Purpose The purpose of this paper is to study the influence of intellectual capital on a firm’s absorptive capacity (ACAP), and of ACAP on product innovation. The authors argue that intellectual capital and other sets of intangible assets are mobilized by firms through dynamic capabilities such as ACAP. Product innovation is one of the results of this process. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative study was conducted, including 500 firms of different sizes, industries and technological intensities located in southern Brazil. The validity of constructs and the theoretical model were confirmed by structural equation modeling. Findings The authors found that intellectual capital does influence ACAP, albeit differently on each of ACAP’s dimensions. Acquisition, assimilation and exploitation of knowledge are more decisively influenced by structural capital, followed by human capital. The ability of transformation of knowledge is evenly influenced by structural and human capital, and more moderately so by social capital. The results also showed that ACAP influences product innovation, but each of its dimensions demonstrated a different impact. Practical implications This study helps practitioners to identify the development of a firm’s intangible resources and its influences on product innovation. This characterization can serve as a benchmark for managers or private and public companies to define strategies and policies to stimulate innovation. Originality/value Few studies present a theoretical discussion about the relationship between a firm’s resources and ACAP’s dimensions in broad empirical contexts or in emerging countries.

Purpose Over time, technological intensity has been used as a proxy for innovation capability of firms in an industrial sector. However, not only firms belonging to the stratum of high technological intensity are able to innovate. Therefore, this study aims to explore a potential association between technological intensity and innovation capability in firms from different industrial sectors, using the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)’s classification and the components of innovation capability proposed by Zawislak et al. (2012, 2013). Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an exploratory research with four case studies focusing on the innovation capability of Brazilian firms. Findings The results show that the four firms, each belonging to one stratum of technological intensity, have innovation capability, and the differences regarding this feature can be explained by the balance and development of all firms’ capabilities (technological, operational, managerial and transactional). Originality/value In the literature, studies that relate technological intensity and innovation capability are scarce. Therefore, the originality of this research is to relate these two concepts. The most important is that firms can be innovative regardless of their stratum of technological intensity, which shows the importance of other capabilities to ensure the innovation’s success.

No abstract

RESUMO O empreendedor tem desempenhado um papel fundamental no desenvolvimento econômico das nações. Contudo, desde sua origem no século XVI, o termo empreendedor tem passado por modificações. Este artigo tem como objetivo identificar contribuições para a formação e as modificações nesse termo à luz das mudanças ocorridas ao longo de três paradigmas tecnológicos: revolução industrial, fordismo e tecnologia da informação. O argumento central deste ensaio é que empreendedor refere-se a um termo dinâmico e multifacetado, influenciado por revoluções tecnológicas e sociais. Foram identificadas quatro concepções de empreendedor: individual, intra-empreendedor, coletivo e social. Conclui-se que os diferentes empreendedores têm motivações, barreiras e desafios que divergem em características, mas convergem na busca pela construção de um novo empreendimento.