|
Comprehending the catching-up process is as important to firms in advanced countries as in emerging ones. Most firms must invest in second-hand learning to remain competitive (KIM, 1998). The interaction of the internal capabilities with the knowledge networks seems to influence the technological path of the company (DANTAS & BELL, 2011). Moreover, catching-up firms reverse the sequence of research, development and engineering (R, D & E) of the advanced countries.
BR is subsidiary to Petrobras and became responsible for the commercialization and distribution of oil and gas derivatives all over Brazil. Due to its economic importance and national relevance, Petrobras Distribuidora (BR) has accomplished to build its capabilities and networks to catch-up with the main firms of its segment?
This investigation tries to outline how BR has managed to build its technological capabilities together with the development of its knowledge networks.
Catching-up is related to the capabilities that a firm creates to change their technologies, moving from imitation, meaning very limited innovative capability, to deeper levels of capabilities that enable it to develop modest forms of innovation to further engage directly in innovation activities at the international frontier (KIM, 1997). A latecomer firm that has cached-up may tread different paths of technological development, from those of the global industry leaders (BELL & FIGUEIREDO, 2012)
The research method is bases on the design used by DANTAS & BELL (2012) who have qualitatively evaluated the degrees of change in capabilities and networks of Petrobras along the company’s history. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with two executives from the lubricant technological dept. and from other secondary sources. Types of knowledge networks and technological capabilities according to their complexity and sophistication were used to assess lubricants division at BR.
Three distinct periods in the 40-year time frame were determined and evaluated in the longitudinal design, considering: Types of network (strategic innovation, innovation, active learning and passive learning) and Levels of capabilities (strategic, generative, adaptive and assimilative). It showed that BR has evolved from passive learning networks and assimilative capability to innovation networks and generative capabilities and also how it happened. Nevertheless, BR still has not catched-up.
|
