PDF(1135 KB)
PDF(1135 KB)
PDF(1135 KB)
互补企业平台生态能力对协同创新的影响路径与作用机制研究
A study on the influence paths and action mechanisms of complementary firms' platform ecosystem capabilities on collaborative innovation
平台生态系统蕴含着海量但分散的创新资源,创业型互补企业如何在自身资源匮乏下,实现创新资源整合内化并驱动协同创新,有待深入研究。基于动态能力理论和生态系统治理理论,本文构建了互补企业的平台生态能力对协同创新行为的影响机理模型,探究了创业文化的中介机制和资源拼凑的调节机制。收集310份平台互补企业问卷数据,采用多元回归和Bootstrap抽样法进行实证检验。研究发现:第一,互补企业的平台生态能力通过整合和重构来自生态系统主导者或平台生态网络的资源,有效驱动了协同创新;第二,持续变革和寻找机会的创业文化对驱动协同创新具有部分中介机制;第三,资源拼凑具有调节机制,提高了互补企业在资源匮乏下的适应性,推动持续性协同创新。本文为平台生态系统的资源治理、文化塑造和创新创业激励提供了理论依据与实践启示。
Platform ecosystems contain massive yet fragmented innovation resources. How entrepreneurial complementary firms integrate and internalize these resources under conditions of scarcity to drive collaborative innovation requires further exploration. Drawing on the theory of dynamic capabilities and ecosystem governance, this paper constructed a mechanism model to investigate how the platform ecosystem capabilities of complementary firms influence collaborative innovation behaviors, with a focus on the mediating role of entrepreneurial culture and the moderating role of resource bricolage. Using a dataset of 310 survey responses from platform-based complementary firms, the study conducted an empirical testing through multiple regression and bootstrap sampling methods. The findings revealed that: (1) The platform ecosystem capabilities of complementary firms effectively drive collaborative innovation by integrating and reconfiguring resources from ecosystem leaders or platform networks; (2) Entrepreneurial culture characterized by continuous change and opportunity-seeking partially mediates this relationship; and (3) Resource bricolage enhances the adaptability of complementary firms under resource constraints and promotes sustained collaborative innovation as a moderating mechanism. This study will provide theoretical foundations and practical insights for resource governance, cultural shaping, and innovation entrepreneurship incentives within platform ecosystems.
平台生态能力 / 互补企业 / 协同创新 / 创业文化 / 资源拼凑
platform ecosystem capability / complementary firms / collaborative innovation / entrepreneurial culture / resource bricolage
| [1] |
Platform-based technology ecosystems are new forms of organizing independent actors' innovations around a stable product system. This collective organization is proving superior to traditional, vertically integrated systems in many sectors because of greater "generativity"-the ecosystem's capacity to foster complementary innovation from autonomous, heterogeneous firms-which extends the usage scope and value of the platform to users. However, greater generativity can also lead to greater variance in the way ecosystem members' contributions satisfy users' needs, and it could potentially hinder the ecosystems' value creation. We draw on collective action theory to examine generativity's impact on user satisfaction and the mechanisms driving it. We argue that products enhancing user satisfaction contribute to a collective, shared asset, the platform system reputation, from which all participants benefit. Thus, generativity has both a positive (system reputation) and negative (free-riding) effect on the ecosystem members' incentives for developing products that enhance user satisfaction. We argue that the negative free-riding effect prevails as the platform system matures and competition with alternative platform systems increases. Using data from the video game industry, we find supportive evidence for the free-riding effect, which generates an average loss in total revenue for first-rate games of about $36.5 million and a drop of about 3.3% in the console's market share. By identifying the conditions that exacerbate free riding in platform ecosystems, our study contributes to the understanding of the evolutionary dynamics of platform ecosystems. It also highlights one feedback mechanism governing collective action in ecosystems and its implications for value creation.
|
| [2] |
焦豪. 数字平台生态观:数字经济时代的管理理论新视角[J]. 中国工业经济, 2023(7): 122-141.
|
| [3] |
戎珂, 柳卸林, 魏江, 等. 数字经济时代创新生态系统研究[J]. 管理工程学报, 2023, 37(6): 1-7.
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
焦豪, 杨季枫, 应瑛. 动态能力研究述评及开展中国情境化研究的建议[J]. 管理世界, 2021, 37(5): 191-210+114+122-124.
|
| [8] |
唐方成, 王冉冉. 平台与互补商协同创新的制度逻辑及其作用机制[J]. 管理评论, 2021, 33(11): 249-258.
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
张敏. 平台依附型企业如何摆脱创新惰性?行动者网络视角下的组态研究[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2023, 45(8): 101-117.
|
| [11] |
Suppose that a firm in charge of a business ecosystem is a firm in charge of a microeconomy. To achieve the highest growth rate, how open should that economy be? To encourage third-party developers, how long should their intellectual property interests last? We develop a sequential innovation model that addresses the trade-offs inherent in these two decisions: (i) Closing the platform increases the sponsor’s ability to charge for access, while opening the platform increases developer ability to build upon it. (ii) The longer third-party developers retain rights to their innovations, the higher the royalties they and the sponsor earn, but the sooner those developers’ rights expire, the sooner their innovations become a public good upon which other developers can build. Our model allows us to characterize the optimal levels of openness and of intellectual property (IP) duration in a platform ecosystem. We use standard Cobb–Douglas production technologies to derive our results. These findings can inform innovation strategy, choice of organizational form, IP noncompete decisions, and regulation policy.
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
马永开, 李仕明, 潘景铭. 工业互联网之价值共创模式[J]. 管理世界, 2020(8): 211-221.
|
| [16] |
魏江, 赵雨菡. 数字创新生态系统的治理机制[J]. 科学学研究, 2021, 39(6): 965-969.
数字创新生态系统存在创新要素数字化、参与主体虚拟化、主体间关系生态化等鲜明特征，为创新生态系统治理带来挑战。本研究从数字创新生态系统的特征及治理困境入手，构建数字创新生态系统的治理理论框架，从关系机制、激励机制、控制机制三个方面，构建了基于数字平台构建、数字技术应用及数字资源协同的创新生态系统治理机制。
Digital innovation ecosystem is characterized by digitalization of innovation elements, virtualization of actors and ecological relationship among actors, which bring challenges to its governance. Starting with the characteristics of digital innovation ecosystem and its governance dilemma, this paper constructs the theoretical framework of digital innovation ecosystem governance from three aspects: relationship mechanism, incentive mechanism and control mechanism. In addition, the governance mechanism of digital innovation ecosystem is realized through digital platform construction, digital technology application and digital resource coordination.
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
姜君蕾, 夏恩君, 贾依帛. 数字化企业如何重构能力实现数字融合产品创新[J]. 科学学研究, 2023, 41(12): 2257-2266.
复杂多变的数字环境下，能力重构已成为数字化企业充分利用新兴数字技术来实现数字融合产品创新的有效机制。然而，如何进行能力重构来实现数字融合产品创新仍未被现有研究充分揭示。选取小鸟科技作为案例研究对象，解析了数字融合产品创新不同阶段下企业能力重构的过程及作用机制。研究发现：在数字创新启动阶段，通过进行数字感知能力重构，对潜在数字创新机会发挥着加速洞察的作用机制；在数字创新开发阶段，通过进行数字学习能力重构，对数字技术融合绩效发挥着协奏增进的作用机制；在数字创新应用阶段，通过进行数字敏捷能力重构，对价值创造过程变革发挥着重塑支撑的作用机制。研究结论拓展了能力重构与数字融合产品创新相关文献，对数字化企业通过能力重构以加速推动数字融合产品创新进程具有指导意义。
In the complex and changeable digital environment, capability reconfiguration has become an effective mechanism for digital enterprises to make full use of emerging digital technologies to achieve digital integration product innovation. However, how to perform capability reconfiguration to accelerate digital integration product innovation has not been fully revealed by existing research. DigiBird is selected as the case study object, to analyze the process and mechanism of enterprise capability reconstruction under different stages of digital integration product innovation. The results show that: In the initiating digital innovation stage, digital sensing capabilities reconfiguration is realized, which plays accelerated insight for potential digital innovation opportunities. In the developing digital innovation stage, digital learning capabilities reconfiguration is realized, which plays orchestrating enhancement for digital technology integration performance. In the implementing digital innovation stage, digital agility capabilities reconfiguration is realized, which plays remodeling support for value creation process transforming. The research results extend the literature on capacity reconfiguration and digital integration product innovation, and provide guidance for digital enterprises to accelerate the process of digital integration product innovation through capacity reconfiguration.
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
刘志阳, 邱振宇, 许莉萍, 等. 社会企业组织混合性与社会影响力的关系研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2024, 27(1): 246-256.
|
| [22] |
王节祥, 刘双, 瞿庆云. 数字平台生态系统中的创业企业成长研究:现状、框架与展望[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2023, 35(1): 72-88.
|
| [23] |
曹钰华, 李晶. 数字创业生态系统嵌入对创业机会迭代的驱动机制研究[J]. 软科学, 2024, 38(1):1-7.
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
韩炜, 唐洁. 平台治理的机制设计:一个理论研究框架[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2023, 35(1): 105-117.
|
| [26] |
郭润萍, 尹昊博, 龚蓉. 资源视角下数字创业企业竞合战略对价值创造作用机理的多案例研究[J]. 管理学报, 2022, 19(11): 1588-1597.
选取4家数字创业企业，对资源视角下竞合战略影响数字创业企业价值创造的机制进行多案例研究。研究发现：数字创业企业资源整合包括外向资源辅助、外向资源互补、内向资源优化和内向资源拼凑4种方式；竞合战略是推动数字创业企业资源整合顺利实施的战略基础；竞合战略分别通过外向型资源整合和内向型资源整合实现共同价值与个体价值；价值网络成员创造的共同价值有助于提升数字创业企业的个体价值。
4 digital entrepreneurial firms are selected to conduct a multi-case study on the mechanism of coopetition strategy affecting the value creation of digital entrepreneurial firms from the resource perspective. The study found that the resource integration of digital entrepreneurial firms includes four methods: outbound resource assistance, outbound resource complementation, inbound resource optimization, and inbound resource bricolage. Coopetition strategy is the strategic foundation to promote the smooth implementation of the resource integration of digital entrepreneurial firms. Coopetition strategy realizes the common value and individual value through outbound resource integration and inbound resource integration, respectively. The common value created by value network members helps to enhance the individual value of digital entrepreneurial firms.
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
汤丹丹, 温忠麟. 共同方法偏差检验:问题与建议[J]. 心理科学, 2020, 43(1): 215-223.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
