Exploring the Nanotechnology Alliances of Nanotechnology Firms: The Roles of Network Position and Technological Uncertainty

Nanotechnology is now increasing attention to inter-firm collaboration and alliances for developing nanotechnology commercialisation opportunities. This study explores and examines nanotechnology alliance networking behaviour to determine fully what types of factors drive nanotechnology alliance activities. The proposed research frameworks attempt to fill the gap in knowledge regarding emerging nanotechnology alliance behaviour and to explore the alliance decisions driving inter-firm nanotechnology alliances that are grounded in deeper knowledge of nanotechnology alliances. The primary focus of nanotechnology alliance activity for nanotechnology-based firms confirms that nanotechnology alliances are influenced directly by inter-firm R&D ties and by joint interactions among inter-firm R&D ties, network positions and technological uncertainty. Specifically, we propose that a nanotechnology-based firm is highly likely to engage in alliances regarding decision-making activity. Using an original dataset of nanotechnology-based firms in the emerging nanotechnology alliance activity, we found that the joint effect of a position of high network centrality and a high level of technological uncertainty weakens inter-firm nanotechnology alliances.

[1]  M. Bednarski,et al.  Molecular Imaging Applications in Nanomedicine , 2004, Biomedical microdevices.

[2]  Andrew C. Inkpen,et al.  KNOWLEDGE, BARGAINING POWER, AND THE INSTABILITY OF INTERNATIONAL JOINT VENTURES , 1997 .

[3]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[4]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Social Network Analysis , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[5]  R. Gulati.  Alliances and networks , 1998 .

[6]  Chang-Hyun Jin.  Social Capital Index , 2015 .

[7]  H. B. Rashmi,et al.  Integrating nanotechnology into agri-food systems research in India: A conceptual framework , 2010 .

[8]  R. Gulati,et al.  STRATEGIC NETWORKS , 2000 .

[9]  Martin Everett,et al.  Ego network betweenness , 2005, Soc. Networks.

[10]  Devi R. Gnyawali,et al.  Cooperative Networks and Competitive Dynamics: a Structural Embeddedness Perspective , 2001 .

[11]  A. Agresti.  An introduction to categorical data analysis , 1997 .

[12]  Toby E. Stuart.  Network Positions and Propensities to Collaborate: An Investigation of Strategic Alliance Formation in a High-Technology Industry , 1998 .

[13]  David Tolfree.  Commercialising Nanotechnology concepts-products-markets , 2006 .

[14]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[15]  Bat Batjargal,et al.  Social Capital and Entrepreneurial Performance in Russia: A Longitudinal Study , 2003 .

[16]  O. Renn,et al.  Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance , 2006, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[17]  Kumiko Miyazaki,et al.  Nanotechnology innovation system: Understanding hidden dynamics of nanoscience fusion trajectories , 2009 .

[18]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[19]  R. Burt.  Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence , 1987, American Journal of Sociology.

[20]  B. Uzzi,et al.  The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect , 1996 .

[21]  Michael Song,et al.  Manuscript #: RRR97-0379 THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED TECHNOLOGICAL UNCERTAINTY ON JAPANESE NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1999 .

[22]  N. Islam,et al.  Nanotechnology systems of innovation - An analysis of industry and academia research activities , 2007 .

[23]  Terry L. Amburgey,et al.  Interorganizational Linkages and Population Dynamics: Buffering and Transformational Shields. , 1990 .

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

[25]  Vincent Mangematin,et al.  Understanding the emergence and deployment of “nano” S&T , 2007, 0911.3323.

[26]  W. Powell.  Learning from Collaboration: Knowledge and Networks in the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Industries , 1998 .

[27]  Isabell M. Welpe,et al.  Antecedents of cooperative commercialisation strategies of nanotechnology firms , 2010 .

[28]  S. Hung,et al.  Stimulating new industries from emerging technologies: challenges for the public sector , 2006 .

