Advertisement

How Local Knowledge Networks and Firm Internal Characteristics Evolve Across Time Inside Science Parks

  • Isabel Díez-Vial
  • Ángeles Montoro-Sánchez
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)

Abstract

In this chapter we analyze how firms’ characteristics, along with the network that each firm establishes, evolve through three different periods of time: incubation, growth, and maturity. We observe that as firms stay longer in the park, they have a higher number of direct relationships, and also these relationships tend to be stronger in terms of both frequency and friendship. Nevertheless, this higher level of interactions do not benefit firms in the same way, being the best period for improving innovation, the growth initial period, in which firms have between 3 and 6 years.

Keywords

Network evolution Knowledge exchange Trust 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper has been supported by MINECO ECO2015-67122-R, ECO2014-57131-R and ECO2015-67434-R del Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad; PR26/16-5B-1 Santander-Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

References

  1. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahuja, G., Soda, G., & Zaheer, A. (2012). The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks. Organization Science, 23(2), 434–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, D. N., & Mccluskey, R. (1990). Structure, policy, services, and performance in the business incubator industry. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 15, 61–78.Google Scholar
  4. Bakouros, Y. L., Mardas, D. C., & Varsakelis, N. C. (2002). Science park, a high tech fantasy?: An analysis of the science parks of Greece. Technovation, 22(2), 123–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balland, P.-A. A. (2012). Proximity and the evolution of collaboration networks: Evidence from Research and Development projects within the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) industry. Regional Studies, 46(6), 741–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balland, P. A., Belso Martínez, J. A., & Morrison, A. (2016). The dynamics of technical and business knowledge networks in industrial clusters: Embeddedness, status or proximity? Economic Geography, 92(1), 35–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bell, G. G., & Zaheer, A. (2007). Geography, networks, and knowledge flow. Organization Science, 18(6), 955–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
  9. Boschma, R. A. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boschma, R. A., & Iammarino, S. (2009). Related variety, trade linkages, and regional. Economic Geography, 85(3), 289–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boschma, R. A., & Ter Wal, A. L. J. (2007). Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: The case of a Footwear District in the south of Italy. Industry and Innovation, 14(2), 177–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 795–817.Google Scholar
  13. Canina, L., Enz, C. A., & Harrison, J. S. (2005). Agglomeration efects and strtegic orientations: Evidence from the U.S. lodging industry. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 565–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carayannis, E. G., Popescu, D., Sipp, C., & Stewart, M. (2006). Technological learning for entrepreneurial development (TL4ED) in the knowledge economy (KE): Case studies and lessons learned. Technovation, 26(4), 419–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2006). In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science, 52(1), 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chan, K. F., & Lau, T. (2005). Assessing technology incubator programs in the science park: The good, the bad and the ugly. Technovation, 25(10), 1215–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chan, K., & Liebowitz, J. (2006). The synergy of social network analysis and knowledge mapping: A case study. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 7(1), 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E., & Vohora, A. (2005). Spinning out new ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 183–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators? Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 31, 1103–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Demirkan, I., & Demirkan, S. (2012). Network characteristics and patenting in biotechnology, 1990-2006. Journal of Management, 38(6), 1892–1927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Díez-Vial, I., & Fernandez-Olmos, M. (2014). Knowledge spillovers in science and tecnology parks: How can firms benefit most? Journal of Technology Transfer, 40, 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Díez-Vial, I., & Montoro-Sánchez, Á. (2014). Social capital as a driver of local knowledge exchange: A social network analysis. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 12, 276–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Eisingerich, A. B., Bell, S. J., & Tracey, P. (2010). How can clusters sustain performance? The role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty. Research Policy, 39(2), 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Expósito-Langa, M., Molina-morales, F. X., & Capó-Vicedo, J. (2011). New product development and absorptive capacity in industrial districts: A multidimensional approach. Regional Studies, 45(3), 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Felsenstein, D. (1994). University-related science parks—‘seedbeds ‘ or ‘ enclaves ’ of innovation? Technovation, 14(2), 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gedajlovic, E., Honig, B., Moore, C. B., Payne, T., & Wright, M. (2013). Social capital and entrepreneurship: A schema and research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 475–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Giuliani, E., & Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: Evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grimaldi, R., & Grandi, A. (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: An assessment of incubating models. Technovation, 25(2), 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439–1493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 85–112.Google Scholar
  34. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across subunits organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hansen, M. T., Hall, M., & Park, S. F. (2002). Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13(3), 232–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hansson, F., Husted, K., & Vestergaard, J. (2005). Second generation science parks: From structural holes jockeys to social capital catalysts of the knowledge society. Technovation, 25(9), 1039–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hervás-Oliver, J.-L., & Albors-Garrigós, J. (2007). Do clusters capabilities matter? An empirical application of the resource-based view in clusters. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19(2), 113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lawson, C., Lorenz, E., & De Cachan, Â. (1999). Collective learning, tacit knowledge and regional innovative capacity. Regional Studies, 33(4), 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lee, C., Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 615–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2005). R&D networks and product innovation patterns—Academic and non-academic new technology-based firms on science parks. Technovation, 25, 1025–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McAdam, M., & McAdam, R. (2008). High tech start-ups in university Science Park incubators: The relationship between the start-up’s lifecycle progression and use of the incubator’s resources. Technovation, 28(5), 277–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mian, S. A. (1996). Assessing value-added contributions of university technology business incubators to tenant firms. Research Policy, 25(3), 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2009). Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: How an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(3), 1013–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Molina-Morales, F. X., & Expósito-langa, M. (2012). The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24(7–8), 685–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Morrison, A. (2008). All gatekeepers of knowledge within industrial districts: Who they are, how they interact. Regional Studies, 42(6), 817–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Morrison, A., & Rabellotti, R. (2009). Knowledge and information networks in an Italian wine cluster. European Planning Studies, 17(7), 983–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science, 15(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Phelps, C., Heidl, R., & Wadhwa, A. (2012). Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1115–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational and the collaboration locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., Smith, J. O., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Quintas, P., Wield, D., & Massey, D. (1992). Academic-industry links and innovation: Questioning the science park model. Technovation, 12(3), 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Reagans, R., & Mcevily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rothaermel, F. T., & Thursby, M. (2005). Incubator firm failure or graduation? Research Policy, 34(7), 1076–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schwartz, M., & Hornych, C. (2008). Specialization as strategy for business incubators: An assessment of the central German multimedia center. Technovation, 28(7), 436–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shaver, J. M., & Flyer, F. (2000). Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 21(12), 1175–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Soda, G., Usai, A., & Zaheer, A. (2004). Network memory: The influence of past and current networks on performance. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 893–906.Google Scholar
  59. Spender, J. C., & Grant, R. M. (1996). Knowledge and the firm: Overview. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ter Wal, A. L. J., & Boschma, R. A. (2009). Applying social network analysis in economic geography: Framing some key analytic issues. Annals of Regional Science, 43(3), 739–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vedovello, C. (1997). Science parks and university-industry interaction: Geographical proximity between the agents as a driving force. Technovation, 17(9), 491–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Westhead, P., & Batstone, P. (1998a). Perceived benefits of a managed science park location. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 11(2), 129–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Westhead, P., & Batstone, S. (1998b). Independent technology-based firms: The perceived benefits of a Science Park location. Urban Studies, 35(12), 2197–2219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wuyts, S., & Dutta, S. (2014). Benefiting from alliance portfolio diversity. The role of past internal knowledge creation strategy. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1653–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zaheer, A., & Bell, G. G. (2005). Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 809–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Departamento de Organización de Empresas y MarketingUniversidad Complutense de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations