Chapter 14

Competitive Intelligence and the Development of Corporate Universities¹

14.1. Introduction

In light of the new entrepreneurial context, organizations must reconsider their strategies, field of action, margins for maneuver, and the means at their disposition. More than ever, this new paradigm demands an innovative vision of problems and a different perspective in order to guarantee higher levels of competitiveness. This innovative vision is intimately linked to knowledge, the ethics of knowledge, and knowledge sharing — three inseparable aspects.

Economic intelligence and competitive intelligence (CI) play a growing role within this global framework and are becoming essential instruments for business success in a highly competitive economy. It is only by anticipation of results and access to innovative strategies for the application of renewed solutions that businesses may now emerge victorious.

Work within a cooperative network, with the aim of increasing and differentiating productivity and the creation of new contracts, must be made more dynamic. Businesses working within such networks obtain benefits which increase their competitive advantage [POR 98].

In this chapter, we will consider CI as a tool for decision assistance. We will also analyze the relationship between CI and corporate universities by studying the ways in which these establishments can play a role in the provision of economic impetus.

To summarize, the relationship between CI and corporate universities may take different forms. Upstream, CI is an integral part of the design and execution process. Later, it is seen as a service which a corporate university offers to businesses or other institutions.

14.2. Competitive intelligence

In its limited sense, CI is defined by many authors as a systematic process for the collection, processing, analysis, and breakdown of information on competitors. It should aim to provide information on technologies and general commercial tendencies in order to facilitate the decision-making process, helping to achieve the strategic goals of the company. In this process, the time needed for execution is of crucial importance, as, in cases of short- or medium-term work, decision making depends on a vast quantity of information.

This precise lack of time available to process an unpredictable volume of information, with selection of only that which is useful for decision making, can reasonably be seen as one of the main challenges encountered in CI.

Furthermore, we might see CI as a way of attempting to avoid brutal changes and economic or social disturbances, through anticipated knowledge of tendencies and social behaviors. In the Western world, CI is also seen as a necessity in response to what has been done in Japan, leading to the resurgence of the country [COE 00].

The concept of technological watch (systematic surveillance based on the aims of the company and the associated technologies and centers of research) first appeared in France. According to the authors cited above [COE 00], this concept, initially centered on technical aspects, developed to take on a more global form, producing the idea of economic intelligence.

This evolution led France to define CI as a national objective. Thus, the report produced by the Plan Commission [COM 94] defines CI as a set of coordinated research, processing, distribution, and protection actions concerning information of use to economic actors, obtained in a legal manner. It is intended to supply those responsible for decision processes within businesses or state bodies with the necessary knowledge for comprehension of their environment in order to adjust their individual or collective strategies [TAR 06b].

According to Coelho and Dou [COE 00], a similar process also occurred in the United States in a more aggressive form from around 1984, leading to the creation of technological CI.

As an operational system for the collection, processing, and transmission of implicit and explicit knowledge to those responsible for strategic decision making, CI must supply precise information at a precise moment in a precise form to a specific person, allowing this person to make a precise decision [QUE 06]. Thus, CI plays an important role in an increasingly competitive market, motivating decisions which often have effects on the continuity of a business.

We noted that 90% of the information needed for organizations to understand markets, gain knowledge of their competitors, and make strategic decisions is accessible in the public domain [QUE 06]. This facilitates the practice of CI, which is not a tool limited to certain users but an instrument accessible to all; Internet access is sufficient to enable the use of CI. This transversality means that any type of company or organization, however small, may use CI without unreasonable financial outlay.

Note that CI is not a simple market analysis approach. It is a process of research, focused on the environment of the organization, where important data for competitiveness are identified and lead to a determined action [ETT 95]. The larger and more dispersed the business environment, the more complex CI will be.

This learning process, motivated by competition and based on information allowing the optimization of short- and long-term strategy, is of great or even crucial importance for the success of organizations.

The world in which we live is increasingly complex; Coelho and Dou [COE 00] recognize this fact, as we have moved from a world of quasi-certainties to a much more complex system of quasi-uncertainties which must be controlled. We live in what is known as the “information society”, where the Internet and all its applications and associated technologies play an increasingly active role; economic actors born of concentrations and reorganizations become more powerful than “sovereign” states. Ideologies are ceasing to exist, and the gap between rich and poor is growing. In this context, the importance of CI is becoming increasingly clear.

The growing role of CI is not limited to the fact that, faced with the current global situation, it is increasingly urgent to attempt to predict changes so that they do not excessively disturb the life of the country, the business, or the institution. The attention paid to information must therefore be permanent, as stated by Taylor [TAY 06]. If we only become aware of a modification when the first signs become apparent, it is already too late.

CI certainly goes further; in the context of globalization, CI has been used to find responses to problems presented by the organizational and information context, by making it possible to optimize the internal operation of the various services of the organization, offering solutions to develop decision making [QUE 06].

At a time when information production seems unlimited and its diffusion is increasingly simple and instantaneous, it is important to assist companies investing in new technologies to create more wealth than more traditional structures. The mechanisms found for the processing of produced information then become essential in assisting in the practice of CI.

As Coelho and Dou stated [COE 00], mankind owes its wealth to new technologies and to the creation of knowledge, and no longer to crude oil alone. They added that businesses must, in order to truly become stronger, take a gamble on processes for internal knowledge creation and not just apply management practices in the strictest sense of the term.

Knowledge is different from any other resource in that it is constantly obsolete; knowledge considered to be advanced today will be outdated tomorrow. Knowledge production is not the sole factor involved in global economic competition, but it is the deciding factor.

All the tools made available by the Internet contribute to the diversification of products and services on offer, with a significant effect on the modus operandi of companies. Nowadays, communication is no longer simply the process of transmission from one entity to another. With information coming from various sources and circulating in different directions, communication has been transformed into a sort of collective intelligence.

Information, knowledge, and intelligence are, moreover, distinct concepts. Information is transformed into knowledge only when processed by a user. Intelligence appears as a set of knowledge. Thus, information cannot become knowledge without being used. Additionally, no element of knowledge can be called intelligence without the association of other knowledge [BAT 05, IDE 08].

Moving away from the circulation of information between two entities, we now observe the development of a circuit between one entity and n others, increasing efficiency in knowledge sharing through communication. The Internet plays an essential role in this development. Web 2.0 has added a new way of developing this communication process and of sharing knowledge, enlarging the information circuit by transforming it into a circuit between n entities and n entities. The preexisting linear action thus gives way to a cycle of information sharing between all actors involved: the senders and the receivers of information.

It is also interesting to consider the opinions expressed by Fuld [FUL 06], who believes that information has a tendency to repeat itself, meaning that, if organizations succeed in creating an information memory, through the constant collection of information relevant to their sector, it is possible to facilitate the decision-making process.

For a company, knowledge must go beyond technological knowledge or technical knowledge of processes, in that the analysis and comprehension of the environment in which the business operates should constitute its main aim. It is, indeed, essential to be aware of the internal and external environment simultaneously [COE 00].

Thus, by possessing knowledge of all interactions, a business may gradually develop a global supraintelligence which can be used to successfully analyze situations and act more efficiently.

The response to all these new demands comes through the creation of CI systems. Companies must develop ways of obtaining the strategic information needed for decision-making processes, either through training or through the implementation of new working practices.

The methods used are based on a strategy for the collection of information, followed by an information management phase designed to allow experts to work collectively on the information, in accordance with a shared vision of the future of the company [COE 00].

As Kotler [KOT 00] reports, faced with current competitive markets, it is no longer enough to understand clients. Companies must now pay much more attention to their competitors. Successful businesses have been developed by using intelligence systems to obtain continuous information on their competitors.

No organization can ignore the existence of the strategies of their competitors without running the risk of failing to obtain good products from their intelligence activities, weakening strategy and leading to bad decisions [FUL 06].

