IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v113y2016ipbp379-385.html

Being central is a double-edged sword: Knowledge network centrality and new product development in U.S. pharmaceutical industry

Author

Listed:
  • Dong, John Qi
  • Yang, Chia-Han

Abstract

Today firms extensively use external knowledge from interfirm knowledge networks for their new product development (NPD). In light of this phenomenon, scholars and managers often believe that a higher centrality in interfirm knowledge networks is good for absorbing external knowledge and improving NPD performance. Since knowledge network centrality can be measured from different perspectives, however, we propose that some types of centrality might do more harm than good for NPD. Using a panel data set from the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, we empirically examine the impacts of three measures for knowledge network centrality (i.e., degree centrality, closeness centrality and eigenvector centrality) on NPD performance. We find that degree centrality in an interfirm knowledge network is positively associated with subsequent NPD performance. Counter-intuitively, closeness centrality and eigenvector centrality in an interfirm knowledge network have negative impacts on subsequent NPD performance. Taken together, our findings remind the danger of oversimplifying the complex impact of knowledge network centrality on innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dong, John Qi & Yang, Chia-Han, 2016. "Being central is a double-edged sword: Knowledge network centrality and new product development in U.S. pharmaceutical industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 379-385.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:113:y:2016:i:pb:p:379-385
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.07.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016251630155X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.07.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2016. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-112.
    2. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Hirotaka Miura, 2012. "Stata graph library for network analysis," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 12(1), pages 94-129, March.
    4. Stolwijk, C.C.M. & Ortt, J.R. & den Hartigh, E., 2013. "The joint evolution of alliance networks and technology: A survey of the empirical literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(7), pages 1287-1305.
    5. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & van den Oord, Ad, 2008. "Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1717-1731, December.
    6. Lee Fleming & Charles King & Adam I. Juda, 2007. "Small Worlds and Regional Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 938-954, December.
    7. Gordon Walker & Bruce Kogut & Weijian Shan, 1997. "Social Capital, Structural Holes and the Formation of an Industry Network," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(2), pages 109-125, April.
    8. Gilsing, Victor & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Pieters, Michiel, 2014. "Mind the gap," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 351-362.
    9. Huenteler, Joern & Ossenbrink, Jan & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—Evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1195-1217.
    10. C. K. Prahalad & Richard A. Bettis, 1986. "The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(6), pages 485-501, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jacob, Jojo & Duysters, Geert, 2017. "Alliance network configurations and the co-evolution of firms' technology profiles: An analysis of the biopharmaceutical industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 90-102.
    2. Goossen, Martin C. & Paruchuri, Srikanth, 2022. "Measurement errors and estimation biases with incomplete social networks: replication studies on intra-firm inventor network analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Magnus Olsén Hammarfjord & Tommy Roxenhall, 2017. "The Relationships Between Network Commitment, Antecedents, And Innovation In Strategic Innovation Networks," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(04), pages 1-36, May.
    4. Na Zhang & Lu Cheng & Chao Sun & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2023. "The role of inter- and intra-organisational networks in innovation: towards requisite variety," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4117-4136, July.
    5. Takashi Iino & Hiroyasu Inoue & Yukiko U. Saito & Yasuyuki Todo, 2021. "How does the global network of research collaboration affect the quality of innovation?," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 5-48, January.
    6. Markus, Arjan & Candiani, Juan Antonio & Gilsing, Victor A., 2025. "How symmetry between intrafirm knowledge and collaboration structures influences exploratory innovation under conditions of combinability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(2).
    7. Nuha Zamzami & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2017. "The impact of individual collaborative activities on knowledge creation and transmission," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1385-1413, June.
    8. Gilsing, Victor A. & Cloodt, Myriam & Bertrand–Cloodt, Danielle, 2016. "What makes you more central? Antecedents of changes in betweenness-centrality in technology-based alliance networks," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 209-221.
    9. Emine Beyza Satoglu & Fernando Sanchez-Henriquez & Andres Velez-Calle & Jessica Rae Salmon & Salma Zaman, 2026. "Network Centrality and Breakthrough Innovations in Developing Cities," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 17(2), pages 4774-4796, April.
    10. Wang, Liukai & Li, Min & Wang, Weiqing & Gong, Yu & Xiong, Yu, 2023. "Green innovation output in the supply chain network with environmental information disclosure: An empirical analysis of Chinese listed firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    11. Yan, Yan & Guan, JianCheng, 2018. "Social capital, exploitative and exploratory innovations: The mediating roles of ego-network dynamics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 244-258.
    12. de Leeuw, Tim & Gilsing, Victor & Duysters, Geert, 2019. "Greater adaptivity or greater control? Adaptation of IOR portfolios in response to technological change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1586-1600.
    13. Liu, Xielin & Ji, Xiaohui & Ge, Shuang, 2024. "Does the complexity and embeddedness of knowledge recombination contribute to economic development? —— Observations from prefecture cities in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    14. Schaap, Eric & Mahr, Dominik & Wilms, Ines & Klingwort, Jonas & Grewal, Dhruv, 2026. "Why more isn’t always better: Examining the effects of network density on firms’ likelihood of new product innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    15. Bao, Yuting & Pan, Tianxing, 2025. "Close to star organizations promotes exploratory innovation for latecomers," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    16. Guiyang Zhang & Chaoying Tang & Yong Qi, 2020. "Alliance Network Diversity and Innovation Ambidexterity: The Differential Roles of Industrial Diversity, Geographical Diversity, and Functional Diversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Harpreet Singh & David Kryscynski & Xinxin Li & Ram Gopal, 2016. "Pipes, pools, and filters: How collaboration networks affect innovative performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1649-1666, August.
    18. Abbasiharofteh, Milad & Hermans, Frans, 2025. "Using archetypal analysis to derive a typology of knowledge networks in European bioclusters," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(1), pages 1-17.
    19. Jin, Zhizhou & Zeng, Saixing & Chen, Hongquan & Shi, Jonathan Jingsheng, 2022. "Explaining the expansion performance in technological capability of participants in megaprojects: A configurational approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    20. Gupeng Zhang & Xiao Wang & Hongbo Duan, 2020. "Obscure but important: examining the indirect effects of alliance networks in exploratory and exploitative innovation paradigms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 1745-1764, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:113:y:2016:i:pb:p:379-385. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.