Inter-Organizational Trust Evolution in Innovation Networks Based on Chaos Theory

Abstract

Abstract: Previous research on trust has been carried out under the assumption of stable equilibrium. Actually the nonlinear chaotic state appears in the process of trust evolution in innovation networks. And inter-organizational trust evolution in innovation networks evolves with the characteristics of complex systems. Chaos has an extremely sensitive dependence on initial conditions. No matter how small the deviation of the given initial conditions is, the result at some point in the can could be very different from the actual situation. Chaotic characteristics of inter-organizational trust in innovation networks are analyzed based on chaos theory, such as complexity, sensitivity to initial value, bifurcation behavior and inner randomness. The differential equations of inter-organizational trust evolution in innovation networks are established based on evolutionary game theory. The relationship between trust evolution equation and the logistic mapping is deduced. Trust chaos is determined by the Lyapunov stability theory. Inter-organizational trust in innovation networks leads to chaos through the period-doubling bifurcation. The general conditions in which trust comes to chaos instead of being in good order are gotten. The path through which trust evolution leads to chaos has been demonstrated by the simulation with a numerical example. The practical significance of trust evolution chaos in the innovation network is analyzed. The feasibility and effectiveness of the research is proved with the comparison of Silicon Valley and Tsukuba Science City. The chaotic evolution of inter-organizational trust in innovation networks can reflect the non-linear character of trust development and it can provide theoretical guidance for the application of chaos and chaotic control of inter-organizational trust in innovation networks.

Key words: technological innovation, trust evolution, chaos theory, innovation network

摘要： 以往关于信任的研究是在稳定均衡的假设下进行的,然而信任演化过程中会表现出非线性的混沌状态,具有复杂系统的特征。基于演化博弈理论和混沌理论,建立了创新网络中组织间信任演化模型,分析了创新网络中组织间信任的复杂性、初值敏感性、分岔行为及内随机性等混沌特性,推导出信任演化方程与Logistic映射之间的关系,采用Lyapunov稳定性理论进行混沌性判定,证明创新网络中组织间信任通过倍周期分岔通往混沌,得到了信任从有序进入混沌的一般条件,运用算例进行仿真展示信任演化通往混沌的过程,分析创新网络中信任演化进入混沌区的实际意义,并选择硅谷和筑波科技城两个实例做对比分析,验证了该研究的实用性和有效性。创新网络中组织间信任的混沌演化反映出信任发展的非线性特点,为创新网络中组织间信任的混沌利用和控制提供理论指导。

关键词: 技术创新, 信任演化, 混沌理论, 创新网络

CLC Number:

F270

HAN Ya-pin, HU Long-ying. Inter-Organizational Trust Evolution in Innovation Networks Based on Chaos Theory[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2014, 23(4): 219-227.

韩亚品, 胡珑瑛. 基于混沌理论的创新网络中组织间信任演化研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2014, 23(4): 219-227.

References

[1] 李金华,孙东川.创新网络的演化模型[J].科学学研究.2006,24(1):135-140.
[2] 张喜征.资源池模式下虚拟企业信任治理模型及实例研究[J].中国软科学.2004,(12):65-69.
[3] Jap S, Anderson E. Safeguarding interorganizational performance and continuity under expost opportunism[J]. Management Science, 2003, 12(49): 1684-1701.
[4] Krishnan R, Martin X, Noorderhaven N G. When does trust matter to alliance performance[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2006, 49(5): 894-917.
[5] Johnson D, Grayson K. Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2005, 4(58): 500-507.
[6] Puranam P, Vanneste B S. Trust and governance: untangling a tangled web[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2009, 34(1): 11-31.
[7] Lewicki R J, Bunker B B. Trust in relationships: a model of trust development and decline. in B B Bunker & J Z rubin(Eds), Conflict, cooperation and justice: essays inspired by the work of Morton deutsch[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.
[8] Msanjila S S, Afsarmanesh H. On modelling evolution of trust in organisations towards mediating collaboration[J]. Production Planning & Control, 2011, 22: 5-6, 518-537.
[9] Vlaar P W L, Van den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W. On the evolution of trust, distrust, and formal coordination and control in interorganizational relationships: toward an integrative framework[J]. Group & Organization Management. 2007, 32(4): 407-429.
[10] Inkpen A C, Currall S C. The coevolution of trust, control, and learning in joint ventures[J]. Organization Science, 2004,15(5): 586-599.
[11] Ybarra C E, Turk T A. The evolution of trust in information technology alliances[J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 2009,(20): 62-74.
[12] 王涛,顾新.知识链成员间相互信任的建立与演化过程研究[J].科技进步与对策,2010,27(14):8-10.
[13] 柴国荣,龚琳玲,李振超.产业集群合作创新中信任关系的演化博弈分析[J].科技管理研究.2011,(2):36-38,73.
[14] McBride N. Chaos theory as a model for interpreting information systems in organizations[J]. Information Systems Journal. 2005, (15): 233-254.
[15] Sardar Z, Abrams I. Introducing chaos[M]. England: Totem Books, 2005, 18.
[16] 吴彤.非线性动力学混沌理论方法及其意义[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,15(3):72-79.
[17] 王永平,孟卫东.供应链企业合作竞争机制的演化博弈分析[J].管理工程学报,2004,18(2):96-98.
[18] Han Y, Hu L. Research on asymmetric trust evolution in the complex products and systems cooperative innovation network[A]. Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Management Science & Engineering[C]. Italy: IEEE Conference Publication Operations, 2011. 313-320.
[19] 刘彩虹,徐福缘.SDN子网进化博弈研究[J].系统工程与电子技术,2008,30(7):1269-1272.
[20] 郭亚军,洪帆.普适计算的信任计算模型[J].计算机科学,2005,32(10):59-62.
[21] 刘友金,刘莉君.基于混沌理论的集群式创新网络演化过程研究[J].科学学研究,2008,26(1):185-190.
[22] 张毅,邵新宇,邓超.企业合作中信任传递过程的机理分析[J].华中科技大学学报(自然科学版),2005,33(9):132-134.
[23] 李辉,李向阳,徐宣国.基于信任的供应链伙伴关系维系管理方法研究[J].管理工程学报,2007,28(4):72-79.
[24] Pavlou P A, Gefen D. Psychological contract violation in online marketplace: antecedents, consequences and moderating role[J]. Information Systems Research, 2005, 16(4): 372-399.
[25] 张晓丹,李志萍,张丽丽.一类基于奇异值分解的Lyapunov指数计算方法[J].北京科技大学学报,2005,27(3):371-374.
[26] 王兴元,朱伟勇.二维Logistic映像的吸引子演化[J].东北大学学报(自然科学版),1997,18(4):417-420.
[27] 王兴元.复杂非线性系统中的混沌[M].北京:电子工业出版社,2003.24-26.
[28] Thomae S, Grossmann S. Correlations and spectra of periodic chaos generated by the logistic parabola[J]. Journal of Statistical Physics, 1981, 26(3): 485-504.
[29] Dyer J H, Chu W. The determinants of trust in supplier-automaker relationships in the US, japan and korea[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2000, 31(2): 259-285.
[30] Huff L, Kelley L. Levels of organizational trust in individualist versus collectivist societies: a seven-nation study[J]. Organization Science, 2003, 14(1): 81-90.
[31] Schoorman F D, Mayer R C, Davis J H. An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present, and future[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2007, 32(2): 344-354.
[32] Wicks A C, Berman S L, Jones T M. The structure of optimal trust: moral and strategic implications[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(1): 99-116.
[33] Lloyd A L, Lloyd D. Chaos: its significance and detection in biology[J]. Biological rhythm research. 1995, 26(2): 233-252.
[34] Kim P H, Ferrin D L, Cooper C D, et al. Removing the shadow of suspicion: the effects of apology vs denial for repairing ability- vs integrity-based trust violations[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2004, 89(1): 104-118.
[35] Kim P H, Dirks K T, Cooper C D, Ferrin D L. When more blame is better than less: the implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence-vs. integrity-based violation[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2007, 92(4): 893–908.
[36] Gillespie N, Dietz G. Trust repair after an organization level failure[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2009, 34(1): 127-145.
[37] 王蓉,张祎雪.信任机制与技术创新网络模式的相关性分析[J].科技进步与对策,2008,25(7):13-15.
[38] Sheppard B H, Sherman D M. The grammars of trust: a model and general implications[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1998, 23(3): 422-437.
[39] Arthur W B. Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by historical events[J]. The economic journal, 1989, 99(394): 116-131.
[40] Kim P H, Dirks K T, Cooper C D. The repair of trust: a dynamic bilateral perspective and multilevel conceptualization[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2009, 34(3): 401-422.