CI operations also need to concentrate on consumers and suppliers as, by satisfying their needs, it becomes possible to control the market and, consequently, competitors. The intelligence process then appears relatively simple, involving observation from our intelligence perspective, paying attention to the teaching of management and to signs, and attempting to obtain information directly from its source [FUL 06].

By introducing a CI process, the organization creates, in an environment of uncertainty, a mechanism able to reduce the element of surprise present in markets. This allows decision makers to question the “absolute truths” which they previously believed without hesitation. By being able to satisfy and fulfill needs and by contributing to the existence of users with a greater awareness of their own role, we create durable market advantages [TOM 03].

According to Tomé [TOM 03], CI should be seen as a process able to produce an action, predicting market developments which may, in one way or another, have an impact on the activity of the business. In this way, CI constitutes a value creation process for businesses and leads to strategic reflection and processes. CI contributes to decision making by focusing this strategic reflection and process on priority needs, posing critical questions, and identifying the best course of action to take.

Organizations must become visionary so that, with the capacity for anticipation, they may succeed in identifying transformations requiring action — for example, by identifying future or emerging markets [FUL 06]. This question is accompanied by a preoccupation concerning the creation of a clear distinction between CI and monitoring systems which often exist but concern only the analysis of existing competition and the threats and opportunities it represents.

14.3. Corporate universities

Corporate universities are a support structure for the practice of corporate education within a company. They provide a set of strategic learning solutions applicable to the essential competences of organizations [PER 03].

Company-based education allows the development of a set of actions which aim to broaden knowledge and competences adapted to the strategic interests of the organization and, consequently, suitable for the development of its competitive potential [MAR 05]. Thus, in addition to the fact of promoting the qualification of the human resources of the company, company-based education promotes “[…] the development and establishment of business and human competences, seen as critical for the viabilization of commercial strategies” [EBO 04].

The creation of corporate universities is only meaningful if it is effectively linked to an overriding economic strategy. We must remember the essential character of results and of periodic evaluation of the objectives initially defined for each action. This allows us not only to check whether strategic goals are really being implemented but also to identify possible needs for reformulation of the plan being followed, permitting continual improvement of processes.

A corporate university may have various characteristics, which vary between countries and between organizations. These characteristics, as set out by Pereira [PER 03], are as follows:

– proactiveness;

– centralized organization;

– targeting of specific sectors;

– a desire to deepen forms of actions;

– growing use of new technologies;

– essentially strategic objectives;

– an entrepreneurial perspective linking commercial development and continued training;

– aims integrating the strategy of a specific organization;

– those responsible for the organization are the managers and instructors involved in the teaching process;

– aims involving the creation and democratization of knowledge and encouragement of organizational learning;

– operation as a business center;

– the target public is made up of workers, clients, suppliers, and the community as a whole;

– the teaching body is constituted of internal executives and experts and external lecturers and consultants;

– increasing the social responsibility of the company.

By implementing company-based learning, corporate universities establish themselves as educational establishments with a strategic function: they aim to assist their partner organization in the attainment of a mission and in carrying out activities which create a culture of knowledge, at both individual and collective level [ALL 02].

From a historical viewpoint, corporate universities appear as the result of an evolution of training activities promoted by human resources departments. Initially, their main aim, “… in the United States, was employee training, seeking the improvement of professional competences and excellence in their activity within the company (development of expertise)” [TAR 06b]. In this respect, corporate universities have proven to be the best way for companies to instruct their employees and guarantee competitiveness in markets.

Meister [MEI 98] indicated that corporate universities are the sector in which the increase in offer in higher education is largest and highlighted the following particular aspects, which he considers to be essential to the success of a corporate university:

– unite aims of training development with the strategic needs of organizations;

– implicate decision makers, students, and teachers;

– choose an executive to be responsible for institutional training — known as a Chief Learning Officer;

– consider employee training as a strategic and continuous process and not as an isolated phenomenon;

– link employee salaries to learning;

– extend the reach of the corporate university beyond training employees of the company. Training may also apply to clients and to the supply chain:

– pilot the corporate university as a business center within the company;

– develop a series of new, innovative alliances or partnerships with the higher education sector;

– demonstrate the value of the teaching infrastructure of the corporate university;

– develop the corporate university as an instrument for obtaining competitive commercial advantages and as a business center.

According to Martins [MAR 05], the factors that explain the exponential increase in corporate universities are as follows:

– increased competition for market positions at national and international level;

– increased demand for training and professional qualifications on the part of the workforce;

– awareness of the need to improve the image of organizations, both for the outside public and within the organization;

– a vital need to develop, diffuse, and perpetuate relevant knowledge for the essential competences of the organization.

The greatest concentration of creations of corporate universities took place in the United States in the 1980s. Since 1988, there were around 400 such institutions in the United States; 10 years later, there were around 1,200 and 1,600 in the 2000s. Corporate universities have never been as present in Europe as in the United States; in 2001, there were around 100, mostly in France, where there were around 30 [TAR 06a].

Over the last 15 years, the number and visibility of corporate universities has increased considerably. During this period, the number of conferences, consultations, and publications on teaching practices in businesses and associated subjects has undergone continuous growth. Nevertheless, company-based teaching is not the exclusive domain of corporate universities; this is, indeed, far from being the case. A significant number of companies, particularly large businesses, have invested considerable amounts in this kind of initiative, at business level, and these units are not specifically listed as corporate universities. Others, on the other hand, use the term when in reality they only offer training and development through departments of units focused exclusively on trade [PAT 09].

In the majority of cases, corporate universities emerge within and on the initiative of companies or institutions, with the mission of carrying out educative actions in order to promote individual and collective development. This aspect essentially summarizes the history of corporate universities throughout 30 years in which they have been active. Examples of corporate universities include the General Electric Corporate University [GEC 09] and those of the Bank of Brazil [UNI 09d], the Petrobras University [UNI 09c], the Motorola University [MOT 09], the UCUF [UNI 09a], and others.

In 2007, Fernando Pessoa University (UFP), a Portuguese higher education institution, after implementing CI actions internally, decided to advance toward previously unseen perspectives of a national-level implementation of a corporate university, affirming that, following its conception, “[…] a corporate education program will always begin with the existence of a partnership between Fernando Pessoa University and an organization (company, state, community, association representing a sector, etc.) which is convinced of the importance of qualification for its employees as a way of gaining in competitiveness” [EDU 09].

This association, aside from the fact from being able to link practical knowledge with knowledge obtained through university research, guarantees that educational programs will be geared toward practical operations. These programs follow the three main axes of company-based education:

– in-depth knowledge of the organization (culture, values, traditions, and vision);

– analysis of the environment surrounding the organization (contracts, clients, competitors, tendencies, and best practice of other organizations);

– the acquisition of basic competences linked to organizational and individual competitiveness (learning to learn, effective communication, collaboration, creativity and problem solving, reading competence, information technologies).

The practical result of this work was the appearance of the first Portuguese corporate university, the CEVAL business university, establishing a partnership between Fernando Pessoa University and the chamber of commerce of the Vales do Lima e Minho region, created in January 2007 [UNI 09b].

The UFP’s work in company-based education did not stop there, and in November 2008, the UFP Academy, a corporate university specific to the UFP, was created [ACA 09a], dedicated to the qualification of current and former employees and students and to the development of organizational competences.

At a time when competitiveness and innovation are essential elements for the survival of organizations, it is important to develop capacities for learning, especially to create new knowledge. As Tarapanoff [TAR 06a] indicates, for this to occur, organizations and their employees must learn to become organizations with a focus on learning.

We consider that the interest in company-based education is naturally connected to the major changes currently underway in the geography of production and consumption linked to the value of knowledge in post-industrial societies [FER 06].

In parallel with the development of corporate universities, four factors emerged which have had an effect on the economic world, education, and society as a whole [PAT 05]:

– the appearance of an economy of knowledge and training organizations;

– the rapidity and frequency of restructuring in companies, leading entrepreneurs to center their action on shared principles and practices;

– the constant and developing presence of ICT (information and communication technology) and its application in training and development;

– the growing diversification of education systems, replacing models centered on training plans by models centered on functions, models centered on a campus by diffused learning systems, and the standardized path of knowledge progression by multiple access routes to knowledge.

The phenomenon of corporate universities is situated at the center of these four important factors in the current economy.

14.4. The role of CI in the creation of corporate universities

For company-based education to become an effective instrument for competition and excellence, a company must first prepare the ground to welcome it. Second, this preparation makes use of the existence of a flexible and adaptable organizational structure, combined with a business culture centered on personal evaluation and investment in training. Third, it passes through the use of CI to try and predict the future and guarantee innovative change to the project, becoming the necessary means for attainment of the final aim: the creation of a corporate university. It is only then that management may progress in a sure and credible manner, reducing the part played by uncertainty in future strategic decisions.

Fuld [FUL 09] describes the CI process as shown in Figure 14.1.

In the planning phase, we identify questions that guide the collection process. When dealing with public information, we check that the information source is sufficiently large to enable attainment of predefined objectives. Next, we collect primary sources, including data often extracted from direct contact with individuals. The analysis and production phase aims to convert retrieved data into relevant information. Finally, we proceed to the creation and diffusion of reports. These reports should produce critical intelligence in a format corresponding to the needs of the decision maker.

These steps may lead to the implementation — or avoidance of the implementation — of a CI process with a view to creating a corporate university. One thing is certain: on reaching the final stage of report production, the decision maker must be able to suggest different options based on various anticipated possible scenarios.

Thus, through the use of CI techniques, organizations will be able to predict contract opportunities, possible constraints, and strategies, allowing them to remain a step ahead of their competitors and become more competitive. CI thus accords a fundamental role to the sustainable development of a company education project, while also reducing the degree of uncertainty of directors in decision making.

14.5. Corporate universities and potential domains of action

The sectors of activity of corporate universities vary from one organization to another. There is no standard model for a corporate university; models are created according to need and based on the strategic aims of the founding entity. These models are also influenced by the economic and financial situation of the surrounding organization or country. The analysis of internal and external context is, in this respect, one of the main aspects to consider when designing a corporate university. This analysis must cover not only consumers and suppliers but also competitors.

In this phase of design and choice of the most suitable model for a corporate university, CI plays an extremely important role. CI contributes to the processing of information produced during the analysis of the surrounding environment, identifying constraints and appropriate solutions for each situation, allowing the avoidance of sudden changes through forward planning.

Rowley et al. [ROW 98] presented the first corporate universities as education centers, created internally, within companies responsible for continuous education and training. Their initial intentions were as follows:

– To provide employees with the ability to work with new techniques and updated practices.

– To develop a suitably trained and prepared workforce, which will necessarily give the company a competitive advantage.

– To change the first education centers and adopt structures similar to those of higher education institutions.

There are now various corporate universities throughout the world which assist their parent companies in developing a base of collaborators with access to strategic information. This allows the company to remain competitive.

Over the years, corporate universities have progressively taken on other roles, enlarging their sphere of action. Currently, corporate universities are developing around three main possible axes:

– in-depth knowledge of the organization (culture, values, traditions, and vision);

– analysis of the environment of the organization (business, clients, competitors, tendencies, and best practices of other organizations);

– basic competences for organizational and individual competitiveness (research preparation, effective communication, collaboration, creativity, problem solving, reading competences, and information technologies).

Based on these three axes, the corporate university divides its activity into different projects and activities, whether in training or in simple organizational improvements. The Accor Latin America Academy [ACA 09b] is an example illustrating this type of actions.