[29]  A. Goerzen,et al.  Alliance networks and firm performance: The impact of repeated partnerships , 2007 .

[30]  J M Wilkinson,et al.  Nanotechnology applications in medicine. , 2003, Medical device technology.

[31]  N. Lin.  Social Capital: Frontmatter , 2001 .

[32]  R. Veugelers,et al.  R&D Cooperation between Firms and Universities: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgian Manufacturing , 2003 .

[33]  W. Powell,et al.  Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[34]  G. Ahuja.  Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study , 1998 .

[35]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences , 1993 .

[36]  Jaideep Anand,et al.  Non‐additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: a real options‐based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology , 2004 .

[37]  M. Roco.  Nanotechnology: convergence with modern biology and medicine. , 2003, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[38]  Peter E. Kennedy.  A Guide to Econometrics , 1979 .

[39]  Bengt Holmstrom,et al.  AGENCY COSTS AND INNOVATION , 1989 .

[40]  Bruce R. Barringer,et al.  Walking a Tightrope: Creating Value Through Interorganizational Relationships , 2000 .

[41]  Andreas B. Eisingerich,et al.  How can clusters sustain performance? The role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty , 2010 .

[42]  K. Zhou,et al.  Do managerial ties in China always produce value? Competition, uncertainty, and domestic vs. foreign firms , 2008 .

[43]  L. Freeman.  Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[44]  W. Powell.  Hybrid Organizational Arrangements: New Form or Transitional Development? , 1987 .

[45]  Christopher Palmberg,et al.  Transferring science-based technologies to industry: Does nanotechnology make a difference? , 2010 .

[46]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[47]  A. Gillison,et al.  Research Partnerships , 2007 .

[48]  J. Youtie,et al.  How interdisciplinary is nanotechnology? , 2009, Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology.

[49]  Mark Jansen,et al.  Influence of partner diversity on collaborative public R&D project outcomes : a study of application and commercialization of nanotechnologies in the Netherlands , 2012 .

[50]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? Explorations in the specialty of molecular motors , 2007, Scientometrics.

[51]  R. Gulati,et al.  Guest editors’ introduction to the special issue: strategic networks , 2000 .

[52]  Kwaku Atuahene-Gima,et al.  Antecedents and Outcomes of Marketing Strategy Comprehensiveness , 2004 .

[53]  J. A. Calvin.  Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables , 1998 .

[54]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[55]  M. Maznevski,et al.  The relationship between networks, institutional development, and performance in foreign investments , 2011 .

[56]  Toby E. Stuart.  Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates i , 2000 .

[57]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  Sustainable governance of emerging technologies—Critical constellations in the agent network of nanotechnology , 2007 .

[58]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents , 2007, Scientometrics.

[59]  Gwendolyn K. Lee.  The significance of network resources in the race to enter emerging product markets: the convergence of telephony communications and computer networking, 1989–2001 , 2007 .

[60]  R. Gulati.  Social Structure and Alliance Formation Patterns: A Longitudinal Analysis , 1995 .

[61]  P. Soh.  The role of networking alliances in information acquisition and its implications for new product performance , 2003 .

[62]  Kumiko Miyazaki,et al.  An empirical analysis of nanotechnology research domains , 2010 .

[63]  Krsto Pandza,et al.  Collaborative diversity in a nanotechnology innovation system: Evidence from the EU Framework Programme , 2011 .

[64]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience , 2009, Scientometrics.

[65]  Rachelle C. Sampson.  R&D Alliances & Firm Performance: The Impact of Technological Diversity and Alliance Organization on Innovation , 2003 .

[66]  Torsten Fleischer,et al.  Assessing emerging technologies—Methodological challenges and the case of nanotechnologies , 2005 .

[67]  Haibin Yang,et al.  Behind Acquisitions of Alliance Partners: Exploratory Learning and Network Embeddedness , 2011 .

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

[69]  J. Hagedoorn.  Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Nterorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences , 1993 .