Skip to main content
  • 1668 Accesses

Abstract

Theories on business networks provide poor understanding of situations where it is the network itself, although featuring high degrees of loyalty, reciprocity, efficiency and trust, that seems to hinder innovativeness; on the other side, theories on business networks have not systematically investigated the different possible motivations that drive different business actors towards specific business networks. This Chapter suggests that these two gaps in theory are correlated. In fact, the three field researches presented here confirm that different business networks attract and select different actors and are effective in pursuing different goals, and these differences may strongly influence the innovation performances of the organizations. In the qualitative worst-practice research presented here, three networks where sustainable innovation processes were to some extent hindered or damaged or overlooked by the network itself were chosen as exemplary cases. After comparing and contrasting the outcomes of the case studies, the extant management literature, the suggestions from the theory of fairness and cooperation developed in Chapter 3 and from the theory of innovation developed in Chapter 4, the different dimensions of Network Effectiveness, corresponding to different “Motivations to Business Networking”, are discussed and operationalized. Possible positive and negative influences of the different possible Motivations for Networking on the organization’s innovational success are hypothesized.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adler, P., & Kwon, S-W. (2002). Social capital – prospect for a new concept. Academy of management review, 27 (1) 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bànàthy B.H. (1996), Designing Social Systems in a Changing World. Plenum, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Björk, J. & Magnusson, M. (2009). Where Do Good Innovation Ideas Come From? Exploring the Influence of Network Connectivity on Innovation Idea Quality. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(6): 662–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R. and Burian R.M. eds., (1984). Genes, Organisms, Population: Controversies Over the Units of Selection. Cambridge MA: MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt H., Ohtsuki H, Iwasa Y., and Sigmund K. (2006). A Survey on Indirect Reciprocity. IIASA Interim Report, IR –06–065. IIASA Studies in Adaptive Dynamics, n.123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhalis, D., (2000), Marketing the competitive destination of the future, Tourism Management, Vol.21(1), pp.97–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, T.I. (2001). Supply networks and complex adaptive systems: control versus emergence. Journal of Operations Management; May2001, Vol. 19 Issue 3, p351–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Combs J.G., Ketchen D. (1999). Explaining Interfirm Cooperation and Performance. Toward a reconcilia-tion of predictions from the resource-based view and organizational economics. Strategic Management Journal, 20:867–888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt K.M. and Bird Schoonhoven C. (1996). Resource-Based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms. Organization Science, Vol. 7, No. 2 (Mar. – Apr., 1996), pp. 136–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eklinder Frick J., Eriksson L.T., and Hallén L. (2011). Bridging and bonding forms of social capital in a re-gional strategic network. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 40, Issue 6, August 2011, pp. 994–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromm, J. (2004), The Emergence of Complexity. Kassel University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Fulconis, F., Pache, G. (2008). Le management strategique des reseaux inter-organisationnels a l’epreuve des comportements opportunistes: Elaboration d’un cadre d’analyse. La Revue des Sciences de Gestion, March-April 2008, v. 43, iss. 230, pp. 35–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, J. (1980). The panda’s thumb. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S.J. (2002). The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh, L. (2001). Managing strategic relationships: The key to business success. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. (2007). Managing network resources. Alliances, Affiliations and Other Relational Assets. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Håkansson, H., Ford, D., Gadde, L-E., Snehota I, and Waluszewski A.(2009), Business in Networks. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart C. (2000). Doing a literature review. Sage Publications: London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindmoor A. (1998). The Importance of Being Trusted: Transaction Costs and Policy Network Theory. Public Administration, Vol. 76, Issue 1, pp. 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen, M.P. (2007). The Relative Importance of Interfirm Relationships and Knowledge Transfer for New Product Development Success. Journal of Product Innovation Management; Mar2007, Vol. 24 Is-sue 2, p 117–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M.T. and J. Freeman (1977) “The population ecology of organizations.” American Journal of Sociology 82 (5): 929–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M.T. and J. Freeman (1989) Organizational Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess C., Ostrom E. (eds.) (2007). Understanding Knowledge as a Commons. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C. and B. J. Collins (2009). "Resource dependence theory: A review." Journal of Management 35: 1404–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman E., Hauert C., and Nowak M.A.(2005). Evolutionary dynamics on graphs. Nature 433: 312–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Morales, F., Martínez-Fernández, 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, 1013–1023.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesi E. (2010). Storia della mia gente. Milano: Bompiani.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak M.A. (2006), Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation. Science, 314, 8: 1560–1563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohtsuki H., C HauertC., Lieberman E., and Nowak M.A. (2006). A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks. Nature 441: 502–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E. and Walker J. (2005). Trust and reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons for Experimental Research. Russel-Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perks, H., & Jeffery, R. (2006). Global network configuration for innovation: a study of international fibre innovation. R & D Management, pp.67–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. and G. R. Salancik (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York, NY, Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittaway L., Robertson M., Munir K., Denyer D., Neely A. (2004). Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, Volume 5, Issue 3–4, pages 137–168, September 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricciardi F., Cantù C. (2011). The Role of Altruism in Inter-firm Relationships: Long-term Value Creation in Business Networks. The paper was published at the 27th IMP-conference in Glasgow, Scotland in 2011. Available online at: http://www.impgroup.org/uploads/papers/7754.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigmund K. (1998). Complex Adaptive Systems and the Evolution of Reciprocation. IIASA Interim Report, IR –98–100. IIASA Studies in Adaptive Dynamics, n.32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staber, U. (2001). Spatial Proximity and Firm Survival in a Declining Industrial District: The Case of Knitwear Firms in Baden-Württemberg. Regional Studies; Jun2001, Vol. 35 Issue 4, p329–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers R.L. (1971). The evolution of Reciprocal Altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46 (1): 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M.L., and Nadler D. (1986) Organizing for innovation: towards successful translational research. California Management Review, Vol. 27, Issue 10, 558–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Bertalanffy L. (1976) General System theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsham G. (2006). Doing interpretive research. European Journal of Information Systems (2006) 15, 320–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerlund, M. & Rajala, R. (2010). Learning and innovation in inter-organizational network collaboration. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 25(6): 435–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin R. (1984), Case study research: Design and methods (1st ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, A., Gulati, R., & Nohria, N. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 203

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ricciardi, F. (2014). Motivations for Business Networking. In: Innovation Processes in Business Networks. Advances in Information Systems and Business Engineering. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-03439-9_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics