IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: technological distance, betweenness centrality and density

Listed author(s):
  • Victor Gilsing
  • Bart Noteboom
  • Wim Vanhaverbeke
  • Geert Duysters
  • Ad van Noord

This paper aims to understand better the innovation potential of a firm's alliance network. Here we analyze the role of an alliance network in terms of the technological distance between partners, a firm's network position (centrality) and total network density. We study how these three elements of an alliance network, separately and in combination, affect the 'twin tasks' in exploration, namely novelty creation on the one hand and its efficient absorption on the other hand. For an empirical test, we study technology-based alliance networks in the pharmaceutical, chemical and automotive industries. Our findings indicate that successful exploration indeed seems to require a delicate balance between these two exploration tasks. A second conclusion is that different network positions yield different pay-offs in terms of the number of explorative patents. In other words, success rates for exploration are not spread equally across firms. However, position alone does not tell the full story. Our empirical findings clearly indicate that exploration success also depends on the other two dimensions of embeddedness, namely technological distance and network density. The three elements of network embeddedness need to be considered jointly in order to understand their complementary effects on both novelty creation and absorptive capacity.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Paper provided by Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies in its series Working Papers with number 06-08.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Apr 2006
Date of revision: Apr 2006
Handle: RePEc:ein:tuecis:0608
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Tema Building 1.40, PO Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven

Phone: (+31) (0)40 247 5938
Fax: (+31) (0)40 247 2607
Web page: https://www.tue.nl/universiteit/faculteiten/industrial-engineering-innovation-sciences/onderzoek/onderzoeksinstituten/ecis/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
  2. Wuyts, Stefan & Colombo, Massimo G. & Dutta, Shantanu & Nooteboom, Bart, 2005. "Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 277-302, October.
  3. Mowery, David C & Oxley, Joanne E, 1995. "Inward Technology Transfer and Competitiveness: The Role of National Innovation Systems," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 67-93, February.
  4. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
  5. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
  6. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, October.
  8. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy, 1984. "Interpersonal communication patterns among Swedish and Boston-area entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 101-114, April.
  9. Nooteboom, B. & Gilsing, V.A., 2004. "Density and strength of ties in innovation networks: a competence and governance view," Working Papers 04.01, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
  10. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
  11. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
  12. Cooper, Arnold C. & Schendel, Dan, 1976. "Strategic responses to technological threats," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 61-69, February.
  13. Ariél Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Estimating Distributed Lags in Short Panels with an Application to the Specification of Depreciation Patterns and Capital Stock Constructs," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 243-262.
  14. Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
  15. Gilsing, V. & Nooteboom, B., 2004. "Density and strength of ties in innovation networks: an analysis of multimedia and biotechnology," Working Papers 04.16, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
  16. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ein:tuecis:0608. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.