How symmetry between intrafirm knowledge and collaboration structures influences exploratory innovation under conditions of combinability

IF 8 1区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Research Policy Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-06 DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2024.105030
Arjan Markus , Juan Antonio Candiani , Victor A. Gilsing
{"title":"How symmetry between intrafirm knowledge and collaboration structures influences exploratory innovation under conditions of combinability","authors":"Arjan Markus ,&nbsp;Juan Antonio Candiani ,&nbsp;Victor A. Gilsing","doi":"10.1016/j.respol.2024.105030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We examine how symmetry between intrafirm knowledge and collaboration structures influences firms' exploratory innovation performance. Symmetry means that the inventors' collaboration structure mimics their knowledge structure, implying that inventors with similar domain knowledge collaborate, whereas inventors with dissimilar domain knowledge do not. We argue and show that intrafirm symmetry is the commonly used form by most firms, as it is intuitive and pays off on average. However, it also comes with an inherent risk for their exploratory innovation performance. To address this, we include a key condition of a firm's technological environment: the ease or difficulty with which its knowledge domains can be combined. Based on a sample of 170 publicly traded semiconductor firms over 23 years, we find a positive association between the symmetry of a firm's collaboration and knowledge structure and its exploratory innovation performance under average combinability. This relationship changes when firms operate under low or high combinability conditions. Both these conditions favor firms that deviate from symmetry by relying on a parallel, isolated configuration or multidisciplinary configuration. Our contribution to the literature lies herein that we show when firms and their managers should pay attention to stimulating and optimizing collaboration, as has been the dominant focus until now, but also, and equally important, when disbanding this standing collaboration among inventors is more effective for a firm's exploratory innovation. Most firms overlook the risk that comes with a symmetric configuration under conditions of low or high combinability and are better off instead through one of two less common, asymmetric configurations of their inventor collaboration and knowledge structures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48466,"journal":{"name":"Research Policy","volume":"54 2","pages":"Article 105030"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733324000799","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examine how symmetry between intrafirm knowledge and collaboration structures influences firms' exploratory innovation performance. Symmetry means that the inventors' collaboration structure mimics their knowledge structure, implying that inventors with similar domain knowledge collaborate, whereas inventors with dissimilar domain knowledge do not. We argue and show that intrafirm symmetry is the commonly used form by most firms, as it is intuitive and pays off on average. However, it also comes with an inherent risk for their exploratory innovation performance. To address this, we include a key condition of a firm's technological environment: the ease or difficulty with which its knowledge domains can be combined. Based on a sample of 170 publicly traded semiconductor firms over 23 years, we find a positive association between the symmetry of a firm's collaboration and knowledge structure and its exploratory innovation performance under average combinability. This relationship changes when firms operate under low or high combinability conditions. Both these conditions favor firms that deviate from symmetry by relying on a parallel, isolated configuration or multidisciplinary configuration. Our contribution to the literature lies herein that we show when firms and their managers should pay attention to stimulating and optimizing collaboration, as has been the dominant focus until now, but also, and equally important, when disbanding this standing collaboration among inventors is more effective for a firm's exploratory innovation. Most firms overlook the risk that comes with a symmetric configuration under conditions of low or high combinability and are better off instead through one of two less common, asymmetric configurations of their inventor collaboration and knowledge structures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
企业内部知识和协作结构的对称性如何影响可组合条件下的探索性创新
研究了企业内部知识和协作结构的对称性对企业探索性创新绩效的影响。对称性是指发明人的协作结构与发明人的知识结构相似,即具有相似领域知识的发明人进行协作,而具有不同领域知识的发明人则不进行协作。我们论证并表明,企业内部对称是大多数公司常用的形式,因为它是直观的,平均而言是有回报的。然而,这也带来了探索性创新绩效的内在风险。为了解决这个问题,我们纳入了公司技术环境的一个关键条件:其知识领域可以组合的难易程度。基于23年来170家半导体上市公司的样本,我们发现在平均可组合性下,企业协作和知识结构的对称性与其探索性创新绩效之间存在正相关关系。当企业在低或高可组合性条件下运营时,这种关系会发生变化。这两种情况都有利于依靠平行、孤立或多学科结构而偏离对称的公司。我们对文献的贡献在于,我们展示了公司及其管理者何时应该注意激励和优化合作,这一直是迄今为止的主要焦点,但同样重要的是,何时解散发明者之间的这种长期合作对公司的探索性创新更有效。大多数公司忽略了在低或高可组合性条件下对称配置所带来的风险,相反,通过两种不太常见的、不对称的发明家、合作和知识结构配置中的一种,情况会更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Research Policy
Research Policy MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
6.90%
发文量
182
期刊介绍: Research Policy (RP) articles explore the interaction between innovation, technology, or research, and economic, social, political, and organizational processes, both empirically and theoretically. All RP papers are expected to provide insights with implications for policy or management. Research Policy (RP) is a multidisciplinary journal focused on analyzing, understanding, and effectively addressing the challenges posed by innovation, technology, R&D, and science. This includes activities related to knowledge creation, diffusion, acquisition, and exploitation in the form of new or improved products, processes, or services, across economic, policy, management, organizational, and environmental dimensions.
期刊最新文献
Disruptive sustainability through digital innovations: Overcoming information asymmetries to benefit small-scale producers Did the defend trade secrets act spur the reliance on trade secrets? Entrepreneurs-as-Scientists and entrepreneurial team formation strategies: A randomized control trial experiment Pluriversal technologies: A decolonial typology of knowledge integration for disruptive sustainability Towards disruptive sustainability: A multi-level analysis of business models driving sustainability transitions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1