LISS 2012 pp 569-576 | Cite as

The Impacts of Network Competence, Knowledge Sharing on Service Innovation Performance: Moderating Role of Relationship Quality

Conference paper


This research contributes to existing literature by examining how network competence (NC), knowledge sharing (KS) and relationship quality (RQ) affect service innovation performance (SIP). The sample used in this empirical research is drawn from the Pearl River Delta of China. The results show that: (1) Enterprise’s network competence has a distinct positive impact on SIP; (2) Knowledge sharing partially mediates the effect of network competence on SIP. (3) Relationship quality positively moderates the effect of network competence on knowledge sharing, and the effect of knowledge sharing on SIP. (4) Relationship quality does not positively moderate the effect of network competence on SIP. These results enrich current understanding of the relationships among network competence, knowledge sharing, relationship quality and service innovation performance.


Service Innovation (SI) Service Innovation Performance (SIP) Network Competence (NC) Relationship Quality (RQ) Knowledge Sharing (KS). 



This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 70872030 & No. 71090403/71090400).


  1. 1.
    Ordanini A, Parasuraman A (2011) Service innovation viewed through a service-dominant logic lens: a conceptual framework and empirical analysis. J Serv Res 14(1):3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schumpeter JA (1934) The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fizgerald L, Johnston R, Silvestro R, Brignall TJ, Voss C (1991) Performance measurement in service business. CIMA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Möller KK, Halinen A (1999) Business relationships and networks: managerial challenge of network era. Ind Mark Manag 8:28–49Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ritter T, Gemunden HG (2004) The impact of a company’s business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success. J Bus Res 57:548–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galbraith J (1973) Designing complex organizations, reading. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McAdam R (2002) Knowledge management as a catalyst for innovation within organizations: a qualitative study. Knowl Process Manag 7(4):233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fleming L, Chen D, Mingo S (2007) Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Adm Sci Q 52:443–475Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hoang H, Rothaermel FT (2005) The effect of general and partner-specific alliance experience on joint R&D project performance. Acad Manage J 48(2):332–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crosby LA, Cowles D (1990) Relationship quality in service selling: an inter-personal influence perspective. J Mark 54(7):54–82Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jaw C, Lo JY, Lin YH (2010) The determinants of new service development: service characteristics, market orientation, and actualizing innovation effort. Technovation 30(4):265–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roberts K, Varki S, Brodie R (2003) Measuring the quality of relationships in consumer services: an empirical study. Eur J Mark 37:169–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garbarino E, Johnson MS (1999) The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. J Mark 63(2):70–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davenport TH, Prusak L (1998) Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know. President and Fellows of Harvard College, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gupta AK, Govindarajan V (2002) Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strateg Manag J 21:473–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bock GW, Zmud RW, Kim YG, Lee JN (2005) Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, Social Psychological Forces, and Organizational Climate. MIS Q 29(1):87–111Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Storey C, Kelly D (2001) Measuring the performance of new service development activities. Serv Ind J 21(2):71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Andrews JC, Netemeyer RG, Burton S, Moberg DP, Christainsen A (2004) Understanding adolescent Intentions to smoke: an examination of relationships among social Influences, prior trial behaviors, and anti-tobacco campaign advertising. J Mark 68(3):110–123Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business AdministrationSouth China University of TechnologyGuangdongP.R. China

Personalised recommendations