Another way of working consists of creating strong associations between corporate education and the management of people and competences, dividing the actions of the corporate university into three main operational programs, each oriented toward the three phases of the relationship between an individual and a company or institution: recruitment, development, and departure. The operational welcome program aims to integrate individuals into the business through various welcoming actions destined for target publics. The operational development program is devoted to relations between the company, its employees, and external partners. This program may have aims ranging from performance management to updating and developing knowledge through lifelong training, to promoting the enrichment of the organizational culture, and to the preparation for change processes, among other aspects. The organizational program for departure aims to accompany those leaving the company or institution, using various mechanisms to discover the reasons for this departure and seeking occasions for new relations in the future. The idea that predominates in this case is not to limit interaction to the last moment of contact with the institution but to maintain points for resuming contact. The UFP Academy [ACA 09a] is one example of a corporate university based on this strategy of action.

We would do well to remember that there is no preformatted model for a corporate university, and each must adapt to the real needs of the founding entity, independently of the form in which it distributes its sectors of action, the names it gives to its programs, the lessons it gives, and the individuals it involves in its work. The quality of the model of the corporate university is measured not by its form but by the results achieved and associated success stories.

By analyzing the theoretical propositions of these initiatives and their respective activities, we conclude that the corporate university tag refers, finally, to a new generation of strategic teaching initiatives [PAT 09]. This new generation of initiatives is as valuable as its impact on the individual and collective development of those involved, i.e. the sustainable development of organizations.

14.6. Integrated CI services in corporate universities

The actions of corporate universities are inevitably linked to the training and development of human resources, but are not completely identical to these tasks. The corporate university also presupposes a role in integrating different sectors of the company, through the implementation of transversal projects, such as policies for welcoming and integrating new employees. This policy may be extended to welcoming suppliers, clients, or partners, with the constant aim of creating an immense network of multifunctional contacts to concretize the position of the company in the relevant market.

In company-based learning, CI may presuppose a perspective of provision of services to the mother company. These services are structured in different ways: either on the initiative of the corporate university itself through diagnosis of sectors where CI might support decision making, or at the request of managers who, at moments of strategic decision making, may use CI services to predict actions and decisions which would put the company in an advantageous situation.

How, then, can CI services be applied in a corporate university?

In our opinion, we must begin by raising awareness of the importance of such services among managers, by demonstrating the ways in which CI allows users to preempt the plans of the competition. An engagement of this kind should focus on the potential effects of the practice of CI, demonstrating its effectiveness through the construction of a pilot project.

The employees of the organization must also be made aware of the importance of CI and be supplied with tools to allow them to play an active part in its implementation, practicing CI on a daily basis in the course of their work. As Fuld [FUL 06] reminds us, CI can be taught, and all members of an organization may therefore put it to practical use to improve results.

One form of action would be to create small-scale CI training courses. As an alternative, or in addition, we might include more occasional and specific training actions in the course of sectorial actions, for example a “CI hour”. This would be made easier by the fact that CI is a completely transversal subject which complements other subjects. Initiatives of this kind might result in the implementation of small CI projects in the context of the day-to-day work of personnel, allowing employees to gain understanding of the use of this tool.

After carrying out engagement and awareness tasks, we must define general aims for the CI project and a timeline for its implementation. Of course, these aims will always require organizational supervision, in direct association with the strategic aims of the company.

A project group must then be set up, based on a multicompetent team created to respond to the needs of the specific project. This group does not need to be particularly large: three to five elements suffice. It must, however, be sufficiently diversified to cover different perspectives of the same reality, thus enriching the results produced. The group must operate with sufficient autonomy to manage its own work and suggest actions and must have access to sufficient human and material resources and a calendar of actions.

Based on the predefined general objectives, the project group will be responsible for the definition of specific aims and the implementation of the CI process in its different phases.

After carrying out CI work, the group must report on a proposed plan of action. This report will act as a support for the decision to be made.

Once a decision has been made based on the CI work carried out, the results must be evaluated in order to identify the real effects of the CI procedure behind the decision. This evaluation of results may lead to a redefinition of the initial general aims, entering into a new project cycle where each phase will be repeated and reevaluated at the end of the process.

