IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tiu/tiutis/4fae41f2-1e69-40f2-89f5-65d48168693c.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Network Embeddedness and the Exploration of Novel Technologies : Technological Distance, Betweenness Centrality and Density

Author

Listed:
  • Nooteboom, B.

    (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)

  • Gilsing, V.A.

    (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)

  • Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M.
  • Duijsters, G.M.

    (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)

  • Oord, A.

Abstract

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

Suggested Citation

  • Nooteboom, B. & Gilsing, V.A. & Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Duijsters, G.M. & Oord, A., 2006. "Network Embeddedness and the Exploration of Novel Technologies : Technological Distance, Betweenness Centrality and Density," Other publications TiSEM 4fae41f2-1e69-40f2-89f5-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:tiu:tiutis:4fae41f2-1e69-40f2-89f5-65d48168693c
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://pure.uvt.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/777880/32.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joel A. C. Baum & Tony Calabrese & Brian S. Silverman, 2000. "Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 267-294, March.
    2. 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..
    3. Weijan Shan & Gordon Walker & Bruce Kogut, 1994. "Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 387-394, June.
    4. Gautam Ahuja, 2000. "The duality of collaboration: inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 317-343, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    7. Ariél Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Estimating Distributed Lags in Short Panels with an Application to the Specification of Depreciation Patterns and Capital Stock Constructs," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 51(2), pages 243-262.
    8. Bill McEvily & Akbar Zaheer, 1999. "Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(12), pages 1133-1156, December.
    9. Nooteboom, B. & Gilsing, V.A., 2004. "Density And Strength Of Ties In Innovation Networks: A Competence And Governance View," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2004-005-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    10. 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.
    11. Nooteboom, Bart, 1992. "Towards a Dynamic Theory of Transactions," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 281-299, December.
    12. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    13. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Introduction to "R & D, Patents, and Productivity"," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 1-20, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    15. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    16. Mowery, David C & Oxley, Joanne E, 1995. "Inward Technology Transfer and Competitiveness: The Role of National Innovation Systems," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 67-93, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Gautam Ahuja & Curba Morris Lampert, 2001. "Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 521-543, June.
    19. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy, 1984. "Interpersonal communication patterns among Swedish and Boston-area entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 101-114, April.
    20. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    21. 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.
    22. Peter J. Lane & Michael Lubatkin, 1998. "Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning," Post-Print hal-02311860, HAL.
    23. 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.
    24. 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.
    25. Linsu Kim, 1998. "Crisis Construction and Organizational Learning: Capability Building in Catching-up at Hyundai Motor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 506-521, August.
    26. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    27. Bill McEvily & Alfred Marcus, 2005. "Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(11), pages 1033-1055, November.
    28. 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.
    29. Tim Rowley & Dean Behrens & David Krackhardt, 2000. "Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 369-386, March.
    30. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    31. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    32. Akbar Zaheer & Geoffrey G. Bell, 2005. "Benefiting from network position: firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(9), pages 809-825, September.
    33. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    34. Peter Moran, 2005. "Structural vs. relational embeddedness: social capital and managerial performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(12), pages 1129-1151, December.
    35. Geert Duysters & Charmianne Lemmens, 2003. "Alliance Group Formation Enabling and Constraining Effects of Embeddedness and Social Capital in Strategic Technology Alliance Networks," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 49-68, January.
    36. 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)

    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. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Beerkens, B.E. & Duysters, G.M., 2003. "Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks," Working Papers 03.22, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    2. Wim Vanhaverbeke & Victor Gilsing & Bonnie Beerkens & Geert Duysters, 2009. "The Role of Alliance Network Redundancy in the Creation of Core and Non‐core Technologies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 215-244, March.
    3. Duysters, Geert & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Beerkens, Bonnie & Gilsing, Victor, 2007. "Exploration and Exploitation in Technology-based Alliance Networks," MERIT Working Papers 2007-020, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    4. 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.
    5. Vanhaverbeke, W. & Beerkens, B. & Duysters, G., 2001. "Technological capability building through networking strategies within high-tech industries," Working Papers 01.15, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    6. Gilsing, V.A. & Lemmens, C. & Duijsters, G.M., 2007. "Strategic alliance networks and innovation : A deterministic and voluntaristic view combined," Other publications TiSEM deaff6db-3e18-4bfc-a3fa-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Hugo Ernesto Martínez Ardila & Julián Eduardo Mora Moreno & Jaime Alberto Camacho Pico, 2020. "Networks of collaborative alliances: the second order interfirm technological distance and innovation performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1255-1282, August.
    9. Duysters, Geert & Lemmens, Charmianne & Letterie, Wilko & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2008. "The Innovative Performance of Alliance Block Members: Evidence from the Microelectronics Industry," MERIT Working Papers 2008-064, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Colombo, Massimo G. & Grilli, Luca & Piva, Evila, 2006. "In search of complementary assets: The determinants of alliance formation of high-tech start-ups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1166-1199, October.
    11. Casanueva, Cristóbal & Castro, Ignacio & Galán, José L., 2013. "Informational networks and innovation in mature industrial clusters," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(5), pages 603-613.
    12. 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.
    13. Khoury, Theodore A. & Pleggenkuhle-Miles, Erin G., 2011. "Shared inventions and the evolution of capabilities: Examining the biotechnology industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 943-956, September.
    14. Marcus Wagner & Wilfried Zidorn, 2017. "Effects of extent and diversity of alliancing on innovation: the moderating role of firm newness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 919-936, December.
    15. Wilfried Zidorn & Marcus Wagner, 2012. "Too Much of a Good Thing: The Role of Alliance Portfolio Diversity for Innovation Output in the Biotechnology Industry," DRUID Working Papers 12-10, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    16. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hottenrott, Hanna, 2012. "Collaborative R&D as a strategy to attenuate financing constraints," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-049, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Walter, Jorge & Lechner, Christoph & Kellermanns, Franz W., 2007. "Knowledge transfer between and within alliance partners: Private versus collective benefits of social capital," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(7), pages 698-710, July.
    18. Haeussler, Carolin & Patzelt, Holger & Zahra, Shaker A., 2012. "Strategic alliances and product development in high technology new firms: The moderating effect of technological capabilities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 217-233.
    19. Gilsing, Victor & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Pieters, Michiel, 2014. "Mind the gap," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 351-362.
    20. Yu-Shan Su & Eric Tsang & Mike Peng, 2009. "How do internal capabilities and external partnerships affect innovativeness?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 309-331, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    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:tiu:tiutis:4fae41f2-1e69-40f2-89f5-65d48168693c. 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: Richard Broekman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/about/schools/economics-and-management/ .

    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.