Emerging intermediation role configurations in innovation ecosystems
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/bmee.2026.26187Abstract
Purpose – Innovation ecosystems rely on intermediaries, yet intermediation is often conceptualised as a static role tied to fixed entities. This paper develops an adaptive intermediation concept, explaining how a designated governance unit reconfigures its connecting, facilitating, and integrating functions as ecosystem maturity and urgency evolve.
Research methodology – We adopt a dynamic capabilities perspective to develop a theoretical framework for this research based on literature analysis and conduct an empirical single-case study of Latvia’s smart-city ecosystem, to complement our theoretical findings by the analysis of empirical phenomena, and to design our theoretical propositions.
Findings – The governance unit’s effectiveness in the innovation ecosystems relies on its capability to reconfigure intermediation functions. We identify three evolving configurations of governance: (1) connecting, (2) facilitation, and (3) directive integration under high urgency, and explain their reconfiguration in the innovation ecosystems.
Research limitations – Empirical evidence for this research comes from a pilot exploratory study of a single civic-innovation ecosystem; therefore, the applicability and transferability of the research findings should be further tested through comparative multi-case and mixed-method longitudinal studies.
Practical implications – The findings of this research provide a diagnostic lens for ecosystem managers and policymakers to anticipate when to prioritise coordination, facilitation, and brokerage, or an integration approach, and how to project the intermediary role within the ecosystem.
Originality/Value – This study shifts intermediary theory from type-based categorisation towards a processual, capability-based approach of the intermediary role reconfiguration aligned with ecosystem evolution.
Keywords:
ecosystem governance, innovation ecosystems, intermediaries, open innovation, sustainabilityHow to Cite
Share
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451
Adner, R., & Euchner, J. (2022). Innovating in ecosystems: An interview with Ron Adner. Research-Technology Management, 65(6), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2022.2123657
Adner, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 1011–1025. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.331
Alam, M. A., Rooney, D., & Taylor, M. (2022). From ego-systems to open innovation ecosystems: A process model of inter-firm openness. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 39, 177–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12615
Attarpour, M., Elyasi, M., Mohammadi, A., & Rezaalizadeh, H. (2024). Create and strengthen innovation ecosystem: Roles of policy-affiliated transition intermediaries in latecomers. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 15(4), 1560–1578. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-11-2023-0194
Autio, E. (2022). Orchestrating ecosystems: A multi-layered framework. Innovation: Organization & Management, 24(1), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2021.1919120
Bally, F., Daudigeos, T., & Calamel, L. (2025). Intermediary use in sustainable innovation ecosystems: Comparing patterns of resource access among sustainability and technological start-ups. M@n@gement, 28(5), 111–223. https://doi.org/10.37725/mgmt.2025.11463
Banga, K., & Gaile-Sarkane, E. (2024). Role of the bridge maker in innovation ecosystems. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 22(5), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.54808/JSCI.22.05.68
Breslin, D., Kask, J., Schlaile, M., & Abatecola G. (2021). Developing a coevolutionary account of innovation ecosystems. Industrial Marketing Management, 98, 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.07.016
Briede, L., & Gaile-Sarkane, E. (2023, September 12–15). Stakeholders of innovation ecosystem and improvement of their performance. N. Callaos, E. Gaile-Sarkane, S. Hashimoto, N. Lace, B. Sánchez, & M. Savoie (Eds.), In Proceedings of the 27th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics: WMSCI 2023 (pp. 203–209) https://doi.org/10.54808/WMSCI2023.01.203
Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199249145.001.0001
Burt, R. S., & Opper, S. (2026). Evaluation in network context. In R. Younger & A. Zavyalova (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational social evaluations (pp. 365–379). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198933137.013.0023
Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094
Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547
Clauss, T., & Ritala, P. (2023). Network governance institutionalization: Creating mutual value by harnessing and avoiding conflicts in interorganizational networks. Journal of Business Research, 163, Article 113880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113880
