This paper aims to analyze the moderating effect of knowledge leakage on the relationship between absorptive capacity and co-innovation, which implies collaborative work and knowledge exchange with external actors on virtual innovation platforms.,The research model was tested in a sample of companies through the use of structural equations by the partial least squares method.,The results confirm that absorptive capacity is a prior condition for co-innovation. However, the most interesting and surprising result has to do with knowledge leakage, which actually has a negative moderating effect, but whose size is modest, which dismisses the great damages that such leakage could generate.,This study is pioneering in analyzing knowledge leakage in the context of virtual innovation platforms, which occurs in a different manner as compared to leakage in the context of collaborative research and development, widely analyzed in the literature. However, the main contribution of the paper lies in the fact that the results evidence the existence of an intermediate position between the traditional approach that insists on demonstrating the devastating consequences of the leakage and the emerging approach that dismisses these negative repercussions and conceives leakage as a positive organizational phenomenon, natural and inherent to the interaction of the firm with the environment. The results also contradict recent empirical evidence that completely dismisses the negative repercussions of knowledge leakage in contexts where incremental innovations prevail.

中文翻译：

---

当谈到吸收能力对协同创新的影响时，知识泄漏到底有多有害？

本文旨在分析知识泄漏对吸收能力与合作创新之间关系的调节作用，这意味着在虚拟创新平台上的协作工作和与外部参与者的知识交换。结果表明，吸收能力是协同创新的先决条件。然而，最有趣和令人惊讶的结果与知识泄漏有关，它实际上具有负面的调节作用，但其规模适中，消除了这种泄漏可能产生的巨大损害。虚拟创新平台的背景 与文献研究中广泛分析的协作研究和开发中的泄漏相比，这种泄漏发生的方式有所不同。但是，本文的主要贡献在于以下事实：结果证明了在坚持证明泄漏的毁灭性后果的传统方法与消除这些负面影响并将泄漏视为一种新方法之间出现的中间立场。企业与环境互动所固有和固有的积极组织现象。该结果还与最近的经验证据相矛盾，后者在渐进式创新盛行的情况下完全消除了知识泄漏的负面影响。然而，本文的主要贡献在于以下事实：结果表明，在传统方法（坚持证明泄漏的破坏性后果）与新兴方法之间存在着中间立场，传统方法试图证明泄漏的破坏性后果，而新兴方法则消除了这些负面影响并将泄漏视为一种企业与环境互动所固有和固有的积极组织现象。该结果还与最近的经验证据相矛盾，后者在渐进式创新盛行的情况下完全消除了知识泄漏的负面影响。然而，本文的主要贡献在于以下事实：结果表明，在传统方法（坚持证明泄漏的破坏性后果）与新兴方法之间存在着中间立场，传统方法试图证明泄漏的破坏性后果，而新兴方法则消除了这些负面影响并将泄漏视为一种企业与环境互动所固有和固有的积极组织现象。该结果还与最近的经验证据相矛盾，后者在渐进式创新盛行的情况下完全消除了知识泄漏的负面影响。本文的主要贡献在于以下事实：结果表明，在传统方法（坚持证明泄漏的毁灭性后果）与新兴方法之间存在中间立场，传统方法坚持证明泄漏的毁灭性后果，而新兴方法则消除了这些负面影响并将泄漏视为积极的组织企业与环境互动所固有和固有的现象。该结果还与最近的经验证据相矛盾，后者在渐进式创新盛行的情况下完全消除了知识泄漏的负面影响。本文的主要贡献在于以下事实：结果表明，在传统方法（坚持证明泄漏的毁灭性后果）与新兴方法之间存在中间立场，传统方法坚持证明泄漏的毁灭性后果，而新兴方法则消除了这些负面影响并将泄漏视为积极的组织企业与环境互动所固有和固有的现象。该结果还与最近的经验证据相矛盾，后者在渐进式创新盛行的情况下完全消除了知识泄漏的负面影响。