*Assessing Interdependencies in Innovation Ecosystems: Evidence from the Training Partnerships… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112558*

The study presents some limitations. In qualitative analysis, results are interviewee-contingent and context-specific findings. Interviewee cognitive dissonance could cause inaccurate assessments of knowledge-based cooperative processes, motivating them to report changes that brought beliefs and behaviors into alignment, thus potentially overestimating (or underestimating) knowledge sharing and collaborative practices. Retrospective reports are themselves errorprone, as respondents could inflate their current standing or implicit theories assuming value creation. Although a single case study analysis precludes any generalizability of results, the rich evidence base associated with the case highlights lessons learned for similar situations.
