, Volume 110, Issue 2, pp 541–580 | Cite as

Sleeping Beauties and their princes in innovation studies

  • Aurora A. C. Teixeira
  • Pedro Cosme Vieira
  • Ana Patrícia Abreu


A Sleeping Beauty (SB) is a publication that goes unnoticed for a long time, and then, almost suddenly, is awakened by a ‘prince’ (PR), attracting from there on a lot of attention in terms of citations. Although there are some studies on the SB and the PR phenomena in the sciences, barely any research on this topic has been conducted in the social sciences, let alone in innovation studies. Based on 52,373 articles extracted from the Web of Science and using a new method that, comparatively with extant methods, selects SBs with the highest scientific impact, we found that, similarly to the sciences, SBs are rare in the field of innovation (<0.02%). In contrast with the sciences, the depth of sleep is relatively small, ranging from 7 to 17 years. All the 8 SBs found, and the (37) corresponding princes, were published in highly renowned journals (e.g., Harvard Business Review, Journal of Management Studies, Organization Studies, Rand Journal of Economics, Research Policy). The explanations for the delayed recognition are associated with innovative methods, scientific resistance, and theoretical-relatedness. The role of highly influential authors and self-awakening mechanisms were critical triggers for bringing SBs into scientific notoriety.


Sleeping Beauty Prince Delayed recognition Awakening intermittency Innovation 



The authors appreciate helpful comments by two anonymous referees and the editor, Wolfgang Glänzel. This research has been financed by Portuguese Public Funds through FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia) in the framework of the project UID/ECO/04105/2013.


* (**) Indicates an article that is a Sleeping Beauty (Prince).

  1. Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2009). h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. **Armbruster, H., Bikfalvi, A., Kinkel, S., & Lay, G. (2008). Organizational innovation: The challenge of measuring non-technical in large-scale survey. Technovation, 28(10), 644–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. **Avlonitis, G. J., Papastathopoulou, P. G., & Gounaris, S. P. (2001). An empirically-based typology of product innovativeness for new financial services: success and failure scenarios. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(5), 324–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barber, B. (1961). Resistance by scientists to scientific discovery. Science, 134, 596–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *Barras, R. (1986). Towards a theory of innovation in services. Research Policy, 15(4), 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. **Barras, R. (1990). Interactive innovation in financial and business services - the vanguard of the service revolution. Research Policy, 19(3), 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. **Basole, R. C. (2009). Visualization of interfirm relations in a converging mobile ecosystem. Journal of Information Technology, 24(2), 144–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baumgartner, H. (2010). Bibliometric reflections on the history of consumer research. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(3), 233–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhagwat, R., & Sharma, M. K. (2007). Performance measurement of supply chain management using the analytical hierarchy process. Production Planning and Control, 18(8), 666–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2010). On Sleeping Beauties, princes and other tales of citation distributions…. Research Evaluation, 19(3), 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, K. A., & Mitchell, T. R. (1993). Organizational obstacles: Links with financial performance, customer satisfaction, and job-satisfaction in a service environment. Human Relations, 46(6), 725–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burke, W. W. (1997). What human resource practitioners need to know for the twenty-first century. Human Resource Management, 36(1), 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burrell, Q. L. (2005). Are ‘Sleeping Beauties’ to be expected. Scientometrics, 65(3), 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Butcher, J., & Jeffrey, P. (2005). The use of bibliometric indicators to explore industry–academia collaboration trends over time in the field of membrane use for water treatment. Technovation, 25, 1273–1280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. **Camison-Zornoza, C., Lapiedra-Alcami, R., Segarra-Cipres, M., et al. (2004). A meta-analysis of innovation and organizational size. Organization Studies, 25(3), 331–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cattaneo, M., Meoli, M., & Signori, A. (2016). The moderating effect of university legitimacy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. **Chwelos, P., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. (2001). Research report: empirical test of an EDI adoption model. Information Systems Research, 12(3), 304–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cole, S. (1970). Professional standing and the reception of scientific discoveries. American Journal of Sociology, 76, 286–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. **Coombs, R., & Miles, I. (2000). Innovation, measurement and services: The new problematique. In R. Coombs & I. Miles (Eds.), Innovation systems in the service economy: Measurement and case study analysis, vol. 18 of the series economics of science, technology and innovation (pp. 85–103). Boston: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cressey, D. (2015). ‘Sleeping Beauty’ papers slumber for decades. Nature. doi: 10.1038/nature.2015.17615.Google Scholar
  21. *Damanpour, F. (1992). Organizational size and innovation. Organization Studies, 13(3), 375–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. **Damanpour, F. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation: Developing and testing. Multiple contingency models. Management Science, 42(5), 693–716.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. **Damanpour, F., & Schneider, M. (2006). Phases of the adoption of innovation inorganizations: Effects of environment, organization, and top managers. British Journal of Management, 17(3), 215–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. *Damanpour, F., Szabat, K. A., & Evan, W. M. (1989). The relationship between types of innovation and organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies, 26(6), 587–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davison, R. M., & Ou, C. X. J. (2007). Sharing knowledge in China: Experiences in an SME. In PACIS 2007-11th Pacific Asia conference on information systems: Managing diversity in digital enterprises.Google Scholar
  26. Di Stefano, G., Gambardella, A., & Verona, G. (2012). Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions. Research Policy, 41(8), 1283–1295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Djellal, F., Gallouj, F., & Miles, I. (2013). Two decades of research on innovation in services: Which place for public services? Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 27, 98–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. **Dodd, S. D. (2002). Metaphors and meaning: A grounded cultural model of us entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(5), 519–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. **Drejer, I. (2004). Identifying innovation in surveys of services: A Schumpeterian perspective. Research Policy, 33(3), 551–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Drew, C. H., Pettibone, K. G., Finch, F. O., Giles, D., & Jordan, P. (2016). Automated research impact assessment: A new bibliometrics approach. Scientometrics, 106(3), 987–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Du, J., & Wu, Y. (2016). A bibliometric framework for identifying “princes” who wake up the “Sleeping Beauty” in challenge-type scientific discoveries. Journal of Data and Information Science, 1(1), 1–19. doi: 10.20309/201602.Google Scholar
  32. Fagerberg, J., Fosaas, M., & Sapprasert, K. (2012). Innovation: Exploring the knowledge base. Research Policy, 41(7), 1132–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. **Farjoun, M. (2002). Towards an organic perspective on strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 23(7), 561–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. *Gadrey, J., Gallouj, F., & Weinstein, O. (1995). New modes of innovation: How services benefit industry. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 6(3), 4–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. **Gallouj, F., & Weinstein, O. (1997). Innovation in services. Research Policy, 26(4–5), 537–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Garfield, E. (1980). Premature discovery or delayed recognition: Why? In Essays of an Information Scientist, 4, 488–493.Google Scholar
