伙伴社会价值对企业突破性创新的影响研究

毕静煜; 谢恩

PDF(673 KB)

科研管理 ›› 2021, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (1) : 67-77.

论文

伙伴社会价值对企业突破性创新的影响研究

毕静煜¹,谢恩²

作者信息 +

A research on the impact of partner′s social value on firms′ critical innovation

Bi Jingyu¹, Xie En²

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

本研究基于交易成本理论分析了在研发联盟组合中，研发合作伙伴的社会价值（中心企业的研发合作伙伴的伙伴数的平均值来衡量）如何作用于企业的突破性创新；同时分析了研发联盟伙伴技术多样性以及地理多样性的调节作用。基于1997年至2017年中国医药制造业构建研发联盟的数据，采用负二项回归分析发现：（1）在研发联盟组合中，研发联盟伙伴社会价值与企业突破性创新的关系为倒U形；（2）研发联盟伙伴技术多样性减弱了伙伴社会价值对企业突破性创新的倒U作用；（3）研发联盟伙伴地理多样性增强了伙伴社会价值对企业突破性创新的倒U作用。本文的研究结论不仅完善了现有的研发联盟组合文献和伙伴多样性研究文献，还基于交易成本理论为企业管理者进行伙伴选择及联盟组合管理提供重要的思路启发。

Abstract

In a volatile business environment, firms usually build and operate a set of R&D alliances with multiple external partners as R&D alliance portfolios to achieve economic and technological objectives. However, due to the less transparent information disclosure process in emerging markets, it is difficult for firms to obtain reliable information about potential partners through public sources. As a result, firms trend to view the high frequency with which a specific partner is selected by other firms as a convincing signal of quality, because others′ actions can help the focal firm to reduce information asymmetries associating with partner selection decisions. Thus, the R&D alliance portfolio is often featured with high partners′ social value. Previous studies have examined how partners′ social value of the R&D alliance portfolio influence firms′ innovation outcomes, however, the conclusions are inconsistent. Specifically, how partners′ social value influences firms′ critical innovation still remains unknown. This study attempts to fill this gap by drawing on transaction cost theory to examine how partners′ social value of R&D alliance portfolio (which is measured as the average of the linkages of all partners in R&D alliance portfolio) influences firms′ critical innovation.
Because few of the previous studies focus on exploring the boundary effect of partners′ social value on firms′ critical innovation, while, the attributes of participants in the alliance portfolio can indeed affect the information obtained by the focal firm from external partners, especially the technological diversity and geographic diversity of R&D partners in the R&D alliance portfolio. Still, how partners′ technological diversity and geographic diversity moderate the relationship between partners′ social value and firms′ critical innovation remains unclear.
The empirical study, leveraging Chinese listed biopharmaceutical firms during a twenty-year period (1997-2017), and using a negative binomial regression model, aims to fill these gaps by posing two research questions. First, how partners′ social value of R&D alliance portfolio influences firms′ critical innovation. Second, how partners′ technological diversity and geographic diversity moderate the relationship between partners′ social value and firms′ critical innovation. Our results indicate that: (1) Partners′ social value has an inverted U-shaped effect on firms′ critical innovation; (2) Partners′ technological diversity weakens the inverted U-shaped effect of partners′ social value on firms′ critical innovation. The higher the technological diversity of the partners, the inverted-U shaped relationship between partners′ social value and firms′ innovation is weakened; (3) Partners′ geographic diversity has enhanced the inverted U-shaped effect of partners′ social value on firms′ critical innovation. The higher the geographical diversity of partners, the inverted-U shaped relationship between partners′ social value and firms′ critical innovation is steeper. Because existing research provides multiple measurements of firms′ critical innovation, we also use the number of citations of firms′ patent as the measurement of firms′ critical innovation to conduct a robustness test, the results further indicate that the conclusion of this article is still robust.
Relevant research results not only help supplement the existing literature on alliance portfolio and partner diversity but also can provide useful references for managers of the focal firms to select partners and manage their R&D alliance portfolio, thereby improving their innovation capabilities and innovation investment efficiency.

导出引用

毕静煜谢恩. 伙伴社会价值对企业突破性创新的影响研究[J]. 科研管理. 2021, 42(1): 67-77

Bi Jingyu, Xie En. A research on the impact of partner′s social value on firms′ critical innovation[J]. Science Research Management. 2021, 42(1): 67-77

参考文献

[1] 王龙伟,任胜钢,谢恩.合作研发对企业创新绩效的影响研究—基于治理机制的调节分析 [J]. 科学学研究, 2011, 29(5): 785 – 792.

[2] 王道平，韦小彦，方放.基于技术标准特征的标准研发联盟合作伙伴选择研究 [J]. 科研管理,2015, 36(1): 81 – 89.

[3] Li H, Zhang Y. The role of managers’ political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China’s transition economy [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2007, 28(8): 791 – 804.

[4] Peng M W, Buck T, Filatotchev I. Do outside directors and new managers help improve firm performance? An exploratory study in Russian privatization [J]. Journal of World Business, 2003, 38(4): 348 – 360.

[5] Williamson O E. The economic institutions of capitalism-transaction cost economics [J]. The Political Economy Reader Markets as Institutions, 1985: 185 – 194.

[6] Vasudeva G, Spencer J W, Teegen H J. Bringing the institutional context back in: A cross-national comparison of alliance partner selection and knowledge acquisition [J]. Organization Science, 2013, 24(2): 319 – 338.

[7] Belderbos R, Gilsing V A, Jacob J. Technology alliances in emerging economies: Persistence and interrelation in European firms’ alliance formation [J]. R&D Management, 2013, 43(5): 447 – 460.

[8] Belderbos R, Olffen W V, Zou J. Generic and specific social learning mechanisms in foreign entry location choice [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2011, 32: 1309 – 1330.

[9] Dacin M T, Oliver C, Roy J P. The legitimacy of strategic alliances: An institutional perspective [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2007, 28(2): 169 – 187.

[10] Sorenson O, Stuart T. Bringing the context back in: Settings and the search for syndicate partners in venture capital investment networks [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2008, 53(2): 266 – 294.

[11] Zheng Y, Yang H. Does familiarity foster innovation? The impact of alliance partner repeatedness on breakthrough innovations [J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2015, 52(2): 213 – 230.

[12] 李靖华, 黄继生. 网络嵌入、创新合法性与突破性创新的资源获取 [J]. 科研管理, 2017, 38(4): 10 – 18.

[13] Powell W W, White D R, Koput K W, et al. Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 2005, 110(4): 1132 – 1205.

[14] Sampson R C. R&D alliances and firm performance: The impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2007, 50(2): 364 – 386.

[15] Miller D J. Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010, 27(7): 601 – 611.

[16] Gomes-Casseres B, Hagedoorn J, Jaffe A B. Do alliances promote knowledge flows [J]. Journal of Financial Economic, 2005, 80(1): 5 – 33.

[17] Ozmel U, Robinson D T, Stuart T E. Strategic alliances, venture capital, and exit decisions in early stage high-tech firms [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2013, 107(3): 655 – 670.

[18] Shi W, Sun S L, Pinkham B C, et al. Domestic alliance network to attract foreign partners: Evidence from international joint ventures in China [J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2014, 45(3): 338 – 362.

[19] Oehme M, Bort S. SME internationalization modes in the German biotechnology industry: The influence of imitation, network position, and international experience [J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2015, 46(6): 629 – 655.

[20] Bruyaka O, Durand R. Sell–off or shut–down? Alliance portfolio diversity and two types of high tech firms’ exit [J]. Strategic Organization, 2011, 10(1): 7 – 30.

[21] Jiang R J, Tao Q T, Santoro M D. Research notes and commentaries alliance portfolio diversity and firm performance [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010, 31(12): 1136 – 1144.

[22] Wuyts S, Dutta S. Benefiting from alliance portfolio diversity: The role of past internal knowledge [J]. Journal of Management, 2014, 40: 1653 – 1674.

[23] Lee C Y, Wang M C, Huang Y C. The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators [J]. European Management Journal, 2015, 33(6): 450 – 461.

[24] Page S E. The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies-new edition [M]. Princeton University Press, 2008.

[25] Lahiri N. Geographic distribution of R&D activity: How does it affect innovation quality [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2010, 53(5): 1194 – 1209.

[26] 魏江, 应瑛, 刘洋. 研发活动地理分散性、技术多样性与创新绩效 [J]. 科学学研究, 2013, 31(5): 772 – 779.

[27] Ocasio W. Towards an attention-based view of the firm [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010, 18(1): 187 – 206.

[28] Guan J, Liu N. 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.

[29] 赵博, 毕克新. 基于专利的我国制造业低碳突破性创新动态演化规律分析 [J]. 管理世界, 2016, 7: 182 – 183.

[30] Phelps C C. A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2010, 53(4): 890 – 913.

[31] Li J J, Poppo L, Zhou K Z. Do managerial ties in China always produce value? Competition, uncertainty, and domestic vs. foreign firms [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2008, 29(5): 383 – 400.

[32] Nohria N, Gulati R. Is slack good or bad for innovation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39(5): 1245 – 1264.

[33] Lind J T, Mehlum H. With or without U? The appropriate test for a U-shaped relationship [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics & Statistics, 2010, 72(1): 109–118.

[34] Fieller E C. Some problems in interval estimation [J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1954, 16(2): 175 – 185.

[35] 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.