JACIII Vol.26 No.4 pp. 619-630
doi: 10.20965/jaciii.2022.p0619


Cooperative Network Embedding, Knowledge Network Structure and Technological Catch-Up of Latecomers: A Technical Standards Alliance Perspective

Xiaomeng Su*, Jing Hu*,†, and Yilin Wang**

*College of Economics and Management, China Jiliang University
No.258 Xueyuan Street, Xiasha Higher Education District, Hangzhou 310018, China

**Zhongchao Ink Co., Ltd.
No.288 Xiuyan Road, Nanhui District, Shanghai 201315, China

Corresponding author

February 15, 2022
May 14, 2022
July 20, 2022
knowledge network, collaboration network, latecomer, technical standards alliance

Taking the technical standards alliance (TSA) of strategic emerging industries as the sample, including China’s new energy vehicles, new-generation information technology, new materials, and high-end equipment manufacturing, the article empirically verified the impact of the external cooperation network and internal knowledge network of late-developing enterprises on their dual catch-up. The results showed that the appropriate centrality of the cooperative network promotes the exploitative catch-up and exploratory catch-up of late-developing enterprises. However, the excessive centrality blocked its exploratory catch-up. The structural hole of the cooperation network was conducive to the exploratory catch-up of late-developing enterprises, but not to their exploitative catch-up. The comprehensive cohesiveness of the knowledge network strengthened the positive impact of the centrality of the cooperation network on exploitative catch-up of late-developing enterprises, damaging the negative impact of the structural hole of the cooperation network on exploitative catch-up. The partial cohesiveness of the knowledge network positively adjusted the centrality of the cooperative network, the relationship between the structural hole and exploratory catch-up, and negatively adjusted the relationship between the centrality of the network and exploitative catch-up. By analyzing the differential impact of the dual network on two types of technology catch-up strategies of late-developing enterprises, the article deepened the theory of organizational duality. Meanwhile, the article contained innovation activities of late-developing enterprises in the TSA, which provided a new theoretical perspective and empirical basis for the combination of standardization of cooperation and innovation management theory.

Cite this article as:
X. Su, J. Hu, and Y. Wang, “Cooperative Network Embedding, Knowledge Network Structure and Technological Catch-Up of Latecomers: A Technical Standards Alliance Perspective,” J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Inform., Vol.26, No.4, pp. 619-630, 2022.
Data files:
  1. [1] M. Hobday, “East Asian latecomer firms: learning the technology of electronics,” World Development, Vol.23, No.7, pp. 1171-1193, 1995.
  2. [2] X. Peng, S. Zheng, X. Wu, and D. Wu, “How do latecomer catch up to the forefront? – from ambidextrous learning perspective,” Management World, No.2, pp. 142-158, 2017 (in Chinese).
  3. [3] F. Galati and B. Bigliardi, “Redesigning the Model of the Initiation and Evolution of Inter-Firm Knowledge Transfer in R&D Relationships,” J. of Knowledge Management, Vol.23, No.10, pp. 2039-2066, 2019.
  4. [4] H. Dai, D. Zeng, and Y. Zhang, “Social Capital Embedded in Standard Alliance Portfolio and Its Impact on Enterprises’ Innovation Performance,” R&D Management, No.2, pp. 93-101, 2017 (in Chinese).
  5. [5] J. Wen, W. J. Qualls, and D. Zeng, “Standardization alliance networks, standard-setting influence, and new product outcomes,” J. of Product Innovation Management, Vol.37, No.2, pp. 138-157, 2020.
  6. [6] H. Jiang, W. Liu, and S. Sun, “Knowledge integration capability, alliance management capability and technical standard alliance performance,” Studies in Science of Science, No.9, pp. 1617-1625, 2019 (in Chinese).
  7. [7] J. Hu, Y. Guan, L. Zhou, and Y. Wang, “Influence Mechanism of Ambidexterity Innovation on Technological Catch-Up in Latecomer Enterprises of Technical Standards Alliance,” J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Inform., Vol.24, No.3, pp. 252-259, 2020.
  8. [8] S. Yayavaram and G. Ahuja, “Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.53, No.2, pp. 333-362, 2008.
  9. [9] T.-K. Kuo, S. S. Lim, and L. K. Sonko, “Catch-up strategy of latecomer firms in Asia: a case study of innovation ambidexterity in PC industry,” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol.30, No.12, pp. 1483-1497, 2018.
  10. [10] S. F. Slater, J. J. Mohr, and S. Sengupta, “Radical product innovation capability: Literature review, synthesis, and illustrative research propositions,” J. of Product Innovation Management, Vol.31, No.3, pp. 552-566, 2014.
  11. [11] W. Li, “Nature of standard-setting alliance: based on comparisons between R&D alliance and patent alliance,” Science Research Management, No.10, pp. 49-56, 2014 (in Chinese).
  12. [12] K. Blind and A. Mangelsdorf, “Motives to standardize: empirical evidence from Germany,” Technovation, Vols.48-49, pp. 13-24, 2016.
  13. [13] S. Wasserman and K. Faust, “Social network analysis: Methods and applications,” Cambridge University Press, 1994.
  14. [14] N. Li, S. Li, and W. Wang, “Supplier Supply Network Position and Manufacturer Performance: The Effects of Network Awareness Capability,” J. of Management Science, No.2, pp. 49-59, 2015 (in Chinese).
  15. [15] Y. Zhao and Y. Wang, “The Stronger, the More Parochial? Evidence from Inter-Firm Alliance Innovation Networks: From the Perspective of Resource and Structure Characteristics,” Science of Science and Management of S.&T., No.5, pp. 117-127, 2017 (in Chinese).
  16. [16] D. R. Gnyawali and R. Madhavan, “Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a structural embeddedness perspective,” The Academy of Management Review, Vol.26, No.3, pp. 431-445, 2001.
  17. [17] R. S. Burt, “Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition,” Harvard University Press, 1992.
  18. [18] X. Sun, W. Cui, and L. Wang, “The Review on Structural Holes and Enterprise Innovation,” Science of Science and Management of S.&T., No.11, pp. 142-152, 2014 (in Chinese).
  19. [19] M. Gargiulo and M. Benassi, “Trapped in Your Own Net? Network Cohesion, Structural Holes, and the Adaptation of Social Capital,” Organization Science, Vol.11, No.2, pp. 183-196, 2000.
  20. [20] G. Ahuja and R. Katila, “Where Do Resources Come from? The Role of Idiosyncratic Situations,” Strategic Management J., Vol.25, Nos.8-9, pp. 887-907, 2004.
  21. [21] D. Li, L. Fan, and Z. Yang, “Can Network Embedded Enterprises Rest Easy: A Research Based on the Listed Manufacture Enterprises in China,” Nankai Business Review, No.1, pp. 67-82, 2017 (in Chinese).
  22. [22] Y. Zhao, Q. Wang, and X. Zheng, “Impact of network vicinity and geographical proximity to knowledge transfer performance,” Science Research Management, No.1, pp. 128-136, 2016 (in Chinese).
  23. [23] J. Wu and M. T. Shanley, “Knowledge Stock, Exploration, and Innovation: Research on the United States Electromedical Device Industry,” J. of Business Research, Vol.62, No.4, pp. 474-483, 2009.
  24. [24] X. Liu, I. R. Hodgkinson, and F.-M. Chuang, “Foreign Competition, Domestic Knowledge Base and Innovation Activities: Evidence from Chinese High-Tech Industries,” Research Policy, Vol.43, No.2, pp. 414-422, 2014.
  25. [25] K. Z. Zhou and C. B. Li, “How Knowledge Affects Radical Innovation: Knowledge Base, Market Knowledge Acquisition, and Internal Knowledge Sharing,” Strategic Management J., Vol.33, No.9, pp. 1090-1102, 2012.
  26. [26] M. Moeen and R. Agarwal, “Incubation of an Industry: Heterogeneous Knowledge Bases and Modes of Value Capture,” Strategic Management J., Vol.38, No.3, pp. 566-587, 2017.
  27. [27] A. Colombelli, J. Krafft, and F. Quatraro, “Properties of Knowledge Base and Firm Survival: Evidence from a Sample of French Manufacturing Firms,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol.80, No.8, pp. 1469-1483, 2013.
  28. [28] L. Xu, “Research on the influence of knowledge network characteristics of high-tech enterprises on binary innovation performance,” Hunan University, 2018.
  29. [29] L. Xu, D. Zeng, and Y. Zhang, “Research on the Relationship of Knowledge Network Density and Firms’ Innovation Performance: Moderating Effects of Knowledge Base Diversity,” R&D Management, No.1, pp. 72-80, 2018 (in Chinese).
  30. [30] C. Prange, “Ambidextrous internationalization strategies: the case of Chinese firms entering the world market,” Organizational Dynamics, Vol.41, No.3, pp. 245-253, 2012.
  31. [31] C. O’Reilly III and M. L. Tushman, “Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future,” Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol.27, No.4, pp. 324-338, 2013.
  32. [32] Y. Luo and H. Rui, “An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from emerging economies,” Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol.23, No.4, pp. 49-70, 2009.
  33. [33] D. Mani and R. Durand, “Family firms in the ownership network: Clustering, bridging, and embeddedness,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol.43, No.2, pp. 330-351, 2019.
  34. [34] D. Li and Z. Song, “Network patterns, standard alliance and the emergence of a dominant design,” Studies in Science of Science, No.3, pp. 428-437, 2017 (in Chinese).
  35. [35] N. Li, R. Lin, and Z. Xie, “Research on impact mechanism of exploratory innovation under multiple embedded in knowledge network and cooperation network,” Studies in Science of Science, No.1, pp. 169-179, 2020 (in Chinese).
  36. [36] J. Wen, D. Zeng, and S. Zhao, “Influence of Standard-Setting Alliance’s Network Resource Endowment and Structure Embeddedness on Firm’s NPD Performance,” R&D Management, No.1, pp. 113-122, 2020 (in Chinese).
  37. [37] L. Xu, J. Li, and X. Zhou, “Exploring new knowledge through research collaboration: the moderation of the global and local cohesion of knowledge networks,” The J. of Technology Transfer, Vol.44, pp. 822-849, 2019.
  38. [38] L. Xu, D. Zeng, and J. Li, “The Effects of Knowledge Network Centralization, Knowledge Variety on Firms’ Dual-Innovation Performance,” Chinese J. of Management, No.2, pp. 221-228, 2017 (in Chinese).
  39. [39] N. Hashai, “Focusing the high-technology firm: How outsourcing affects technological knowledge exploration,” J. of Management, Vol.44, No.5, pp. 1736-1765, 2018.
  40. [40] K. Hoisl, M. Gruber, and A. Conti, “R&D Team Diversity and Performance in Hypercompetitive Environments,” Strategic Management J., Vol.38, No.7, pp. 1455-1477, 2017.
  41. [41] J. Guan, Y. Yan, and J. J. Zhang, “The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations,” J. of Informetrics, Vol.11, No.2, pp. 407-422, 2017.
  42. [42] J. Li and Y. Yu, “Structural Holes in Collaboration Network, Cohesion of Knowledge Network and Exploratory Innovation Performance: An Empirical Study on the Chinese Automakers,” Nankai Business Review, No.6, pp. 121-130, 2018 (in Chinese).
  43. [43] J. Goldenberg, D. Mazursky, and S. Solomon, “Toward Identifying the Inventive Templates of New Products: A Channeled Ideation Approach,” J. of Marketing Research, Vol.36, No.2, pp. 200-210, 1999.
  44. [44] J. Guan and N. Liu, “Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy,” Research Policy, Vol.45, No.1, pp. 97-112, 2016.
  45. [45] I. Guler and A. Nerkar, “The impact of global and local cohesion on innovation in the pharmaceutical industry,” Strategic Management J., Vol.33, No.5, pp. 535-549, 2012.
  46. [46] C. C. Phelps, “A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation,” The Academy of Management J., Vol.53, No.4, pp. 890-913, 2010.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Aug. 05, 2022