, F.X. and Martínez-Fernández, M.T. (2007), “Redes de empresas: proposta de uma tipologia Para classiﬁcação aplicada na indústria de cerâmica de revestimento”, Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Vol. 11 (n. especial), pp. 103-127. Sacomano Neto, M. and Paulillo, L.F.O. (2012), “Estruturas de Governança em Arranjos Produtivos Locais: um estudo comparativo nos arranjos calçadistas e sucroalcooleiro no estado de São Paulo”, Rev. Adm. Pública, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 1131-1155. Corresponding author Rafael Araújo Sousa Farias can be contacted at: farias-rafael@hotmail.com For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Journal

Innovation & Management Review – Emerald Publishing

Published: Jun 6, 2018

Keywords: Network; Bibliometrics; Cluster; Alliance; Interorganizational relationship

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Analysis of scientific production on interorganizational networks study field

Analysis of scientific production on interorganizational networks study field

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Analysis of scientific production on interorganizational networks study field

Analysis of scientific production on interorganizational networks study field

References (132)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.

Our policy towards the use of cookies