  37. **Ghalayini, A. M., & Noble, J. S. (1996). The changing basis of performance measurement. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 16(8), 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. **Ghalayini, A. M., Noble, J. S., & Crowe, T. J. (1997). An integrated dynamic performance measurement system for improving manufacturing competitiveness. International Journal of Production Economics, 48(3), 207–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Glänzel, W., & Garfield, E. (2004). The myth of delayed recognition citation analysis demonstrates that premature discovery, while rare, does occur. The Scientist, 18(11), 8.Google Scholar
  40. Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B., & Thijs, B. (2003). Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon. Scientometrics, 58(3), 571–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Griffith, J. R. (1994). Reengineering health-care: Management-systems for survivors. Hospital and Health Services Administration, 39(4), 451–470.Google Scholar
  42. Griffith, J. R., Smith, D. G., & Wheeler, J. R. C. (1994). Continuous improvement of strategic information-systems: Concepts and issues. Health Care Management Review, 19(2), 43–52.Google Scholar
  43. Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (1995). Total quality management: Empirical, conceptual, and practical issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 309–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. **Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. Rand Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38.Google Scholar
  45. **Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link? Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 30–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. **Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, M., & Vopel, K. (1999). Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(3), 511–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. **Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hauser, J., Tellis, G. J., & Griffin, A. (2006). Research on innovation: A review and agenda for marketing science. Marketing Science, 25(6), 687–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hawkins, R. G., Ritter, L. S., & Walter, I. (1973). What economists think of their journals. Journal of Political Economy, 81, 1017–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. **Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 119–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hiltrop, J. M., & Despres, C. (1994). Benchmarking the performance of human-resource management. Long Range Planning, 27(6), 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Holsapple, C. W., & O’Leary, D. E. (2009). How much and where? Private vs. public universities’ publication patterns in the information systems discipline. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 318–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hu, Z., & Wu, Y. (2014). Regularity in the time-dependent distribution of the percentage of never-cited papers: An empirical pilot study based on the six journals. Journal of Informetrics, 8, 136–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Huang, T.-C., Hsu, C., & Ciou, Z.-J. (2015). Systematic methodology for excavating Sleeping Beauty publications and their princes from medical and biological engineering studies. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, 35(6), 749–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. **Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kalaitzidakis, P., Mamuneas, T. P., & Stengos, T. (2001). Rankings of academic journals and institutions in economics. Discussion Papers of the University of Cyprus, 10, 1–29.Google Scholar
  57. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. (1992a). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79.Google Scholar
  58. *Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992b). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 69(1), 71–79.Google Scholar
  59. Ke, Q., Ferrara, E., Radicchi, F., & Flammini, A. (2015). Defining and identifying Sleeping Beauties in science. PNAS, 112(24), 7426–7431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kozak, M. (2013). Current science has its ‘Sleeping Beauties’. Current Science, 104(9), 1129–1130.Google Scholar
  61. **Kraemer, K. L., & Dedrick, J. (2002). Strategic use of the internet and e-commerce: Cisco Systems. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(1), 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kumar, R. R., Stauvermann, P. J., & Patel, A. (2016). Exploring the link between research and economic growth: An empirical study of China and USA. Quality and Quantity, 50, 1073. doi: 10.1007/s11135-015-0191-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lachance, C., & Larivière, V. (2014). On the citation lifecycle of papers with delayed recognition. Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 863–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lange, L. L. (2005). Sleeping Beauties in psychology: Comparisons of “hits” and “missed signals” in psychological journals. History of Psychology, 8(2), 194–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. **Lerner, J. (1994). The importance of patent scope: An empirical analysis. Rand Journal of Economics, 25(1), 319–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Levinthal, D. A., & Warglien, M. (1999). Landscape design: Designing for local action in complex worlds. Organization Science, 10(3), 342–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Leydesdorff, L., Rotolo, D., & de Nooy, N. (2013). Innovation as a nonlinear process, the scientometric perspective, and the specification of an ‘innovation opportunities explorer’. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 25(6), 641–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Li, J. (2014). Citation curves of ‘all-elements-sleeping-beauties’: ‘Flash in the pan’ first and then ‘delayed recognition’. Scientometrics, 100, 595–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Li, J., & Shi, D. (2016). Sleeping Beauties in genius work: When were they awakened? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(2), 432–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Li, J., Shi, D., Zhao, S. X., & Ye, F. Y. (2014a). A study of the “heartbeat spectra” for “Sleeping Beauties”. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 493–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Li, J., Shi, D., Zhao, S. X., & Ye, F. Y. (2014b). A study of the “heartbeat spectra” for “Sleeping Beauties”. Journal of Informetrics, 8, 493–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Li, J., & Ye, F. Y. (2012). The phenomenon of all-elements-sleeping-beauties in scientific literature. Scientometrics, 92(3), 795–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Li, S., Yu, G., Zhang, X., & Zhang, W.-F. (2014). Identifying princes of Sleeping Beauty: Knowledge mapping in discovering princes. In 2014 International conference on management science and engineering (21th). Auguest 17–19, 2014 Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  74. **Li, Y. (2009). The technological roadmap of Cisco’s business ecosystem. Technovation, 29(5), 379–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Liang, L., Lin, X., Zhong, Z., & Xue, X. (2009). Delayed recognition: Sleeping beauties in science. Journal of Dialectics of Nature, 31(1), 39–45.Google Scholar
