Advertisement

Asia Pacific Journal of Management

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 687–704 | Cite as

Entrepreneurial firms’ network competence, technological capability, and new product development performance

  • Bo Yu
  • Shengbin HaoEmail author
  • David Ahlstrom
  • Steven Si
  • Dapeng Liang
Article

Abstract

Successfully developing new products is critical to an entrepreneurial firm’s continued success. Based on the resource management model, this study aims to answer the key research question: how entrepreneurial firms leverage network competence and technological capability to enhance their new product development (NPD) performance in a turbulent environment. Using data collected from 134 entrepreneurial firms in China, we investigate the performance effects of network competence and technological capability, and the moderating effects of technological turbulence and market turbulence. Our findings show that network competence has a positive impact on NPD performance and technological capability plays a mediating role between network competence and NPD performance. Technological turbulence enhances the performance effects of network competence and technological capability; market turbulence advances the performance effect of network competence, but fails to exert significant negative impact on that of technological capability. We discuss managerial implications of our findings and offer directions for future research.

Keywords

Network competence Technological capability Technological turbulence Market turbulence New product development (NPD) performance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Rae Pinkham and Marc Ahlstrom of Burlington County College for their editorial and research assistance. This research was partially supported by the China Natural Science Foundation (71202160 and 71272175), China Postdoctoral Fund (2012M520758), Heilongjiang Postdoctoral Fund (LBH-Z12103) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under Grant No. HIT.NSRIF.2010085 and HIT.HSS.201101.

References

  1. Afuah, A. 2002. Mapping technological capabilities into product markets and competitive advantage: The case of cholesterol drugs. Strategic Management Journal, 23(2): 171–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahlstrom, D. 2010. Innovation and growth: How business contributes to society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3): 10–23.Google Scholar
  3. Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. 2002. An institutional perspective on the role of culture in shaping strategic actions by technology-focused entrepreneurial firms in China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4): 53–69.Google Scholar
  4. Akgün, A. E., & Lynn, G. S. 2002. Antecedents and consequences of team stability on new product development performance. Journal of Engineering Technology Management, 19: 263–286.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3): 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson, P., & Tushman, M.L. 1990. Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 604–633.Google Scholar
  7. Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1): 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barney, J. B., & Arikan, A. M. 2001. The resource-based view: Origins and implications. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.). Handbook of strategic management: 124–188. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. 2008. Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: Where are we today and where should the research go in the future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
  11. Calantone, R., Garcia, R., & Dröge, C. 2003. The effects of environmental turbulence on new product development strategy planning. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20(2): 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. 2003. The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deng, Z. L., Hofman, P. S., & Newman, A. 2013. Ownership concentration and product innovation in Chinese private SMEs. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(3): 717–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eisenhardt, KM & Martin, JA. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they?. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11): 1105–1121.Google Scholar
  16. Fransman, M. 1989. Conceptualizing technological change in the third world in the 1980s: An interpretive survey. Journal of Development Studies, 21(4): 572–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grant, A.M. 2013. Give and take: A revolutionary approach to success. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  18. Grant, R. M. 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3): 114–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. C., & Black, W. C. 1998. Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  20. Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. 1998. Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link?. Journal of Marketing, 62(10): 30–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hsu, Y. H., & Fang, W. C. 2009. Intellectual capital and new product development performance: The mediating role of organizational learning capability. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 76: 664–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. 1993. Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57(3): 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jeong, I., Pae, J. H., & Zhou, D. S. 2006. Antecedents and consequences of the strategic orientations in new product development: The case of Chinese manufacturers. Industrial Marketing Management, 35: 348–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. 1990. Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lavie, D. 2006. Capability reconfiguration: An analysis of incumbent responses to technological change. Academy of Management Review, 31(1): 153–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li, C. R., Chu, C. P., & Lin, C. J. 2010. The contingent value of exploratory and exploitative learning for new product development performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 39: 1186–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lin, P. 2009. The regulating role of environmental turbulence: An empirical study of the relationship between dynamic capabilities and performance. Journal of Shanghai University (Social Sciences), 16(6): 66–77.Google Scholar
  28. Lynn, G. S., Abel, K. D., Valentine, W. S., & Wright, R. C. 1999. Key factors in increasing speed to market and improving new product success rates. Industrial Marketing Management, 28: 320–329.Google Scholar
  29. Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psyochomatric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Ortega, M. J. R. 2010. Competitive strategies and firm performance: Technological capabilities’ moderating roles. Journal of Business Research, 63: 1273–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pangarkar, N., & Wu, J. 2013. Alliance formation, partner diversity, and performance of Singapore startups. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(3): 791–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Peng, M. W. 2003. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 28: 275–296.Google Scholar
  33. Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. 2001. Is the resource-based view a useful perspective for strategic management research?. Academy of Management Review, 26(1): 22–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ritter, T. 1999. The networking company: Antecedents for coping with relationships and networks effectively. Industrial Marketing Management, 28(5): 467–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. 2003. Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 56: 745–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. 2004. The impact of a company’s business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success. Journal of Business Research, 57: 548–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. 2003. Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 27: 339–358.Google Scholar
  38. Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. 2007. Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1): 273–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. 1994. Does competitive environment moderate the market orientation performance relationship?. Journal of Marketing, 58(1): 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Song, M., & Di Benedetto, C. A. 2008. Supplier’s involvement and success of radical new product development in new ventures. Journal of Operations Management, 26: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Song, M., Dröge, C., Hanvanich, S., & Calantone, R. 2005. Marketing and technology resource complementarity: An analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3): 259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Song, X. M., Montoya-Weiss, M. M., & Schmidt, J. B. 1997. The pole of marketing in developing successful new products in South Korea and Taiwan. Journal of International Marketing, 5(3): 47–69.Google Scholar
  43. Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. 1997. A cross-national comparative study of new product development processes: Japan and the United States. Journal of Marketing, 61(2): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Su, Z. F., Peng, J. S., Shen, H., & Xiao, T. 2013. Technological capability, marketing capability, and firm performance in turbulent conditions. Management and Organization Review, 9: 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tsai, K. H. 2004. The impact of technological capability on firm performance in Taiwan’s electronics industry. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 15(2): 183–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wei, J. 2000. Development and review of the research on the enterprise’s technological capability. Science Management Research, 5: 20–23.Google Scholar
  48. Zahra, S., & George, G. 2002. Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2): 185–203.Google Scholar
  49. Zhan, W., & Chen, R. 2013. Dynamic capability and IJV performance: The effect of exploitation and exploration capabilities. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(2): 601–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhao, X. Q., & Xu, Q. R. 2001. Evaluation of technological capability: Theory and method. Science of Science and Management of S&T, 4: 64–67.Google Scholar
  51. Zhao, X. Q., & Xu, Q. R. 2006. Research on spiral process of technological capability’s accumulative path. Science Research Management, 1: 40–46.Google Scholar
  52. Zhou, K. Z. 2006. Innovation, imitation, and new product performance: The case of China. Industrial Marketing Management, 35(3): 394–402.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bo Yu
    • 1
  • Shengbin Hao
    • 1
    Email author
  • David Ahlstrom
    • 2
  • Steven Si
    • 3
  • Dapeng Liang
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ManagementHIT-UMKC Institute for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Harbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of ManagementThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong
  3. 3.School of ManagementTongji UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations