Study on the Emergence of Technological Innovation Network Community Structure and Effect on Ambidexterity Innovation in Asymmetric Perspective

doi:10.12005/orms.2017.0252

Abstract

Abstract: In order to deal with the technology innovation community phenomena between global network and ego network, and the innovation paradox of radical and incremental innovation in the network community, this paper analyze the emergence characteristics of technological innovation network community structure on different levels to explore the effect of dynamic community structure on ambidexterity innovation in asymmetric perspective. Then an empirical test is made by fast unfolding of communities’ algorithm and multiple regressions with high-tech bio pharmacy industry data. The results show that there exists a giant component of multiple network communities on the macro level of the global network; the meso level of network community has selection preference features with core-periphery structure; in the micro level of ego network , the two dimensional dynamic individual behaviors are drastic changed .Membership turnover and movement across different network communities not only have significant positive relationship with radical innovation ,but also have the approximate U-shaped correlation with incremental innovation. In the relationship between dynamic communities and ambidexterity innovation, the position asymmetry moderated effect is confirmed, but technology asymmetry has no significant moderated effect. This research can reveal the collaboration pattern of network communities. It is significant for the behavior of innovation organization and stability of technology innovation network.

Key words: technology innovation, organization network, network community, community structure, ambidexterity innovation

摘要： 针对介于全局网络与自中心网络间的社群现象及其网络结构的创新悖论,分析了不同层面网络社群结构的涌现特征,从组织间关系的非对称视角,探究网络社群动态变化对双元创新的差异性影响。利用高科技生物制药行业的合作与专利数据,使用快速压缩社群识别算法和多元回归模型进行实证检验。研究结果表明:宏观层面的全局网络存在显著“抱团”的多社群巨元组结构;中观层面的网络社群存在选择偏好的核心-边缘结构;微观层面社群组织动态的跨社群运动和成员流动二维变化加剧;社群动态的二维变化对突破式创新具有正向影响,与渐进式创新呈现倒U型关系;位置非对称性正向调节社群动态对双元创新的影响,技术非对称性的调节作用不显著。研究结论有助于揭示技术创新网络社群的合作创新模式,对提升组织创新能力,维持创新网络平稳运行具有重要意义。

关键词: 技术创新, 组织网络, 网络社群, 社群结构, 双元创新

CLC Number:

F237.1

WEI Long, DANG Xing-hua. Study on the Emergence of Technological Innovation Network Community Structure and Effect on Ambidexterity Innovation in Asymmetric Perspective[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2017, 26(10): 188-199.

魏龙, 党兴华. 非对称视角下技术创新网络社群结构涌现及其对双元创新的影响研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2017, 26(10): 188-199.

