Abstract
Small and medium‐sized companies (SMEs) fall – measured on the investment for innovations – behind large‐scale companies: “Small and medium‐sized companies with up to 249 employees held in year 2011 a share of 10.2% of the entire research and development expenses and a share of 17.8% of research and development workforce. Larger companies with 250 to 499 employees represent a share of 4.8% of the research and development expenses and 7.0% of the research and development workforce. Measured on the share of these group companies to the net value‐added and to total employment (54.8% respectively 59.4%) the research and development stake is small in comparison to large‐scale companies with at least 500 employees.” (IfM Bonn).
However, this declaration deforms the picture. SMEs spend relatively less for R&D, but they are not necessarily less innovative since they concentrate on other forms of innovation. A popular model is the interorganisational cooperation in innovation networks. The following explanations aim to examine the goal, the development and structure genesis of innovation networks. With the help of the case study of the “Fördergesellschaft Erneuerbare Energien e. V.” (Promotional Organisation for Renewable Energies), which is an in Germany active innovation network under significant participation of SMEs, an exemplary model will be described.
References
Aderhold, J., Meyer, M., & Ziegenhorn, F. (2001). Wie funktionieren Netzwerke? In T. Teich (ed.), Hierarchielose Regionale Produktionsnetzwerke (vol. 2001, pp. 131–160). Chemnitz: GUC.
Barnes, J. A. (1979). Network analysis: orienting notion, rigorous technique or substantive field of study. In P. W. Holland & S. Leinhardt (eds.), Perspectives on social network research (pp. 403–423). New York: Academic Press.
Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1992). Centrality and power in organizations. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (eds.), Networks and organizations. Structure, form, and action (vol. 1992, pp. 191–215). Boston: Havard Business School Press.
Coxon, A. P. M., & Davies, P. M. (1986). Images of social stratification: occupational structures and class. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Deutsch-Türkische Industrie- und Handelskammer. www.eclareon.com/sites/default/files/factsheet_bioenergie_2016.pdf. Accessed 2. Mar. 2016.
EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH. http://www.energieagentur.nrw/international/laenderinformationen/tuerkei. Accessed 2. Mar. 2016.
Fördergesellschaft Erneuerbare Energien e.V. http://www.fee-ev.de/verein/satzung.html, http://www.fee-ev.de, http://www.fee-ev.de/arbeitsgruppen.html, http://www.fee-ev.de/arbeitsgruppen/biogene-gase-brennstoffzellen.html. Accessed 2. Mar. 2016.
Gläser et al. (2004). Einleitung: Heterogene Kooperation. In Strübing et al. (ed.), Kooperation im Niemandsland. Neue Perspektiven auf Zusammenarbeit in Wissenschaft und Technik (vol. 2004, pp. 7–24). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Hahn, K. (2013). Heterogene Akteure als Innovationspartner: Zur Strukturierung von Handeln in industriellen Innovationsprojekten. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Huber, J. (1989). Herrschen und Sehnen. Kulturdynamik des Westens. Weinheim: Beltz.
Huber, J. (2011). Allgemeine Umweltsoziologie (2nd edn.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
IfM Institut für Mittelstandsforschung Bonn. http://www.ifm-bonn.org/statistiken/mittelstand-im-einzelnen/#accordion=0&tab=4. Accessed 02. Mar. 2016.
Koschatzky, K., Kulicke, M., & Zenker, A. (2013). Innovation networks. Concepts and challenges in the European perspective (technology, innovation and policy (ISI). vol. 12. Heidelberg: Physica.
Kranzusch, P., & Holz, M. (2013). Internationalisierungsgrad von KMU. Ergebnisse einer Unternehmensbefragung. In Institut für Mittelstandsforschung Bonn (ed.), IfM-Materialien Nr. 222. Bonn: Institut für Mittelstandsforschung Bonn.
Mitchell, C.J. (1969). The concept and use of social networks. In: Mitchell, C.J. (1969): Social networks in Urban situations: analysis of personal relationships in central african towns (pp. 1–32). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Müller, A. (2004). Zur Strukturgenese von und Kommunikation in Innovationsnetzwerken, S. 90 ff. http://sundoc.bibliothek.uni-halle.de/diss-online/04/04H201/prom.pdf. Accessed 2. Mar. 2016.
Pappi, F. U. (ed.). (1987). Methoden der Netzwerkanalyse. vol. 1. München: De Gruyter Oldenbourg.
Seemann, M. (2012). Innovationsnetzwerke in jungen Branchen: Formation, Morphologie und unternehmensstrategische Implikationen am Beispiel der deutschen Photovoltaikbranche. Marburg: Metropolis.
Türkisch-Deutsches Biogas-Projekt. http://www.biyogaz.web.tr/de. Accessed 2. Mar. 2016.
Weyer, J. (1997). Weder Ordnung noch Chaos. Die Theorie sozialer Netzwerke zwischen Institutionalismus und Selbstorganisationstheorie. In J. Weyer et al. (ed.), Technik, die Gesellschaft schafft. Soziale Netzwerke als Ort der Technikgenese (pp. 53–99). Berlin: edition sigma.
ZEW (2015). Innovationsverhalten der deutschen Wirtschaft. Indikatorenbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2014, Mannheim. http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/mip/14/mip_2014.pdf. Accessed 2. Mar. 2016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH
About this paper
Cite this paper
Müller, A., Pick Vidal, S. (2018). Structure Genesis as a Factor of Success of Interorganisational Innovation Networks. In: Bakırcı, F., Heupel, T., Kocagöz, O., Özen, Ü. (eds) German-Turkish Perspectives on IT and Innovation Management. FOM-Edition(). Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16962-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16962-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-16961-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-16962-6
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)