How R&D partner diversity influences innovation performance: an empirical study in the nano-biopharmaceutical field
R&D partner diversity is generally acknowledged to help organizations to improve innovation performance. This study investigates the influence mechanism in depth by introducing technological diversification as mediator and the structural holes of new knowledge elements from R&D partners and the degree centrality of the focal organization’s knowledge elements as two moderators. The empirical analysis is based on patent data in the emerging nano-biopharmaceutical field and includes 554 innovative organizations. Results show that partners’ organizational diversity and geographical diversity have positive effects on focal organizations’ innovation performance through improving technological diversification. The structural holes of new knowledge elements from R&D partners and the degree centrality of the focal organization’s knowledge elements moderate the process in the way that when they are at high levels, the indirect positive effects of partner diversity on innovation performance through technological diversification are strengthened.
KeywordsInnovation performance Organizational diversity Geographical diversity Structural holes Degree centrality
- Archibugi, D. (1992). Patenting as an indicator of technological innovation: A review. Science & Public Policy, 19(6), 357–368.Google Scholar
- Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Current Partnering (2016). Top pharmaceutical companies. http://www.currentpartnering.com/insight/top-pharmaceutical-companies/.
- Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(28), 1661–1707.Google Scholar
- Kleinknecht, A., & Reinders, H. J. (2012). How good are patents as innovation indicators: Evidence from german CIS data. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Lenoir, T., & Herron, P. (2009). Tracking the current rise of Chinese pharmaceutical bionanotechnology. Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration, 4, 8.Google Scholar
- OECD. (2005). A framework for biotechnology statistics. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
- Okuyama, R., & Osada, H. (2013). University–industry collaboration in drug discovery in Japan: An empirical analysis over thirty years. In Technology Management in the It-Driven Services. (pp. 2704–2710). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 73–91.Google Scholar
- Statnano (2015). Top 20 Countries in Nanotechnology Publications. http://statnano.com/news/48147.
- Zhang, Y., Chen, K., Zhu, G., Yam, R. C. M., & Guan, J. (2016). Inter-organizational scientific collaborations and policy effects: An ego-network evolutionary perspective of the Chinese academy of sciences. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1–33.Google Scholar