To obtain competitive advantage, the key target for the two-sided matching between technological knowledge supplier and demander is maximizing the individual exchange satisfaction. The structure of the supplier and demander relationship networks means that the two-sided matching approach not only gives point-to-point matching but also gives network-to-network matching. In this paper, supply and demand network characteristics are embedded into a two-phase decision analysis method. First, to select the matching pairs, a matching satisfaction matrix is constructed based on the supply and demand network characteristics, after which a multi-objective optimal model is built to determine the best optimization matching results and the overall improvements illustrated through comparison. Finally, a numerical example is given to show the practicality and validity of the proposed approach.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This research was supported by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2016M590960), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC Grant Nos.71403158 and 71601133) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 14SZYB10). The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees as well as the editors.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. It is based on previously published studies.
Alaei S, Jain K, Malekian A (2011) Competitive equilibrium in two sided matching markets with general utility functions. ACM Sigecom Exchanges 10:34–36CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
Baum JAC, Cowan R, Jonard N (2010) Network-independent partner selection and the evolution of innovation networks. Manag Sci 56:2094–2110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boland WP, Phillips PWB, Ryan CD, Mcphee-Knowles S (2012) Collaboration and the generation of new knowledge in networked innovation systems: a bibliometric analysis. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 52:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carayol N, Roux P (2009) Knowledge flows and the geography of networks: a strategic model of small world formation. J Econ Behav Organ 71:414–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankort HTW, Hagedoorn J, Letterie W (2012) R&D partnership portfolios and the inflow of technological knowledge. Ind Corp Change 21:507–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guan J, Zhao Q (2013) The impact of university-industry collaboration networks on innovation in nanobiopharmaceuticals. Technol Forecast Soc Change 80:1271–1286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrero Á, Sáiz-Bárcena L, Manzanedo MA, Corchado E (2016) A hybrid proposal for cross-sectoral analysis of knowledge management. Soft Comput 20:4271–4285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber F (2010) Do clusters really matter for innovation practices in information technology? questioning the significance of technological knowledge spillovers. J Econ Geogr 12:107–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Lecture notes in economics and mathematical system: multiple attribute decision making, methods and application, a state of art survey. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
Mauleo A, Sempere-Monerris JJ, Vannetelbosch V (2008) Networks of knowledge among unionized firms. Can J Econ 41:971–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miguélez E, Moreno R (2015) Knowledge flows and the absorptive capacity of regions. Res Policy 44:833–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mindruta D, Moeen M, Agarwal R (2016) A two-sided matching approach for partner selection and assessing complementarities in partners’ attributes in inter-firm alliances. Strateg Manag J 37:206–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morizumi Y, Hayashi T, Ishida Y (2011) A network visualization of stable matching in the stable marriage problem. Springer, New York, pp 40–43Google Scholar
Ni Y, Ning L, Ke H, Ji X (2016) Modeling and minimizing information distortion in information diffusion through a social network. Soft Comput 1–13Google Scholar
Noni ID, Ganzaroli A, Orsi L (2017) The impact of intra- and inter-regional knowledge collaboration and technological variety on the knowledge productivity of European regions. Technol Forecast Soc Change 117:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noni ID, Orsi L, Belussi F (2017) The role of collaborative networks in supporting the innovation performances of lagging-behind European regions. Res Policy 47:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sebestyén T, Varga A (2013) Research productivity and the quality of interregional knowledge networks. Ann Reg Sci 51:155–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su CY, Lin BW, Chen CJ (2015) Technological knowledge co-creation strategies in the world of open innovation. Innov Manag Policy Pract 17:485–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todo Y, Matous P, Inoue H (2016) The strength of long ties and the weakness of strong ties: knowledge diffusion through supply chain networks. Res Policy 45:1890–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urgal B, Quintas MA, Arevalo Tome R (2011) Technological knowledge, innovation capability and innovative performance: the moderating role of the behavioural environment of the firm. Panel De Innovación Tecnológica 14:53–66Google Scholar
Winkelbach A, Walter A (2015) Complex technological knowledge and value creation in science-to-industry technology transfer projects: the moderating effect of absorptive capacity. Ind Mark Manag 47:98–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu X, Zhang W, Li N, Xu H (2015) A bi-level programming model of resource matching for collaborative logistics network in supply uncertainty environment. J Frankl Inst 352:3873–3884MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zach FJ, Hill TL (2017) Network, knowledge and relationship impacts on innovation in tourism destinations. Tour Manag 62:196–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar