Technological distance measures: new perspectives on nearby and far away

Understanding the competitive environment of one’s company is crucial for every manager. One tool to quantify the technological relationships between companies, evaluate industry landscapes and knowledge transfer potential in collaborations is the technological distance. There are different methods and many different factors that impact the results and thus the conclusions that are drawn from distance calculation. Therefore, the present study derives guidelines for calculating and evaluating technological distances for three common methods, i.e. the Euclidean distance, the cosine angle and the min-complement distance. For this purpose, we identify factors that influence the results of technological distance calculation using simulation. Subsequently, we analyze technological distances of cross-industry collaborations in the field of electric mobility. Our findings show that a high level of detail is necessary to achieve insightful results. If the topic in scope of the analysis does not represent the core business of the companies, we recommend filters to focus on the respective topic. Another key suggestion is to compare the calculated results to a peer group in order to evaluate if a distance can be evaluated as ‘near’ or ‘far’.

[1]  Knut Blind,et al.  Technological convergence and the absorptive capacity of standardisation , 2015 .

[2]  A. P. Man,et al.  Transitory Alliances: An Instrument for Surviving Turbulent Industries? , 2003 .

[3]  Glenn Hoetker,et al.  TECHNOLOGICAL OVERLAP, TECHNOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES, AND RESOURCE RECOMBINATION IN TECHNOLOGICAL ACQUISITIONS , 2014 .

[4]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Characterizing the “technological position” of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers☆ , 1989 .

[5]  Dar-Zen Chen,et al.  The bibliographic coupling approach to filter the cited and uncited patent citations: a case of electric vehicle technology , 2012, Scientometrics.

[6]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on International Patent Classification (IPC) , 2012, Scientometrics.

[7]  P. Peretto,et al.  Technological Distance, Growth and Scale Effects , 2002 .

[8]  Frank T. Rothaermel,et al.  Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[9]  M. Fung Technological proximity and co-movements of stock returns , 2003 .

[10]  Sebastian Heil,et al.  Preparing for distant collaboration: Antecedents to potential absorptive capacity in cross-industry innovation , 2014 .

[11]  Z. Griliches Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[12]  J. Leker,et al.  Anticipating converging industries using publicly available data , 2010 .

[13]  O. Gassmann,et al.  Crossing the Industry-Line: Breakthrough Innovation through Cross-Industry Alliances with ‘Non-Suppliers’ , 2010 .

[14]  Mark Jansen,et al.  When is a network a nexus for innovation? A study of public nanotechnology R&D projects in the Netherlands , 2012 .

[15]  Chao-Chan Wu,et al.  Using patent analyses to monitor the technological trends in an emerging field of technology: a case of carbon nanotube field emission display , 2009, Scientometrics.

[16]  Bokyoung Kang,et al.  Novelty-focused patent mapping for technology opportunity analysis , 2015 .

[17]  C. Autant‐Bernard,et al.  Social distance versus spatial distance in R & D cooperation: Empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies , 2007 .

[18]  Nathalie Sick,et al.  Identifying trends in battery technologies with regard to electric mobility: evidence from patenting activities along and across the battery value chain , 2015 .

[19]  J. Leker,et al.  Market convergence in the field of stationary energy storage systems , 2015, 2015 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET).

[20]  J. Hagedoorn,et al.  Mergers and acquisitions : their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries , 2006 .

[21]  J. Sylvan Katz,et al.  Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration , 1994, Scientometrics.

[22]  M. Beller,et al.  New synthetic protocols for the preparation of unsymmetrical bisindoles. , 2006, Organic letters.

[23]  Jens Leker,et al.  How to measure technological distance in collaborations? The case of electric mobility , 2013, 2013 Proceedings of PICMET '13: Technology Management in the IT-Driven Services (PICMET).

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

[25]  Xianwen Wang,et al.  Divergence and convergence: technology-relatedness evolution in solar energy industry , 2013, Scientometrics.

[26]  R. Katila,et al.  Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study , 2001 .

[27]  Aija Leiponen,et al.  A measure of technological distance , 2012 .

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

[29]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  A Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1984 .

[30]  Ulrich Kaiser Measuring knowledge spillovers in manufacturing and services: an empirical assessment of alternative approaches , 2002 .

[31]  Shann-Bin Chang,et al.  Using patent analysis to establish technological position: Two different strategic approaches , 2012 .

[32]  G. Duysters,et al.  The Role of Alliance Network Redundancy in the Creation of Core and Non-Core Technologies , 2009 .

[33]  Cécile Ayerbe,et al.  A method using two dimensions of the patent classification for measuring the technological proximity: an application in identifying a potential R&D partner in biotechnology , 2014 .

[34]  Christian Sternitzke,et al.  Similarity measures for document mapping: A comparative study on the level of an individual scientist , 2007, Scientometrics.

[35]  Timothy R. Anderson,et al.  Innovation in technology management : the key to global leadership , 1997 .

[36]  A. Jaffe Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

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

[38]  Devi R. Gnyawali,et al.  Behavioral implications of absorptive capacity: The role of technological effort and technological capability in leveraging alliance network technological resources , 2015 .

[39]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Technology life cycle analysis method based on patent documents , 2013 .

[40]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Innovation forecasting , 1997, Innovation in Technology Management. The Key to Global Leadership. PICMET '97.

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

[42]  George W. Furnas,et al.  Pictures of relevance: A geometric analysis of similarity measures , 1987, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

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

[44]  Holger Ernst,et al.  Patent information for strategic technology management , 2003 .

[45]  Yeonbae Kim,et al.  Measuring relatedness between technological fields , 2010, Scientometrics.

[46]  Liwen Vaughan,et al.  Comparing business competition positions based on Web co-link data: The global market vs. the Chinese market , 2006, Scientometrics.

[47]  M. Kotabe,et al.  The role of strategic alliances in high‐technology new product development , 1995 .

[48]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[49]  Robert C. McNamee Can’t see the forest for the leaves: Similarity and distance measures for hierarchical taxonomies with a patent classification example , 2013 .

[50]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[51]  Devendra Sahal,et al.  The generalized distance measures of technology , 1976 .

[52]  Joel Waldfogel,et al.  Close to You? Bias and Precision in Patent-Based Measures of Technological Proximity , 2007 .

[53]  Wolfgang Becker,et al.  R&D cooperation and innovation activities of firms—evidence for the German manufacturing industry , 2004 .

[54]  Chih-Hung Hsieh,et al.  Measuring the value of patents with fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: insight into the practices of the Industrial Technology Research Institute , 2015 .