|
|
|
| A Study on the Evolution of Knowledge Network Structure Features Based on Patent Intelligence: Empirical Analysis of the Automobile Industry |
| Xu Luyun1, Zeng Deming2, and Chen Jing2 |
1.Business School, Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081
2.College of Business Administration, Hunan University, Changsha 410082 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The key to technological innovation is to realize knowledge integration and combination configuration. Different strategies of knowledge integration and combination configuration lead to heterogeneous structural features of knowledge networks, which reflects the differences in firms’ innovation capabilities and decisions. Using the invention and utility types of patents in China's automobile industry from 2001 to 2014, this paper employed data from 961 firms and constructed their knowledge networks using the International Patent Classification and focused on the evolution analysis of relational and cohesive features. Through analysis of the structural features of 2821 knowledge networks, we found that the general level of relational features in China’s automobile industry is low, but that it still shows an upward trend. The automobile industry has formed a certain level of local and global knowledge cohesion, but the level of local cohesion is obviously higher than that of global cohesion. Furthermore, the sample firms were classified based on whether the firms had participated in R&D collaborations or setting technological standards, and the knowledge network structure features of different types of firms exhibited distinguishing characteristics. The research findings are helpful in revealing the law of knowledge assimilation of China s automobile industry and providing some theoretical guidance for promoting the cross-border integration of technology to enhance the capability for independent innovation in the future.
|
|
Received: 04 July 2018
|
|
|
|
1 SpenderJ C. Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1996, 17(S2): 45-62.
2 NonakaI, ToyamaR, NagataA. A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: A new perspective on the theory of the firm[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2000, 9(1): 1-20.
3 YayavaramS, ChenW R. Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2015, 36(3): 377-396.
4 BrusoniS, GeunaA. An international comparison of sectoral knowledge bases: Persistence and integration in the pharmaceutical industry[J]. Research Policy, 2003, 32(10): 1897-1912.
5 刘岩, 蔡虹. 企业知识基础与技术创新绩效关系研究——基于中国电子信息行业的实证分析[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2011, 32(10): 64-69.
6 NestaL, SaviottiP P. Coherence of the knowledge base and the firm's innovative performance: Evidence from the us pharmaceutical industry[J]. Journal of Industrial Economics, 2005, 53(1): 123-142.
7 刘岩, 蔡虹, 张洁. 企业技术合作、知识基础与技术创新绩效关系研究——基于中国电子信息行业的实证分析[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2014, 32(21): 59-64.
8 YayavaramS, AhujaG. Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2008,53(2): 333-362.
9 蔡虹, 刘岩, 向希尧. 企业知识基础对技术合作的影响研究[J]. 管理学报, 2013, 10(6): 875-881.
10 DibiaggioL, NasiriyarM, NestaL. Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies[J]. Research Policy, 2014, 43(9): 1582-1593.
11 刘岩, 蔡虹, 向希尧. 基于专利的行业技术知识基础结构演变分析[J]. 科学学研究, 2014, 32(7): 1019-1028.
12 SaviottiP P. On the dynamics of generation and utilisation of knowledge: The local character of knowledge[J]. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 2007, 18(4): 387-408.
13 SaviottiP P. Considerations about the production in competition policy and intellectual property law[J]. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 2004, 160(1): 100.
14 WangC L, RodanS, FruinM, et al. Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57(2): 484-514.
15 GuanJ C, LiuN. Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy[J]. Research Policy, 2016, 45(1): 97-112.
16 XuL Y, LiJ, ZengD M. How does knowledge network affect a firm’s explorative innovation? The contingent role of r&d collaborations[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2017, 29(9): 973-987.
17 van BurgE, BerendsH, van RaaijE M. Framing and interorganizational knowledge transfer: A process study of collaborative innovation in the aircraft industry[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2014, 51(3): 349-378.
18 UzziB. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42(1): 35-67.
19 RowleyT, BehrensD, KrackhardtD. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21(3): 369-386.
20 GulerI, NerkarA. The impact of global and local cohesion on innovation in the pharmaceutical industry[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2012, 33(5): 535-549.
21 KabacoffR I. R语言实战[M]. 第2版. 王小宁, 刘撷芯, 黄俊文, 等译. 北京: 人民邮电出版社, 2016: 120-126.
22 ColombelliA, KrafftJ, QuatraroF. Properties of knowledge base and firm survival: Evidence from a sample of French manufacturing firms[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2012, 80(8): 1469-1483.
23 LeeS U, KangJ N. Technological diversification through corporate venture capital investments: Creating various options to strengthen dynamic capabilities[J]. Industry and Innovation, 2015, 22(5): 349-374.
24 SaviottiP P. Knowledge networks: Structure and dynamics[M]// Innovation Networks: New Approaches in Modelling and Analyzing. Heidelberg: Springer, 2009: 19-41.
25 KocakA, CarsrudA, S. MarketOflazoglu, entrepreneurial, and orientationstechnology: Impact on innovation and firm performance[J]. Management Decision, 2017, 55(2): 248-270.
26 NahapietJ, GhoshalS. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organisational advantage[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1998, 23(2): 242-266.
27 CrossanM M, LaneH W, WhiteR E. An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(3): 522-537.
28 MartinJ A, EisenhardtK M. Rewiring: Cross-business-unit collaborations in multibusiness organizations[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2010, 53(2): 265-301.
29 ArvanitisS, LokshinB, MohnenP. Impact of external knowledge acquisition strategies on innovation: A comparative study based on Dutch and Swiss panel data[J]. Review of Industrial Organization, 2015, 46(4): 359-382.
30 van BeersC V, ZandF. R&D cooperation, partner diversity, and innovation performance: An empirical analysis[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2014, 31(2): 292-312.
31 BrenneckeJ, RankO. The firm’s knowledge network and the transfer of advice among corporate inventors—A multilevel network study[J]. Research Policy, 2017, 46(4): 768-783.
32 何瑞卿, 黄瑞华, 李研. 基于知识外溢的合作研发知识产权风险及其影响因素分析[J]. 科研管理, 2007, 28(4): 88-94.
33 李龙一, 张炎生. 基于主导设计的技术标准形成研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2009, 30(6): 37-42.
34 李冬梅, 宋志红. 网络模式、标准联盟与主导设计的产生[J]. 科学学研究, 2017, 35(3): 428-437.
35 张米尔, 张美珍, 冯永琴. 技术标准背景下的专利池演进及专利申请行为[J]. 科研管理, 2012, 33(7): 67-73.
36 马胜男, 孙翊. 标准知识溢出及其前沿问题[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2010, 31(10): 112-118.
37 王博, 刘则渊, 丁堃, 等. 产业技术标准和产业技术发展关系研究——基于专利内容分析的视角[J]. 科学学研究, 2016, 34(2): 194-202.
38 SpeegleA. Antitrust rulemaking as a solution to abuse of the standard-setting process[J]. Michigan Law Review, 2012, 11(5): 847-873. |
|
|
|