Figure 14.2 summarizes the possible phases of application of CI services in a corporate university.

CI services attempt to provide a response to various questions [TOM 03], such as:

– What are the characteristics of the sector in which the organization operates?

– Who are, or who might be, its competitors?

– What are the strengths and weaknesses of these competitors?

– What are the likely tactics of these competitors?

– What anticipated action should the organization take in relation to the predicted tactics of its competitors?

14.7. Conclusion

We live in a world with an increasingly global and competitive economy where only the most attentive can survive. This kind of scenario does not allow us to continue using conservative action strategies, insufficiently open to new action mechanisms. Information and knowledge are produced at incredible speed, demanding increased perspicacity.

CI is an essential analytical tool when confronted with today’s economic challenges, used with the aim of maintaining the economic competitiveness of businesses and of society as a whole. We are faced with a world dominated by the power of information, where strategic information management, using CI, has become not only essential for the survival and development of human societies, but also a specific issue for the maintenance of power and independence by states [JUI 09].

In our opinion, corporate universities could have a deciding role in the reinforcement, diffusion, and use of CI practices in operations, in that they are able to implement actions relating to awareness and engagement on the part of managers and collaborators, acting as a catalyst for the individual and collective development of all employees of an organization, teaching them to look beyond the small, closed world of their daily activities and to find new action mechanisms. It is only in this way that it will be possible to maintain an active organization through a constant learning process.

In summary, we can say that there is a common denominator between CI practices and the actions of corporate universities: innovation. With the presence of this shared element, both play a key role in the takeoff of societies and institutions. We can only hope that CI and corporate universities will work together to further these aims.

14.8. Bibliography

[ACA 09a] ACADEMIA UFP, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, February 2009, www.ufp.pt.

[ACA 09b] ACADÉMIE ACCOR LATIN AMERICA, February 2009, http://academie.accorbrasil.com.br/.

[ALL 02] ALLEN M., Corporate University Handbook: Designing, Managing, and Growing a Successful Program, Amacon, New York, 2002.

[BAT 05] BATES M.J., “Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science”, Information Research, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 239, 2005.

[COE 00] COELHO G.M., DOU H., “Inteligência competitiva e a formação de recursos humanos no Brasil”, Revista de Biblioteconomia de Brasília, vol. 23/24, no. 4, pp. 455–472, 2000.

[COM 94] COMMISSARIAT GÉNÉRAL AU PLAN, Intelligence économique et Stratégique des Entreprises, report of a workgroup led by MARTRE H., La Documentation Française, Paris, 1994.

[EBO 04] EBOLI M., “Educação Corporativa”, Revista T&D — Inteligência Corporativa, vol. 137, no. 12, p. 48, November 2004.

[EDU 09] EDUCAÇÃO CORPORATIVA, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, February 2009, www.ufp.pt.

[ETT 95] ETTORE B., “Managing competitive intelligence”, Management Review, vol. 84, no. 10, pp. 15–19, 1995.

[FER 06] FERREIRA J.R., BENETTI G., “O futuro da indústria: educação corporativa — reflexões e práticas: coletânea de artigos”, MDIC/STI: IEL, Brasília, Brazil, p. 213, 2006.

[FUL 06] FULD L.M., The Secret Language of Competitive Intelligence: How to See Through and Stay Ahead of Business Disruptions, Distortions, Rumors, and Smoke Screens, Crown Business, New York, p. 309, 2006.

[FUL 09] FULD L.M., Fuld & Company — The global leader in competitive intelligence, February 2009, www.fuld.com/.

[GEC 09] GE CORPORATE UNIVERSITY, February 2009, www.ge.com/careers/life_at_ge/index.html.

[IDE 08] IDEHEN K.U., “The difference between information and knowledge”, Kingsley Idehen’s Blog Data Space, November 2008, www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/index.vspx?id=650.