References

[1] Shipilov A, Gulati R, Kilduff M, Li S, Tsai W. Relational pluralism within and between organizations[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57(2): 449- 459.
[2] Schilling M A. Technology shocks, technological collaboration, and innovation outcomes[J]. Organization Science, 2015, 26(3): 668- 686.
[3] Ahuja G, Soda G, Zaheer A. The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks[J]. Organization Science, 2012, 23(2): 434- 448.
[4] 魏龙,党兴华.网络闭合、知识基础与创新催化:动态结构洞的调节[J].管理科学,2017,30(3):83-96.
[5] Majchrzak A, Jarvenpaa S L, Bagherzadeh M. A review of interorganizational collaboration dynamics[J]. Journal of Management, 2015, 41(5): 1338-1360.
[6] Sytch M, Tatarynowicz A. Exploring the locus of invention: the dynamics of network communities and firms’ invention productivity[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57(1): 249-279.
[7] Sytch M, Tatarynowicz A, Gulati R. Toward a theory of extended contact:the incentives and opportunities for bridging across network communities[J]. Organization Science, 2012, 23(6): 1658-1681.
[8] Ren H, Gray B, Harrison D A. Triggering faultline effects in teams: the importance of bridging friendship ties and breaching animosity ties[J]. Organization Science, 2015, 26(2): 390- 404.
[9] Newman M E. Modularity and community structure in networks[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006, 103(23): 8577- 8582.
[10] 郭崇慧,张亮.基于PCA的复杂网络社区结构分析方法[J].运筹与管理,2008,17(6):144-149.
[11] Palla G, Barabási A-L, Vicsek T. Quantifying social group evolution[J]. nature, 2007, 446(7136): 664- 667.
[12] Gulati R, Sytch M, Tatarynowicz A. The rise and fall of small worlds: exploring the dynamics of social structure[J]. Organization Science, 2012, 23(2): 449- 471.
[13] Dahlander L, Frederiksen L. The core and cosmopolitans: a relational view of innovation in user communities[J]. Organization Science, 2012, 23(4): 988-1007.
[14] O’reilly C A, Tushman M L. Organizational ambidexterity: past, present, and future[J]. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 2013, 27(4): 324-338.
[15] 杨皎平,张恒俊,侯楠.集群企业间关系强度对合作技术创新的影响——基于企业类型和创新类型的视角[J].运筹与管理,2015,24(1):280-287.
[16] Lavie D, Kang J, Rosenkopf L. Balance within and across domains: the performance implications of exploration and exploitation in alliances[J]. Organization Science, 2011, 22(6): 1517-1538.
[17] 党兴华,魏龙,闫海.技术创新网络组织惯性对双元创新的影响研究[J].科学学研究,2016,34(9):1432-1440.
[18] Coleman J S. Social capital in the creation of human capital[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1988, 94(Supplement): 95-120.
[19] Burt R S. Structural holes: the social structure of competition[M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university press, 1992: 14-32.
[20] Mckinley W, Latham S, Braun M. Organizational decline and innovation: turnarounds and downward spirals[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2014, 39(1): 88-110.
[21] Sytch M, Tatarynowicz A. Friends and foes: the dynamics of dual social structures[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57(2): 585- 613.
[22] 马费成,刘向.科学知识网络的演化模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2013,33(2):437- 443.
[23] Barabási A L, Albert R. Emergence of scaling in random networks[J]. science, 1999, 286(5439): 509-512.
[24] Mäs M, Flache A, Takács K, Jehn K A. In the short term we divide, in the long term we unite: demographic crisscrossing and the effects of faultlines on subgroup polarization[J]. Organization Science, 2013, 24(3): 716-736.
[25] Lord R G, Dinh J E, Hoffman E L. A quantum approach to time and organizational change[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2015, 40(2): 263-290.
[26] Ghosh A, Rosenkopf L. Shrouded in structure: challenges and opportunities for a friction-based view of network research[J]. Organization Science, 2014, 26(2): 622- 631.
[27] Schreyögg G, Sydow J. Organizational path dependence: a process view[J]. Organization Studies, 2011, 32(3): 321-335.
[28] Tortoriello M, Mcevily B, Krackhardt D. Being a catalyst of innovation: the role of knowledge diversity and network closure[J]. Organization Science, 2015, 26(2): 423- 438.
[29] 向希尧,裴云龙.跨国专利合作网络中技术接近性的调节作用研究[J].管理科学,2015,28(1):111-121.
[30] Baum J A, Cowan R, Jonard N. Does evidence of network effects on firm performance in pooled cross-section support prescriptions for network strategy?[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2014, 35(5): 652- 667.
[31] Wang C, Rodan S, Fruin M, Xu X. Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57(2): 484-514.
[32] Blondel V D, Guillaume J L, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks[J]. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008, 30 (2): 155-168.
[33] Newman M E, Girvan M. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks[J]. Physical Review E, 2004, 69(2): 26-113.
[34] Benner M J, Tushman M L. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2003, 28(2): 238-256.
[35] Makri M, Hitt M A, Lane P J. Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010, 31(6): 602- 628.
[36] Mashima D, Kobourov S G, Hu Y. Visualizing dynamic data with maps[J]. IEEE Transactions on Visualization & Computer Graphics, 2012, 18(9): 1424-1437.
[37] Dahlander L, Mcfarland D A. Ties that last tie formation and persistence in research collaborations over time[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2013, 58(1): 69-110.