Influence mechanism of multi-network embeddedness to enterprises innovation performance based on knowledge management perspective

Based on network embedding, enterprise technology innovation and knowledge management theories, the study has built theoretical conceptual model of multiple network embedding influencing enterprises’ technological innovation performance from the perspective of knowledge management. The work discussed the internal mechanism of knowledge management activities affected by embedded relationship, embedded structure and embedded resource influencing technological innovation performance. Through obtaining 190 SME’s survey data in the Yangtze River Delta region, we systematically validated the conceptual model with the structural equation model. It showed that embedded relationship, embedded structure and embedded resource in enterprise organization network can effectively improve the enterprise’s knowledge management capability, bringing significant promotion in technological innovation performance. Wherein, the embedded relationship and embedded resource can promote not only the technological innovation performance of the enterprise, but also the performance by improving the knowledge management ability of the enterprise. While, the promotion effect of embedded structure to enterprises’ technological innovation majorly relies on the fully-mediated knowledge management to achieve.

[1]  Akbar Zaheer,et al.  The Embeddedness of Networks: Institutions, Structural Holes, and Innovativeness in the Fuel Cell Industry , 2013, Organ. Sci..

[2]  Geoffrey G. Bell,et al.  Benefiting from network position: firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance , 2005 .

[3]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Activating Cross-Boundary Knowledge: The Role of Simmelian Ties in the Generation of Innovations , 2010 .

[4]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness , 1997 .

[5]  Antonio Capaldo.  Network Structure and Innovation: The Leveraging of a Dual Network as a Distinctive Relational Capability , 2006 .

[6]  Gary L. Lilien,et al.  Location, Location, Location: How Network Embeddedness Affects Project Success in Open Source Systems , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[7]  A. Morrison,et al.  The Dynamics of Technical and Business Knowledge Networks in Industrial Clusters: Embeddedness, Status, or Proximity? , 2016 .

[8]  Wenpin Tsai,et al.  Niche and Performance: The Moderating Role of Network Embeddedness , 2005 .

[9]  Cristina Boari,et al.  The Importance of Proximity for the Start‐Ups' Knowledge Acquisition and Exploitation , 2011 .

[10]  R. Gulati,et al.  The Nature of Partnering Experience and the Gains from Alliances , 2009 .

[11]  Liang Jua.  A study on multiple network embeddedness and knowledge creation performance of cluster firms , 2015 .

[12]  Zbigniew J. Czech,et al.  Introduction to Parallel Computing , 2017 .

[13]  Ulf R. Andersson,et al.  The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation , 2002 .

[14]  Vangelis Souitaris,et al.  Network embeddedness and new-venture internationalization: Analyzing international linkages in the German biotech industry , 2008 .

[15]  Brian Uzzi,et al.  Relational Embeddedness and Learning: The Case of Bank Loan Managers and Their Clients , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[16]  J. Wincent,et al.  Entrepreneurial orientation and network board diversity in network organizations , 2014 .

[17]  Nobuya Fukugawa,et al.  Determining Factors in Innovation of Small Firm Networks: A case of Cross Industry Groups in Japan , 2006 .

[18]  B. Dousset.  Innovation and network structural dynamics: Study of the alliance network of a major sector of the biotechnology industry , 2005 .

[19]  T. Thune.  University-industry collaboration: The network embeddedness approach , 2007 .

[20]  Neng-Pai Lin,et al.  The effects of network embeddedness on service innovation performance , 2010 .

[21]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[22]  J. Barney.  Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[23]  E. Autio,et al.  SOCIAL CAPITAL, KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION, AND KNOWLEDGE EXPLOITATION IN YOUNG TECHNOLOGY-BASED FIRMS , 2001 .

[24]  John E. Prescott,et al.  Designing alliance networks: the influence of network position, environmental change, and strategy on firm performance , 2008 .

[25]  S. Bouret,et al.  Hypothalamic tanycytes are an ERK-gated conduit for leptin into the brain. , 2014, Cell metabolism.

[26]  Martin Gargiulo,et al.  The Two Faces of Control: Network Closure and Individual Performance among Knowledge Workers , 2009 .

[27]  Y. Chiu.  How network competence and network location influence innovation performance , 2008 .

[28]  Joakim Wincent,et al.  Does network board capital matter? A study of innovative performance in strategic SME networks , 2010 .

[29]  Richard Taylor,et al.  Knowledge diffusion dynamics and network properties of face-to-face interactions , 2004 .

[30]  M. Hitt,et al.  International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. , 2000 .

[31]  Robyn L. Keast,et al.  Network structure, knowledge governance, and firm performance: evidence from Innovation Networks and SMEs in the UK , 2010 .

[32]  Peter Moran.  Structural vs. relational embeddedness: social capital and managerial performance , 2005 .

[33]  R. Gulati.  Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation , 1999 .