[JUI 09] JUILLET A., El concepto y el dispositivo publico de la inteligencia economía, February 2009, www.intelligence-economique.gouv.fr/.

[KOT 00] KOTLER P., Administração de Marketing, Prentice Hall, São Paulo, 2000, www.netsaber.com.br/resumos/ver_resumo_c_3015.html.

[MAR 05] MARTINS H.G., “Para Aonde Vai a Universidade Corporativa? Notas Para Uma Agenda da Educação Corporativa Brasileira”, O Futuro da Indústria: Educação Corporativa: Coletânea de Artigos, MDIC/STI: IEL/NC, Brasilia, Brazil, p. 192, 2005.

[MEI 98] MEISTER J., Corporate Universities: Lessons in Building a World Class Workforce, McGraw Hill, New York, 1998.

[MOT 09] MOTOROLA, Motorola University, February 2009, http://intrarts.com/Motorola/index.shtml.

[PAT 05] PATON R., PETERS G., STOREY J., TAYLOR S., Handbook of Corporate University Development, Gower Publishing, London, p. 285, 2005.

[PAT 09] PATON R., PETERS G., QUINTAS P., Estratégia de educação corporativa: universidades corporativas na prática, February 2009, http://www.educor.desenvolvimento.gov.br/public/arquivo/arq1229431109.pdf.

[PER 03] PEREIRA C.S., “Educação Corporativa na Era do Conhecimentoé”, Gestão de empresas na era do conhecimento, Edições Sílabo, Lisbon, vol. 1, p. 551, 2003.

[POR 98] PORTER M., “Clusters and the new economics competitions”, Harvard Business Review, pp. 77–90, November/December 1998.

[QUE 06] QUEYRAS J., QUONIAM L., “Inteligência Competitiva”, Inteligência, Informação e Conhecimento, IBICT/UNESCO, Brasília, Brazil, p. 456, 2006.

[ROW 98] ROWLEY D.J., LUJAN H.D., DOLENCE M., Strategic Choices for the Academy: How Demand for Lifelong Learning Will Re-Create Higher Education, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, p. 309, 1998.

[TAR 06a] TARAPANOFF K., Inteligência, Informação e Conhecimento, IBICT/UNESCO, São Paulo, Brazil, 2006.

[TAR 06b] TARAPANOFF K., FEREEIRA J.R., “Aprendizado Organizacional: Panorama da Educação Corporativa no Contexto Internacional”, Inteligência, Informação e Conhecimento, IBICT/UNESCO, Brasília, Brazil, p. 456, 2006.

[TAY 06] TAYLOR J., “Leonard Fuld interview with Jeff Taylor. Factiva CI Center, 2001”, The Secret Language of Competitive Intelligence, Crown Business, New York, p. 309, 2006.

[TOM 03] TOMÉ F., “A Inteligência nos Negócios”, Gestão de empresas na era do conhecimento, Edições Sílabo, Lisbon, vol. 1, p. 551, 2003.

[UNI 09a] Únion Fenosa — UNIVERSIDAD CORPORATIVA, February 2009, www.unionfenosa.es/webuf/wcm/connect/ufwebcontenidos/WebUF/Conocenos/RecursosHumanos/UniversidadCorporativaUCUF/.

[UNI 09b] UNIVERSIDADE CORPORATIVA CEVAL, Conselho Empresarial dos Vales do Lima e Minho, February 2009, http://www.ceval.pt/userfiles/files/publicacoes%20ceval/24813.pdf.

[UNI 09c] UNIVERSIDADE PETROBRÁS, February 2009, www2.petrobras.com.br/Petrobras/portugues/empregos/emp_gestao_index.htm.

[UNI 09d] UNIVERSIDADE CORPORATIVA DO BANCO DO BRASIL, February 2009, www44.bb.com.br/appbb/portal/bb/unv/index.jsp.

---

¹ Chapter written by Cláudia CAMELO, Miguel Rombert TRIGO, Luc QUONIAM, João Casqueira CARDOSO.