Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Intellectual Capital

José Vale et al.
However, it is important to notice that performance improvement is enabled by, among o<strong>the</strong>rs, <strong>the</strong>
interplay between <strong>the</strong>se dimensions (Kujansivu, 2008).
2.2 IC in meso level organisations
Most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> research on intellectual capital has focused on individual companies instead <strong>of</strong> macrolevel
units (e.g. regions) (Pöyhönen and Smedlund, 2004). Thus, in <strong>the</strong> last decade, <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong>
knowledge resources as source <strong>of</strong> regional and local development dynamics have been inquired and
many researchers have now underlined <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> IC trying to go beyond <strong>the</strong> study <strong>of</strong>
individual firms (Schiuma, Lerro and Carlucci, 2008b).
In a knowledge-based economy, where knowledge production, transmission and dissemination are
<strong>the</strong> main characteristics, intangible assets are considered crucial to create value and, thus, economic
wealth (Sánchez and Elena, 2006). Therefore, in this knowledge economy, organisations not only rely
on <strong>the</strong>ir IC but also on <strong>the</strong> IC <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs (namely on those <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> cluster, microcluster or territory where
<strong>the</strong> organisation is located) in order to build sustainable competitive advantages (Viedma, 2003).
Hence, competitiveness <strong>of</strong> regions can be increased through <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> strong regional
clusters and networking (Smedlund and Toivonen, 2007) and, thus, IC should be studied at <strong>the</strong>se
meso levels.
The development <strong>of</strong> clusters located in a specific city, region or territory is very important because <strong>the</strong>
organisations’ ability to exchange or share knowledge develops new capacities, resulting in an
increase <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir IC (Joia and Malheiros, 2009).
Networking improves <strong>the</strong> flow <strong>of</strong> information (Sporleder and Peterson, 2003), giving organizations <strong>the</strong>
knowledge that <strong>the</strong>y cannot obtain in-house and also giving <strong>the</strong>m external economies <strong>of</strong> cognitive
scope (Visser, 2009).
On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong>re is a lack <strong>of</strong> research related to “<strong>the</strong> ways in which intellectual capital is
created and maintained as a dynamic process” (Pöyhönen & Smedlund, 2004).
The dynamics capabilities and <strong>the</strong> relational approaches try to analyse how <strong>the</strong> network is operating
as a relational system and how this influences <strong>the</strong> network capability to create intellectual capital
(Pöyhönen & Smedlund, 2004).
2.3 Ports as clusters and networks
The current state <strong>of</strong> knowledge on maritime transport and ports related to business economics
research appears to be modest (Carbone and De Martino, 2003). Governance approaches have been
most successful in presenting <strong>the</strong> port as a place where synchronic forces are played out among a
pluralistic port community (multi-terminal ports may include several operators within <strong>the</strong> same port)
striving for common internal and external goals (Olivier and Slack, 2005). Thus, ports should continue
to be seen as a politically cohesive entity (as a stakeholders’ consensual space) (Olivier et al., 2005).
Several authors define <strong>the</strong> port as a cluster which includes several activities and actors. Therefore,
although ports’ roles have been changing and are now considered as nodes in global supply chains,
proximity continues to be an important factor (Hall and Jacobs, 2010). O<strong>the</strong>rs define it as a network,
arguing that while most clusters are simple co-located organizations, some are networks <strong>of</strong> strong
cooperation. Both <strong>the</strong>se cases may include not only private actors, but also public ones (Visser,
2009). Therefore, and according to <strong>the</strong> aforementioned explanations, it is our opinion that a port is a
cluster <strong>of</strong> organizations which are related in a network system.
3. Research questions
What are <strong>the</strong> main dimensions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Seaport’s IC?
How do <strong>the</strong>se dimensions relate with each o<strong>the</strong>r?
How is IC, in its different dimensions, created and/or destroyed within a seaport?
4. Methodological approaches
We will do a case study due to <strong>the</strong> fact that we are exploring a complex reality. It is our opinion that a
Seaport, ra<strong>the</strong>r than an organisation, it is a network composed <strong>of</strong> many individual firms connected in a
610