Costabile, C. (2024). Digital platform ecosystem governance of private companies: Building blocks and a research agenda based on a multidisciplinary, systematic literature review. Data and Information Management, 8(1), Article 100053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dim.2023.100053
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
Davis, J. P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011). Rotating leadership and collaborative innovation: Recombination processes in symbiotic relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(2), 159–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839211428131
Dedehayir, O., Mäkinen, S. J., & Ortt, J. R. (2018). Roles during innovation ecosystem genesis: A literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.028
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.21318923
Diener, K., Piller, F., & Pollok, P. (2024). Intermediaries and platforms for open innovation. In H. Chesbrough, A. Radziwon, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of open innovation (pp. 371–386). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780192899798.013.22
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
Enkel, E., Bogers, M., & Chesbrough, H. (2020). Exploring open innovation in the digital age: A maturity model and future research directions. R&D Management, 50, 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12397
Feser, D. (2023). Innovation intermediaries revised: A systematic literature review on innovation intermediaries’ role for knowledge sharing. Review of Managerial Science, 17, 1827–1862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00593-x
Foss, N. J., Schmidt, J., & Teece, D. J. (2023). Ecosystem leadership as a dynamic capability. Long Range Planning, 56(1), Article 102270, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102270
Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90–91, Article 102098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102098
Gierus, B., Du, T., Maduforo, A. N., Gilbert, B., & Koh, K. (2025). Prevalence and quality of mixed methods research in educational subdisciplines: A systematic review. SAGE Open, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251335171
Hafeez, S., Shahzad, K., & De Silva, M. (2025). Enhancing digital transformation in SMEs: The dynamic capabilities of innovation intermediaries within ecosystems. Long Range Planning, 58(3), Article 102525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2025.102525
Hoffmann, M. G., Murad, E. P., Lemos, D. da C., Farias, J. S., & Sanches, B. L. (2022). Characteristics of innovation ecosystems’ governance: An integrative literature review. International Journal of Innovation Management, 26(8), Article 2250062. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919622500621
Holgersson, M., Baldwin, C. Y., Chesbrough, H., & Bogers, M. L. A. M. (2022). The forces of ecosystem evolution. California Management Review, 64(3), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256221086038
Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904
Kerstens, A., & Langley, D. J. (2025). An innovation intermediary’s role in enhancing absorptive capacity for cross-industry digital innovation: Introducing an awareness capability and new intermediary practices. Journal of Business Research, 196, Article 115426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115426
Klerkx, L., & Leeuwis, C. (2009). Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 849–860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2008.10.001
Kohtamäki, M., Rabetino, R., Parida, V., Sjödin, D., & Henneberg, S. (2022). Managing digital servitization toward smart solutions: Framing the connections between technologies, business models, and ecosystems. Industrial Marketing Management, 105, 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.06.010
Markus, K., Rivza, B., & Rivza, P. (2025). Exploring future scenarios for Latvia’s regional business incubators. Business: Theory and Practice, 26(2), 266–276. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2025.23386
Nooteboom, B., Van Haverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., & Van den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36(7), 1016–1034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.04.003
Noviaristanti, S., Acur, N., & Mendibil, K. (2023). The different roles of innovation intermediaries to generate value. Management Review Quarterly, 74, 2545–2577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-023-00364-2
Oliver, A. L., & Rittblat, R. (2023). Facilitating innovation for complex societal challenges: Creating communities and innovation ecosystems for SDG goal of forming partnerships. Sustainability, 15(12), Article 9666. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129666
Olk, P., & West, J. (2023). Distributed governance of a complex ecosystem: How R&D consortia orchestrate the Alzheimer’s knowledge ecosystem. California Management Review, 65(2), 93–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256231165329
Paskaleva, K., Evans, J., & Watson, K. (2021). Co-producing smart cities: A Quadruple Helix approach to assessment. European Urban and Regional Studies, 28(4), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764211016037
Pel, B., Wittmayer, J., Dorland, J., & Søgaard Jørgensen, M. (2020). Unpacking the social innovation ecosystem: An empirically grounded typology of empowering network constellations. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 33(3), 311–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2019.1705147
Piantoni, G., Arena, M., & Azzone, G. (2023). Exploring how different innovation ecosystems create shared value: Insights from a multiple case study analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 206–232. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-09-2022-0495
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015
Raizada, A., & Sinha, S. (2025). Organizing ecosystems for the greater good: An integrative review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 498, Article 145148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.145148
Reypens, C., Lievens, A., & Blazevic, V. (2021). Hybrid orchestration in multi-stakeholder innovation networks: Practices of mobilizing multiple, diverse stakeholders across organizational boundaries. Organization Studies, 42(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619868268
Robertsone, G., & Lapiņa, I. (2023). Digital transformation as a catalyst for sustainability and open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 9(1), Article 100017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100017
Rodrigues, G. de O., D’Avila, L. C., Junior Cardoso Da Silva, D., Piqué Huerta, J. M., & Rapetti, C. A. (2025). Critical success factors for governance in innovation ecosystems: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Innovation Management, 29(1), Article 2530001. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919625300016
Sáez, D. E., Munuera-Alemán, J. L., Delgado-Ballester, E., & Bogers, M. (2025). Quantifying firms’ innovation ecosystem orientation: Assessing the impact on innovation performance and triple bottom line collective benefits. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 73, 879–891. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2025.3647232
Sannikova, A., Titko, J., & Kudins, J. (2025). The role of networking competencies in social enterprise performance. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 23(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3846/bmee.2025.21468
Santos, D. A. G. D., Zen, A., & Bittencourt, B. A. (2022). From governance to choreography: Coordination of innovation ecosystems. Innovation & Management Review, 19(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-08-2020-0117
Shen, L., Shi, Q., Parida, V., & Jovanovic, M. (2024). Ecosystem orchestration practices for industrial firms: A qualitative meta-analysis, framework development and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 173, Article 114463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114463
Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grm036
Spindler, E. dos S., Zen, A. C., Bogers, M. L. A. M., Schutte, C. S. L., & Nascimento, L. da S. (2025). A lifecycle perspective on open innovation and ecosystems. Management Research Review, 48(12), 1647–1663. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-01-2025-0011
Stahl, M., Zarco-Jasso, H., & Miralles, F. (2024). Orchestrating innovation networks: The switching roles of orchestrators along startups’ lifecycle. Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business, 11(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1344/jesb.40827
Szarucki, M., Sadauskis, A., Mačiulytė-Šniukienė, A., & Kosch, O. (2025). Exploring search strategy for systematic literature review: Evidence from the International Journal of Management Reviews. Business: Theory and Practice, 26(2), 360–370. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2025.22033
Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
Tedesco, M. S., & Serrano, T. (2019). Roles, values, and social dynamics: A new model to describe and understand economic ecosystems. MIT D-Lab. https://d-lab.mit.edu/resources/publications/roles-values-and-social-dynamics-new-model-describe-and-understand-economic
Toth, C., & Hary, A. (2024). A comprehensive model for innovation ecosystems. Triple Helix, 11(2), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1163/21971927-bja10050
Tõnurist, P., & Orlik, J. (2025). Towards anticipatory governance guidelines for public sector organisations (Working Paper, No. 82). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a5203d0b-en
Ulaga, W., Kleinaltenkamp, M., Kashyap, V., & Eggert, A. (2021). Advancing marketing theory and practice: Guidelines for crafting research propositions. AMS Review, 11(3), 395–406.
Vanhaverbeke, W., Chesbrough, H., West, J., & Radziwon, A. (2024). Overcoming organizational obstacles to open innovation success. In H. Chesbrough, Radziwon, A., W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of open innovation (pp. 849–868). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780192899798.013.53
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE.
View article in other formats
CrossMark check
Published
Issue
Section
Copyright
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.