  76. Liu, Z., Yin, Y., Liu, W., & Dunford, M. (2015). Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 103(1), 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Longbottom, D., & Zairi, M. (1996). Total quality management in financial services: An empirical study of best practice. Total Quality Management, 7(6), 579–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. **Lusch, R. F., Vargo, S. L., & O’Brien, M. (2007). Competing through service: Insights from service-dominant logic. Journal of Retailing, 83(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Ma, Z., Pan, Y., Yu, Z., Wang, J., Jia, J., & Wu, Y. (2013). A quantitative study on the effectiveness of peer review for academic journals. Scientometrics, 95(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Mafini, C. (2015). Predicting organisational performance through innovation, quality and inter-organisational systems: A public sector perspective. Journal of Applied Business Research, 31(3), 939–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. **Martinsons, M., Davison, R., & Tse, D. (1999). The balanced scorecard: a foundation for the strategic management of information systems. Decision Support Systems, 25(1), 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Martinsons, M. G., & Davison, R. M. (2007). Strategic decision making and support systems: Comparing American, Japanese and Chinese management. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), 284–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Marzolla, M. (2016). Assessing evaluation procedures for individual researchers: The case of the Italian National Scientific Qualification. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 408–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. **Miles, I. (1993). Services in the new industrial-economy. Futures, 25(6), 653–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. *Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75–86.Google Scholar
  86. Nardelli, G. (2015). The interactions between information and communication technologies and innovation in services: A conceptual typology. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 7(3), 15–39.Google Scholar
  87. Noci, G. (1996). Selecting quality based programs in small firms. Small Business Economics, 8(6), 431–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Nohria, N., & Berkley, J. D. (1994). An action perspective: The crux of the new management. California Management Review, 36(4), 70–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. *Normann, R., & Ramírez, R. (1993). From value chain to value constellation: Designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review, 71(4), 65–77.Google Scholar
  90. Ohba, N., & Nakao, K. (2012). Sleeping Beauties in ophthalmology. Scientometrics, 93(2), 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Peterson, S., & Niels, M. (1997). Strategic planning at a government laboratory: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Technical Information Department’s experience with planning. Technical Communication, 44(4), 412–417.Google Scholar
  92. Powell, A. (1994). Management models and measurement in the virtual library. Special Libraries, 85(4), 260–263.Google Scholar
  93. **Ramírez, R. (1999). Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Ren, T. (2008). Application of supply chain performance measurement based on SCOR model. In 4th International conference on wireless communications, networking and mobile computing, Dalian, People’s Republic of China, October 12–17, 2008.Google Scholar
  95. **Rohrbeck, R., Hoelzle, K., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2009). Opening up for competitive advantage: How Deutsche Telekom creates an open innovation ecosystem. R&D Management, 39(4), 420–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sarkis, J., Presley, A., & Liles, D. (1997). The strategic evaluation of candidate business process reengineering projects. International Journal of Production Economics, 50(2–3), 261–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. **Stabell, C. B., & Fjeldstad, Ø. D. (1998). Configuring value for competitive advantage: On chains, shops, and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 413–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. **Subramanian, A., & Nilakanta, S. (1996). Organizational innovativeness: Exploring the relationship between organizational determinant of innovation, types of innovations and measures of organizational performance. International Journal of Management Science, 24(6), 631–647.Google Scholar
  99. Sun, J., Min, C., & Li, J. (2016). A vector for measuring obsolescence of scientific articles. Scientometrics, 107(2), 745–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. **Sundbo, J. (1997). Management of innovation in services. Service Industries Journal, 17(3), 432–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. *Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. Rand Journal of Economics, 21, 172–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Uriona-Maldonado, M., dos Santos, R. N. M., & Varvakis, G. (2012). State of the art on the Systems of Innovation research: A bibliometrics study up to 2009. Scientometrics, 91(3), 977–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. van Raan, A. F. (2004). Sleeping Beauties in science. Scientometrics, 59(3), 461–466.Google Scholar
  104. van Raan, A. F. J. (2015). Dormitory of physical and engineering sciences: Sleeping Beauties may be sleeping innovations. PLoS ONE, 10(10), e0139786. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. **Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Volberda, H. W., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Heij, C. V. (2013). Management innovation: Management as fertile ground for innovation. European Management Review, 10(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. **Walker, R. M. (2006). Innovation type and diffusion: an empirical analysis of local government. Public Administration, 84(2), 311–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. **Walker, R. M. (2008). An empirical evaluation of innovation types and organizational and environmental characteristics: Towards a configuration framework. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 591–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. **Walker, R. M., & Boyne, G. A. (2006). Public management reform and organizational performance: An empirical assessment of the UK Labour government’s public service improvement strategy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25, 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 365–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Wang, J., Ma, F., Chen, M., & Rao, Y. (2012). Why and how can Sleeping Beauties be awakened? The Electronic Library, 30(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Witell, L., Snyder, H., Gustafsson, A., Fombelle, P., & Kristensson, P. (2016). Defining service innovation: A review and synthesis. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2863–2872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Wyatt, H. V. (1961). Knowledge and prematurity-journey from transformation to DNA. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 18(2), 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. **Zhu, K., Kraemer, K., & Xu, S. (2003). Electronic business adoption by European firms: a cross-country assessment of the facilitators and inhibitors. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(4), 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CEF.UP, Faculdade de Economia do PortoUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.INESC TECPortoPortugal
  3. 3.OBEGEFPortoPortugal
  4. 4.Faculdade de EconomiaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations