虚拟集聚型网络关系、制度逻辑差异与数字赋能型企业成长——基于云计算企业的研究

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 在新一代信息技术搭建的虚拟集聚空间中，如何打破传统组织边界建立非地理临近网络关系对数字赋能型企业成长具有关键作用，揭示不同虚拟集聚型网络关系对企业成长差异化影响的内在机制具有重要意义。本文聚焦云计算企业，整合网络和制度逻辑视角探讨了虚拟集聚型网络规模、互联性、角色多样性对企业成长的影响。结果表明：虚拟集聚型网络规模促进企业成长，网络互联性与企业成长呈倒U型关系，角色多样性促进企业成长，且制度逻辑差异对网络角色多样性与企业成长的正向关系、网络互联性与企业成长的倒U型关系均具有负向调节作用。该研究结论拓展了制度逻辑理论在虚拟集聚形态中的研究范畴，对数字化时代不同背景企业如何在虚拟集聚中协作共赢具有指导意义。

关键词: 虚拟集聚, 数字赋能, 网络关系, 企业成长, 颠覆性技术

Abstract: The new generation of information technologies, such as artificial intelligence, big data and cloud computing, are restructuring industrial organizations and transforming industrial clusters that rely on geographical proximity into a new form of virtual agglomeration. In virtual agglomeration, breaking traditional organizational boundaries and establishing non-geographic network relationships are indispensable for the growth of digital enterprises. Taking cloud computing enterprises as the research object, this paper studies the unique influence mechanism of network relationship and enterprise growth in virtual agglomeration, and tests the moderating effect of institutional logic differences. The conclusions of this study provide decision-making clues for the growth of digital enterprises and new capital construction.
The differences between this paper and existing studies are mainly reflected in three aspects：First of all, digital technologies have completely subverted the traditional industrial organizations and enterprise behavior logics. This paper reverifies the influence mechanism of network relationship on enterprise growth under the new situation of virtual agglomeration. Secondly, the existing research on virtual agglomeration has the problem of homogenization. This paper makes up for the homogenization problem. Thirdly, considering the differentiation of enterprise institutional logic, cultural background, role orientation and other factors, this paper expands the research scope of institutional logic theory.
This paper integrates the perspective of network and institutional logic. We focus on cloud computing enterprises and discuss the impact of virtual agglomeration network size, interconnectedness and role diversity on enterprise growth. We also discuss the regulating role of institutional logic difference between them. The empirical study shows that the size of virtual agglomeration network promotes the rapid growth of enterprises, there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between interconnectedness and enterprise growth, role diversity promotes enterprise growth positively. Institutional logic difference has a negative moderating effect on the positive relationship between role diversity and firm growth in virtual agglomeration network, and also the inverted U-shaped relationship between network connectivity and firm growth in virtual agglomeration network.
The conclusion of this paper expands the research scope of institutional logic theory and has guiding significance for enterprises with different backgrounds to cooperate and win-win in virtual agglomeration. Firstly, digital enterprises should pay attention to the important role of network relations in virtual agglomeration. These enterprises are supposed to establish multiple and complex non-linear relationships with different types of enterprises, acquiring resources and technologies that they lack, and penetrate into all fields of production activities. Secondly, although network relationships play an important role, digital enterprises should not rely too much on traditional business partners. Especially for large enterprises, it is necessary for them to re-examine rigid and inflexible partnerships. Therefore, digital enterprises need to take into account the balance between traditional business and new business, and timely establish cooperative network relationships to master the emerging technology. Thirdly, the government should further optimize and clarify the responsibilities of SOEs and non-SOEs, as the differences in institutional logic will cause conflicts between them and also affect the growth of enterprises. SOEs are less dependent on partnerships, so they are supposed to break the original partnerships and establish a balanced partnership network with different enterprises, so as to further optimize the new infrastructure layout and better play their social duties.

Key words: virtual agglomeration, digital enabling, network relation, enterprise growth, disruptive technology

张睿倩, 刘昊倬, 谢一臻, 陈岩. 虚拟集聚型网络关系、制度逻辑差异与数字赋能型企业成长——基于云计算企业的研究[J]. 科研管理, 2021, 42(8): 92-101.

Zhang Ruiqian, Liu Haozhuo, Xie Yizhen, Chen Yan. Virtual agglomeration network relations, institutional logic differences and the growth of digital enabled enterprises: A research on enterprises based on cloud computing[J]. Science Research Management, 2021, 42(8): 92-101.

参考文献

[1] 王如玉, 梁琦, 李广乾. 虚拟集聚:新一代信息技术与实体经济深度融合的空间组织新形态[J]. 管理世界, 2018,34(2):13-21.

WANG Ruyu, LIANG Qi, LI Guangqian. Virtual agglomeration: A new form of spatial organization with the deep integration of new generation information technology and real economy [J]. Management World, 2018,34(2):13-21.

[2] 陈小勇. 产业集群的虚拟转型[J]. 中国工业经济, 2017(12):78-94.

CHEN Xiaoyong. Virtual transformation of industrial cluster [J]. China Industrial Economics, 2017(12):78-94.

[3] 严子淳, 李欣, 王伟楠. 数字化转型研究:演化和未来展望[J]. 科研管理, 2021,42(4):21-34.

YAN Zichun, LI Xin, WANG Weinan. A research on digital transformation: Its evolution and future prospects[J]. Science Research Management, 2021,42(4):21-34

[4] WANG N, LIANG H, JIA Y, et al. Cloud computing research in the IS discipline: A citation/co-citation analysis[J]. Decision Support Systems, 2016,86:35-47.

[5] 阮建青, 石琦, 张晓波. 产业集群动态演化规律与地方政府政策[J]. 管理世界, 2014(12):79-91.

RUAN Jianqing, SHI Qi, ZHANG Xiaobo. Dynamic evolution law of industrial cluster and local government policy [J]. Management World, 2014(12):79-91.

[6] DELGADO M, PORTER M E, STERN S. Clusters, convergence, and economic performance[J]. Research Policy, 2014,43(10):1785-1799.

[7] MCCANN B T, FOLTA T B. Performance differentials within geographic clusters[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2011,26(1):104-123.

[8] KUKALIS S. Agglomeration economies and firm performance: The case of industry clusters[J]. Journal of Management, 2010,36(2):453-481.

[9] TER Wal A L J, BOSCHMA R. Co-evolution of firms, industries and networks in space[J]. Regional Studies, 2011,45(7):919-933.

[10] 冯鹏程. 大数据时代的组织演化研究[J]. 经济学家, 2018(3):57-62.

FENG Pengcheng. Research on organizational evolution in the era of big data[J]. The Economist, 2018(3):57-62.

[11] 张鹏. 数字经济的本质及其发展逻辑[J]. 经济学家, 2019(2):25-33.

ZHANG Peng. The essence of digital economy and its development logic[J]. The Economist, 2019(2):25-33.

[12] KIM H D, LEE D H, CHOE H, et al. The evolution of cluster network structure and firm growth: A study of industrial software clusters[J]. Scientometrics, 2014,99(1):77-95.

[13] RAISI H, BAGGIO R, BARRATT-Pugh L, et al. Hyperlink network analysis of a tourism destination[J]. Journal of Travel Research, 2017,57(5):671-686.

[14] ASLESEN H W, MARTIN R, SARDO S. The virtual is reality! On physical and virtual space in software firms’ knowledge formation[J]. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 2018,9(31):669-682.

[15] LE Ber M J, BRANZEI O. Value frame fusion in cross sector interactions[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2010,94:163-195.

[16] SELSKY J W, PARKER B. Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice[J]. Journal of Management, 2016,31(6):849-873.

[17] GREENWOOD R, RAYNARD M, KODEIH F, et al. Institutional complexity and organizational responses[J]. Academy of Management Annals, 2011,1(5):317-371.

[18] ASHARAF N, AHMADSIMAB A, PINKSE J. From animosity to affinity: The interplay of competing logics and interdependence in cross-Sector partnerships[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2017,54(6):793-822.

[19] VURRO C, DACIN M T, PERRINI F. Institutional antecedents of partnering for social change: How institutional logics shape cross-Sector social partnerships[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2010(94):39-53.

[20] 焦勇. 数字经济赋能制造业转型：从价值重塑到价值创造[J]. 经济学家, 2020(6):87-94.

JIAO Yong. Digital economy enables manufacturing transformation: From value reconstruction to value creation[J]. The Economist, 2020(6):87-94.

[21] BAUM J A C, CALABRESE T, SILVERMAN B S. Don't go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups' performance in canadian biotechnology[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2015,3(21):267-294.

[22] ROWLEY T, BEHRENS D, KRACKHARDT D. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2000,3(21):369-386.

[23] ISOBE T, MAKINO S, MONTGOMERY D B. Resource commitment, entry timing, and market performance of FDIs in emerging economies: The case of Japanese international joint ventures in China[J]. The Academy of Management Journal, 2000,3(43):468-484.

[24] VAN Beers C, ZAND F. R&D Cooperation, partner diversity, and innovation performance: An empirical analysis[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2014,31(2):292-312.

[25] 文金艳, 曾德明, 徐露允, 等. 结构洞、网络多样性与企业技术标准化能力[J]. 科研管理, 2020,41(12):195-203.

WEN Jinyan, ZENG Deming, XU Luyun,et al. Structural holes, network diversity and firms' technological standardization capability[J]. Science Research Management, 2020, 41(12):195-203.

[26] MEYER R E, HÖLLERER M A. Meaning structures in a contested issue field: A topographic map of shareholder value in Austria[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2010,6(53):1241-1262.

[27] FLIGSTEIN N, MCADAM D. Toward a general theory of strategic action fields[J]. Sociological Theory, 2011,1(29):01-26.

[28] 梁强, 王博, 宋丽红, 等. 制度复杂性与家族企业成长——基于正大集团的案例研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2020,23(3):51-62.

LIANG Qiang, WANG Bo, SONG Lihong,et al. Institutional complexity and family business growth:A case study based on Charoen Pokphand Group[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2020,23(3):51-62.

[29] 苏郁锋, 罗顺均, 冉佳森. 双重劣势情境国际新创企业制度拼凑策略研究——以中国在非洲新创企业为例[J]. 南开管理评论, 2020,23(6):27-38.

SU Yufeng, LUO Shunjun, RAN Jiasen. Research on the institutional bricolage strategy of international new ventures under dual liabilities: Based on Chinese new ventures in Africa[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2020,23(6):27-38.

[30] AUSTIN J E. Strategic collaboration between nonprofits and business[J]. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 2000(29):69-97.

[31] CASCIARO T, PISKORSKI M J. Power imbalance, mutual dependence, and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2005(50):167-199.

[32] REAY T, HININGS C R B. The recomposition of an organizational field: Health care in Alberta[J]. Organization Studies, 2005(26):351-384.

[33] PARIDA V, PATEL P C, WINCENT J, et al. Network partner diversity, network capability, and sales growth in small firms[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2016,69(6):2113-2117.

[34] HAANS R F J, PIETERS C, HE Z. Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U-and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2016(37):1177-1195.