single-jc.php

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

Paper:

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

Received:
February 15, 2022
Accepted:
May 14, 2022
Published:
July 20, 2022
Keywords:
knowledge network, collaboration network, latecomer, technical standards alliance
Abstract

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:
References
  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