The roles of different intermediaries in innovation networks: A network-based approach

Greater understanding of what factors promote the formation of innovation networks and their successful performance would help policymakers improve the design of policy interventions aimed at funding R&D projects to be carried out by networks of innovators. In this paper, we focus on the organizations that can play the role of intermediaries in the networks, facilitating the involvement of other participants and promoting communication and knowledge flows within the network. Based on an original empirical dataset, capturing the relationships between organizations involved in a set of publicly-funded programmes in support of innovation networks, we have tried to identify what are the main features of different types of intermediaries based on an analysis of their positions within networks of relationships. We have observed that agents that occupy broker positions – linking agents that are not connected to each other – are more likely to be found in technologically turbulent environments, while the agents that occupy intercohesive positions – bridging cohesive communities of network agents – operate in more stable contexts. Intermediaries in general are more likely to be local governments. However, besides this, it is not possible to clearly identify organizations that, by nature, are more likely to be either brokers or intercohesive agents: different innovation networks may require different organizations to mediate relationships between the other participants.

[1]  Matthew D. Lieberman,et al.  Birds of a feather , 1994, Nature Structural Biology.

[2]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Optimal Cognitive Distance and Absorptive Capacity , 2005 .

[3]  Jens J. Krüger,et al.  The Performance of Gatekeepers in Innovator Networks , 2011 .

[4]  Rikard Stankiewicz,et al.  The Role of the Science and Technology Infrastructure in the Development and Diffusion of Industrial Automation in Sweden , 1995 .

[5]  M. Tushman,et al.  Boundary Spanning Individuals: Their Role in Information Transfer and Their Antecedents , 1981 .

[6]  M. Russo,et al.  Networked by design: can policy constraints support the development of capabilities for collaborative innovation? , 2013 .

[7]  Giovanni Bonifati,et al.  Exaptation and emerging degeneracy in innovation processes , 2013 .

[8]  Andrea Morrison,et al.  Gatekeepers of Knowledge within Industrial Districts: Who They Are, How They Interact , 2008 .

[9]  Josh Whitford,et al.  Industrial districts in a globalizing world: A model to change or a model of change? - Materiali di discussione del Dipartimento di Economia Politica (Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia), n. 615 , 2009 .

[10]  H. Rush,et al.  Building bridges for innovation: the role of consultants in technology transfer , 1995 .

[11]  M. Fritsch,et al.  Who Are the Knowledge Brokers in Regional Systems of Innovation? A Multi-Actor Network Analysis , 2013 .

[12]  Innovation, generative relationships and scaffolding structures. Implications of a complexity perspective to innovation for public and private interventions , 2010 .

[13]  Annalisa Caloffi,et al.  An Analysis of Regional Policies Promoting Networks for Innovation , 2010 .

[14]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities , 1999 .

[15]  J. Howells Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation , 2006 .

[16]  M. Fritsch,et al.  The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks , 2010 .

[17]  Kieron Flanagan,et al.  Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention , 2012 .

[18]  T. P. Hughes,et al.  Complementary Innovations And Generative Relationships: An Ethnographic Study , 2000 .

[19]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Network Embeddedness and the Exploration of Novel Technologies: Technological Distance, Betweenness Centrality and Density , 2006 .

[20]  Jason Potts,et al.  Micro-meso-macro , 2004 .

[21]  Laura Lucia Parolin L'innovazione nelle relazioni tra i nodi di un network. Il caso dei fornitori artigiani nell'industria del mobile , 2010 .

[22]  Thomas J. Allen,et al.  Managing the flow of technology: technology transfer and the dissemination of technological informat , 1977 .

[23]  U. Cantner,et al.  Success and failure of firms' innovation co‐operations: The role of intermediaries and reciprocity* , 2011 .

[24]  Balazs Vedres,et al.  Opening Closure: Intercohesion and Entrepreneurial Dynamics in Business Groups , 2008 .

[25]  Andrew B. Hargadon,et al.  Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. , 1997 .

[26]  M. Fritsch,et al.  Who are the brokers of knowledge in regional systems of innovation? A multi-actor network analysis , 2008 .

[27]  R. Maxfield,et al.  Building a New Market System: Effective Action, Redirection and Generative Relationships , 2009 .

[28]  Victor Gilsing,et al.  The dynamics of innovation and interfirm networks : exploration, exploitation and co-evolution , 2005 .

[29]  John F. Padgett,et al.  Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400-1434 , 1993, American Journal of Sociology.

[30]  V. A. Gilsing The dynamics of innovation and interfirm networks , 2005 .

[31]  L. Lynn,et al.  Linking technology and institutions: the innovation community framework , 1996 .

[32]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[33]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[34]  Martha Prevezer,et al.  UK biotechnology: institutional linkages, technology transfer and the role of intermediaries , 1996 .

[35]  Roger V. Gould,et al.  Structures of Mediation: A Formal Approach to Brokerage in Transaction Networks , 1989 .