基于创新网络协同提升企业创新能力的机制与规律研究
|
摘要
在全球化的知识经济时代,创新的边界大大扩展,创新网络能有效汇集分散、多样化的知识资源与企业内部的创新资源有机整合起来进行协同创新,另一方面,企业的管理活动在空间上分布更广,组织结构呈现出明显网络化特征,探索协同创新的规律性、借助内外创新网络的协同提升竞争能力,是企业顺应经济全球化趋势、从开放式创新中获取最大收益的捷径。
本研究围绕开放式创新环境下企业创新网络中要素协同与能力提升问题,基于制造型企业,按照“要素——结构——能力”的思路,从三个逻辑上相互关联的子研究进行了理论和实证研究：(1)创新网络中企业内外协同创新与创新能力提升的战略途径；(2)创新网络中企业内外创新要素的协同与能力提升机制；(3)创新网络中企业内外要素协同和创新能力之间的动态演化规律性。主要针对企业内外创新网络协同及其影响下的内部要素协同两个层次。
子研究一在文献理论基础上,对三家制造型企业进行了探索性案例研究。初步探寻企业获取外部网络资源、通过内部整合转化为企业技术创新能力的过程和模式,研究指出产业转型升级首先是企业能力的转型升级,结构调整需要创新能力的调整。创新网络反映了创新本质和协同本质的必然要求,促进不同创新个体建立紧密联系,构建创新要素汇集、共享和协同的网络体系,从而更好的整合分散的创新资源协同形成创新合力,提出了六个初始假设命题,为本文的后续研究提供了源于实践的理论构想。
子研究二基于命题假设,通过跨层次概念重构,将企业看作一个由不同要素/部门构成的网络结构,构建了企业内外创新网络协同对创新能力作用机制的整体框架,通过对278家浙江省和山东省制造类企业的问卷调研,运用结构方程模型构建高阶因子模型分三步来分析企业创新网络内外的协同：首先,分析企业内外创新网络的各个维度(dimensionality)对企业不同创新能力(探索性与利用性)产生的单独作用；第二步分析企业内外创新网络的二阶构念之间存在显著的相关性,即相互之间存在明显互动(interaction);第三步将二阶因子合为一个综合实体(general entity),表示内外各维度之间互补性,最后引入了环境动态变量,考察这种环境对内外网络和创新活动(能力与绩效)间关系的强度或方向影响。
子研究三在前面研究基础上,用系统动力学仿真(SD)方法研究企业在内外创新网络的协同与创新能力的动态演化特征,首先构建一个基于结构方程的二阶SD模型,进一步研究企业内外创新网络协同对创新能力的动态作用。然后基于案例构建一阶SD模型,探索在网络环境下企业内部创新要素协同与创新能力的动态演进的关系；总结了创新网络中的要素协同与创新能力演化的动态规律。本研究的主要创新点是：
(1)主要基本点是揭示创新网络中的创新要素协同和创新能力发展的内在规律性
从企业内外网络之间协同和企业内部要素协同两个层次研究网络中企业创新能力动态演化：首先验证了企业内外创新网络存在互动,在这种互动基础上的互补性能促进探索性创新能力和利用性创新能力的共同发展,从而促进企业二元性组织建设,内外协同也会使创新能力具有更长的持续性。其次研究了在创新网络影响下企业内部多维度要素组合推动能力演进的作用：技术和市场要素协同是创新能力发展的基础；而组织和体制要素协同是支持和保障；而战略和文化要素协同对创新能力演化具有导向性；企业原创能力的建设需要企业在战略和文化上创新的支持和引导。
(2)分析了通过创新网络推动协同创新,提升企业创新能力的战略途径
针对不同类型创新能力,总结了三种提升创新能力的战略途径,即通过内部要素协同不断提升渐进式创新能力；通过内外跨界协同提升集成创新能力；通过战略联盟协同提升原创发明能力。随着创新能力发展,企业首先要通过内部要素协同体系构建系统化创新能力,然后沿着价值链的与网络中不同个体协同创新。
(3)分析了企业内外创新网络的协同与创新能力提升的机制
研究验证了企业内外互动与互补效应,发现企业内部创新体系是创新能力发展的基础,内外部创新网络的协同能促进不同性质创新能力之间的协同发展,实现组织二元性(ambidexterity),内外协同降低环境动荡性产生负面作用这也完善了对创新网络的协同创新机制的理解,从而拓展了企业创新要素协同与提升能力的空间范围。
(4)将企业内部与外部网络的两个维度整合在一个框架内,采用动态研究方法探讨了企业协同创新与创新能力演化的规律性,填补了创新网络中企业外部与内部之间分离缝隙,也扩展了全面创新与协同创新的本质联系。
In the era of globalization and knowledge economy, innovation boundary extends and innovation network becomes the best way for benefits from open innovation because of its embedded organizational mechanism and flexible coordinated approach which integrate scattered knowledge resources and enterprises'inner resources for synergetic innovation. In addition, the organizational structure and management activities change rapidly with disperse productive activity and expanding management range in different fields. How to achieve the synergy of inter- and intra-innovation network to leverage innovation capability is the major problem of enterprises in open innovation landscape.
This study encloses the elements synergy and capability leveraging of manufacturing enterprises'innovation networks in the context of open innovation, and proposes three logically interrelated sub-studies according to the routine: element--structure--capability. The three sub-studies are:1). Strategic pathway to leverage enterprise's innovation capability by synergy of internal and external innovation elements in innovation networks; 2). Mechanism to leverage enterprise's innovation capability by synergy of innovation elements in innovation networks; 3). The dynamic evolution law of innovation capability based on synergy of enterprise's internal and external innovation network elements.
The first sub-study on the basis of exploratory case studies of three manufacturing companies is to explore the mechanism that enterprises integrate external and internal resource, and transform resources into technological innovation capabilities. The research points out that the key to industrial transformation and upgrading is leveraging innovation capability, which is also the basis of structural adjustment. Innovation network reflects the nature of innovation and synergy which can utilize the scattered innovation resources effectively. And six initial assumptions are proposed. Insights from the case studies provide theoretical ideas from practice for the study that followed in the next sections.
The second sub-study proposes assumptions on the basis of the first sub-study, and makes in-depth analysis under the related theoretical discussion. By the i omorphism of reconstruction, this sub-study treats enterprise as a structure composed of different elements and departments, and builds the overall framework of enterprise's internal and external innovation network synergy and innovation capability mechanism. By questionnaire survey of 278 enterprises in Zhejiang and Shandong Province, this sub-study utilizes high order factor model of structural equation model to analyze the internal and external innovation network synergy in three steps:(1) Analyzing each dimension's influence of internal and external innovation networks on different innovation capability (exploration and exploitation); (2) Analyzing second-order constructs' significant correlation (namely interaction) of internal and external innovation networks; (3) Constructing second-order factor as a general entity which represents the complementary characteristic of different dimensions. By introduces environment dynamic variable, it studies the strength or direction of influence of environment toward the relationship between capability and performance.
The third sub-study is based on the previous two studies and uses system dynamics (SD) method for analyzing the internal and external innovation networks synergy and the dynamic evolution characteristics of innovation capability. It first establishes a second-order model on the basis of structural equation, in order to studies the dynamic influence of enterprise's internal and external innovation network synergy toward innovation capability. Then, under case studies, it establishes first-order system dynamic model to explore the dynamic evolution relationship between enterprise's internal innovation element synergy and innovation capability in the context of network environment. Finally, it summarizes the dynamic law of element synergy and innovation capability evolution in innovation network.
The research innovative points are as follows:
1. Exploring the inherent law of innovation elements synergy and development of innovation capability in the context of innovation network.
Research focuses on the dynamic evolution of enterprises'innovation capability in network and is carried out from two research level—the synergy of enterprise' internal network and external network, and the synergy of enterprise's internal elements. The first research level refers to the synergy between internal and external enterprise, and it verifies that the internal network and external network exists interaction. The complementary on the basis of interaction promotes the development of exploration innovation capability and exploitation innovation capability simultaneously, and promotes the construction of ambidextrous organization in a longer duration. The second research level refers to the synergy of enterprise's internal elements and multi-dimensional elements' combination promotes the capability transformation from non-core capability to core capability. The role of elements' synergy has hierarchical characteristic, such as the basic characteristic of technological and market elements' synergy, the supporting characteristic of organizational and institutional elements' synergy, and the orientation of strategic and cultural elements' synergy. The establishment of enterprise's original capability needs support and guidance from synergy of strategy and culture.
2. Analyzing the strategic parthways to leverage innovation capabilities in innovation networks by synergetic innovation.
The research proposes that enterprises should first build systematic innovation capability by internal elements' synergy, then promote synergetic innovation along the value chain and by different individuals of network, Three strategic pathways are summarized:To promote incremental innovation capability by synergy of internal elements, and to leverage Integrated Innovation capability by cross-border synergy, and to enhance original invention capability by strategic alliance synergy.
3. Mechanism to leverage innovation capability by the synergy of enterprises' internal and external innovation networks.
The research examines the enterprises' internal and external interaction and complementary effects. It indicates that the enterprise's internal innovation system is the basis of the development of innovation capability. The synergy of internal and external innovation network promotes the development of different innovation capability, achieves organizational ambidexterity, and reduces the negative effect of environmental turbulence which also improves the understanding of synergetic innovation mechanism, so as to enlarge the spatial extent of enterprise innovation elements'synergy and capability leveraging.
4. Integrating internal network and external network into a holistic framework to study dynamic evolution of innovation capability.
From the methodology, system dynamics model is applied to study the synergy of innovation elements across different levels, and the holistic framework fills the gap between enterprises'internal and external innovation networks.
本研究围绕开放式创新环境下企业创新网络中要素协同与能力提升问题,基于制造型企业,按照“要素——结构——能力”的思路,从三个逻辑上相互关联的子研究进行了理论和实证研究：(1)创新网络中企业内外协同创新与创新能力提升的战略途径；(2)创新网络中企业内外创新要素的协同与能力提升机制；(3)创新网络中企业内外要素协同和创新能力之间的动态演化规律性。主要针对企业内外创新网络协同及其影响下的内部要素协同两个层次。
子研究一在文献理论基础上,对三家制造型企业进行了探索性案例研究。初步探寻企业获取外部网络资源、通过内部整合转化为企业技术创新能力的过程和模式,研究指出产业转型升级首先是企业能力的转型升级,结构调整需要创新能力的调整。创新网络反映了创新本质和协同本质的必然要求,促进不同创新个体建立紧密联系,构建创新要素汇集、共享和协同的网络体系,从而更好的整合分散的创新资源协同形成创新合力,提出了六个初始假设命题,为本文的后续研究提供了源于实践的理论构想。
子研究二基于命题假设,通过跨层次概念重构,将企业看作一个由不同要素/部门构成的网络结构,构建了企业内外创新网络协同对创新能力作用机制的整体框架,通过对278家浙江省和山东省制造类企业的问卷调研,运用结构方程模型构建高阶因子模型分三步来分析企业创新网络内外的协同：首先,分析企业内外创新网络的各个维度(dimensionality)对企业不同创新能力(探索性与利用性)产生的单独作用；第二步分析企业内外创新网络的二阶构念之间存在显著的相关性,即相互之间存在明显互动(interaction);第三步将二阶因子合为一个综合实体(general entity),表示内外各维度之间互补性,最后引入了环境动态变量,考察这种环境对内外网络和创新活动(能力与绩效)间关系的强度或方向影响。
子研究三在前面研究基础上,用系统动力学仿真(SD)方法研究企业在内外创新网络的协同与创新能力的动态演化特征,首先构建一个基于结构方程的二阶SD模型,进一步研究企业内外创新网络协同对创新能力的动态作用。然后基于案例构建一阶SD模型,探索在网络环境下企业内部创新要素协同与创新能力的动态演进的关系；总结了创新网络中的要素协同与创新能力演化的动态规律。本研究的主要创新点是：
(1)主要基本点是揭示创新网络中的创新要素协同和创新能力发展的内在规律性
从企业内外网络之间协同和企业内部要素协同两个层次研究网络中企业创新能力动态演化：首先验证了企业内外创新网络存在互动,在这种互动基础上的互补性能促进探索性创新能力和利用性创新能力的共同发展,从而促进企业二元性组织建设,内外协同也会使创新能力具有更长的持续性。其次研究了在创新网络影响下企业内部多维度要素组合推动能力演进的作用：技术和市场要素协同是创新能力发展的基础；而组织和体制要素协同是支持和保障；而战略和文化要素协同对创新能力演化具有导向性；企业原创能力的建设需要企业在战略和文化上创新的支持和引导。
(2)分析了通过创新网络推动协同创新,提升企业创新能力的战略途径
针对不同类型创新能力,总结了三种提升创新能力的战略途径,即通过内部要素协同不断提升渐进式创新能力；通过内外跨界协同提升集成创新能力；通过战略联盟协同提升原创发明能力。随着创新能力发展,企业首先要通过内部要素协同体系构建系统化创新能力,然后沿着价值链的与网络中不同个体协同创新。
(3)分析了企业内外创新网络的协同与创新能力提升的机制
研究验证了企业内外互动与互补效应,发现企业内部创新体系是创新能力发展的基础,内外部创新网络的协同能促进不同性质创新能力之间的协同发展,实现组织二元性(ambidexterity),内外协同降低环境动荡性产生负面作用这也完善了对创新网络的协同创新机制的理解,从而拓展了企业创新要素协同与提升能力的空间范围。
(4)将企业内部与外部网络的两个维度整合在一个框架内,采用动态研究方法探讨了企业协同创新与创新能力演化的规律性,填补了创新网络中企业外部与内部之间分离缝隙,也扩展了全面创新与协同创新的本质联系。
In the era of globalization and knowledge economy, innovation boundary extends and innovation network becomes the best way for benefits from open innovation because of its embedded organizational mechanism and flexible coordinated approach which integrate scattered knowledge resources and enterprises'inner resources for synergetic innovation. In addition, the organizational structure and management activities change rapidly with disperse productive activity and expanding management range in different fields. How to achieve the synergy of inter- and intra-innovation network to leverage innovation capability is the major problem of enterprises in open innovation landscape.
This study encloses the elements synergy and capability leveraging of manufacturing enterprises'innovation networks in the context of open innovation, and proposes three logically interrelated sub-studies according to the routine: element--structure--capability. The three sub-studies are:1). Strategic pathway to leverage enterprise's innovation capability by synergy of internal and external innovation elements in innovation networks; 2). Mechanism to leverage enterprise's innovation capability by synergy of innovation elements in innovation networks; 3). The dynamic evolution law of innovation capability based on synergy of enterprise's internal and external innovation network elements.
The first sub-study on the basis of exploratory case studies of three manufacturing companies is to explore the mechanism that enterprises integrate external and internal resource, and transform resources into technological innovation capabilities. The research points out that the key to industrial transformation and upgrading is leveraging innovation capability, which is also the basis of structural adjustment. Innovation network reflects the nature of innovation and synergy which can utilize the scattered innovation resources effectively. And six initial assumptions are proposed. Insights from the case studies provide theoretical ideas from practice for the study that followed in the next sections.
The second sub-study proposes assumptions on the basis of the first sub-study, and makes in-depth analysis under the related theoretical discussion. By the i omorphism of reconstruction, this sub-study treats enterprise as a structure composed of different elements and departments, and builds the overall framework of enterprise's internal and external innovation network synergy and innovation capability mechanism. By questionnaire survey of 278 enterprises in Zhejiang and Shandong Province, this sub-study utilizes high order factor model of structural equation model to analyze the internal and external innovation network synergy in three steps:(1) Analyzing each dimension's influence of internal and external innovation networks on different innovation capability (exploration and exploitation); (2) Analyzing second-order constructs' significant correlation (namely interaction) of internal and external innovation networks; (3) Constructing second-order factor as a general entity which represents the complementary characteristic of different dimensions. By introduces environment dynamic variable, it studies the strength or direction of influence of environment toward the relationship between capability and performance.
The third sub-study is based on the previous two studies and uses system dynamics (SD) method for analyzing the internal and external innovation networks synergy and the dynamic evolution characteristics of innovation capability. It first establishes a second-order model on the basis of structural equation, in order to studies the dynamic influence of enterprise's internal and external innovation network synergy toward innovation capability. Then, under case studies, it establishes first-order system dynamic model to explore the dynamic evolution relationship between enterprise's internal innovation element synergy and innovation capability in the context of network environment. Finally, it summarizes the dynamic law of element synergy and innovation capability evolution in innovation network.
The research innovative points are as follows:
1. Exploring the inherent law of innovation elements synergy and development of innovation capability in the context of innovation network.
Research focuses on the dynamic evolution of enterprises'innovation capability in network and is carried out from two research level—the synergy of enterprise' internal network and external network, and the synergy of enterprise's internal elements. The first research level refers to the synergy between internal and external enterprise, and it verifies that the internal network and external network exists interaction. The complementary on the basis of interaction promotes the development of exploration innovation capability and exploitation innovation capability simultaneously, and promotes the construction of ambidextrous organization in a longer duration. The second research level refers to the synergy of enterprise's internal elements and multi-dimensional elements' combination promotes the capability transformation from non-core capability to core capability. The role of elements' synergy has hierarchical characteristic, such as the basic characteristic of technological and market elements' synergy, the supporting characteristic of organizational and institutional elements' synergy, and the orientation of strategic and cultural elements' synergy. The establishment of enterprise's original capability needs support and guidance from synergy of strategy and culture.
2. Analyzing the strategic parthways to leverage innovation capabilities in innovation networks by synergetic innovation.
The research proposes that enterprises should first build systematic innovation capability by internal elements' synergy, then promote synergetic innovation along the value chain and by different individuals of network, Three strategic pathways are summarized:To promote incremental innovation capability by synergy of internal elements, and to leverage Integrated Innovation capability by cross-border synergy, and to enhance original invention capability by strategic alliance synergy.
3. Mechanism to leverage innovation capability by the synergy of enterprises' internal and external innovation networks.
The research examines the enterprises' internal and external interaction and complementary effects. It indicates that the enterprise's internal innovation system is the basis of the development of innovation capability. The synergy of internal and external innovation network promotes the development of different innovation capability, achieves organizational ambidexterity, and reduces the negative effect of environmental turbulence which also improves the understanding of synergetic innovation mechanism, so as to enlarge the spatial extent of enterprise innovation elements'synergy and capability leveraging.
4. Integrating internal network and external network into a holistic framework to study dynamic evolution of innovation capability.
From the methodology, system dynamics model is applied to study the synergy of innovation elements across different levels, and the holistic framework fills the gap between enterprises'internal and external innovation networks.
引文
1国家工业转型升级规划(2011—2015年)国发[2011]47号
1吴敬琏“中国发展高层论坛2012年会”2012.3.17发言
2以中国科技统计年度数据2009计算
1陈至立中国自主创新.品牌高层论坛讲话,提高自主创新能力建设创新型国家2005.11
1许庆瑞,走中国特色自主创新道路,光明日报2011.04-06
1吴玲 协同创新,探索产学研结合新模式,半导体照明2012.2http://www.china-led.net/info/2012423/2012423152810.shtml
1陈晓萍等主编组织与管理研究的实证方法2008 p.231
1本节参照王其蕃(2009)系统动力学(修订版)：p31-32
1 Bill Russo等中国的下一轮革命：改变全球汽车产业Booz & Company研究报告2009
2陈劲中国科技体制改革笔谈科学学研究2011.12(p：1762-1763)
3摘自富通集团网站2011http://www.futonggroup.com.cn/
1引自Forbs & Wield(沈瑶等译).从追随者到领先者.北京.高等教育出版社2005 p.167
1 Bill Russo等 无机式全球化Booz & Company研究报告2010 http://www.booz.com/cn
1评论员文章科技日报积极推动协同创新2011.9.1第一版
2吴敬琏“中国发展高层论坛2012年会”2012.3.17发言
[1]Achrol, R.S., & Kotler, P. Marketing in the network economy. The Journal of Marketing,1999,63 (Special Issue),146-163.
[2]Adler, P.S. & Kwon, S.W. Social capital:Prospects for a new concept. Academy of management review,2002,27 (1),17-40.
[3]Ahuja, G. & Katila, R. Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations. Strategic Management Journal,2004,25(8-9),887-907.
[4]Ahuja, G. Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation:A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly,2000,45(3),425-455.
[5]Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. The strategic impact of external networks:subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(11), 979-996.
[6]Atuahene-Gima, K. & Ko, A. An empirical investigation of the effect of market orientation and entrepreneurship orientation alignment on product innovation. Organization Science,2001,12(1),54-74.
[7]Atuahene-Gima, K. & Evangelista, F. Cross-functional influence in new product development:An exploratory study of marketing and R&D perspectives. Management Science,2000,46(10),1269-1284.
[8]Atuahene-Gima, K. The effects of centrifugal and centripetal forces on product development speed and quality:How does problem solving matter? The Academy of Management Journal,2003,46(3)359-373.
[9]Auh, S. & Menguc,B. Balancing exploration and exploitation:The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research,2005,58(12), 1652-1661.
[10]Auh, S. & Menguc, B. Top management team diversity and innovativeness:The moderating role of interfunctional coordination. Industrial Marketing Management,2005,34(3),249-261.
[11]Baker, W.E. & Sinkula, J.M. The synergistic effect of market orientation and learning orientation on organizational performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,1999,27(4),411-427.
[12]Bandalos, D.L. Is parceling really necessary? A comparison of results from item parceling and categorical variable methodology. Structural Equation Modeling, 2008,15(2),211-240.
[13]Baraldi, E., Gressetvold, E., & Harrison, D. Resource interaction in inter-organizational networks:foundations comparison and a research agenda. Journal of Business Research,2011,65 (2),266-276.
[14]Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,1991,17(1),99-120.
[15]Barney, J.B. Strategic factor markets:expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science,1986,1231-1241.
[16]Bendersky, C. Organizational dispute resolution systems:A complementarities model. The Academy of Management Review,2003,28(4),643-656.
[17]Benner, M.J., & Tushman, M. Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Administrative Science Quarterly,2002,47(4),676-707.
[18]Bolton, P., & Dewatripont, M. The firm as a communication network. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(4),809-839.
[19]Borgatti, S.P., & Foster, P.C. The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management,2003,29(6),991-1013.
[20]Borgatti, S.P., et al. Network analysis in the social sciences. Science,2009, 323(5916),892-895.
[21]Branzei, O. Product innovation in heterogeneous networks pathways to exploration and exploitation. Doctoral dissertation. University of British Columbia,2004.
[22]Brass, D.J., et al. Taking stock of networks and organizations:A multilevel perspective. The Academy of Management Journal,2004,47(8),795-817.
[23]Burt, R.S. & Ronchi, D. Measuring a large network quickly. Social Networks, 1994,16(2),91-135.
[24]Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T. & Zhao, Y. Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management,2002, 31(6),515-524.
[25]Capaldo, A. Network structure and innovation:The leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability. Strategic Management Journal,2007,28(6), 585-608.
[26]Cassiman, B. & Veugelers, R. In search of complementarity in innovation strategy:Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science,2006,52(1),68-82.
[27]Chesbrough, H.W., Open innovation:The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, Mass.:Harvard Business School Press. 2003
[28]Christensen, C.M., The Innovator's Dilemma:When New Technologies Cause Great Firms To Fail. Harvard Business Press.1997.
[29]Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A. Absorptive capacity:a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35(1), 128-152.
[30]Coleman, J.S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,1988,94(S),95-120.
[31]Collins, J.D. & Hitt, M.A. Leveraging tacit knowledge in alliances:The importance of using relational capabilities to build and leverage relational capital. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,2006,23(3), 147-167.
[32]Corbin, J.M. & Strauss, A. Grounded theory research:Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology,1990,13(1),3-21.
[33]Cortina, J.M., Chen, G. & Dunlap, W.P. Testing interaction effects in LISREL: Examination and illustration of available procedures. Organizational Research Methods,2001,4(4),324-360.
[34]Creti, A. Firms' organization and efficient communications networks. The Manchester School,2001,69(1),77-102.
[35]Crossland, P. Value creation in fine arts:A system dynamics model of inverse demand and information cascades. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(5), 417-434.
[36]Dangelico, R.M., Garavelli, A.C. & Petruzzelli, A.M. A system dynamics model to analyze technology districts' evolution in a knowledge-based perspective. Technovation,2010,30(2),142-153.
[37]Levinthal, D.A. & March, J. G. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal,1993,14(S2),95-112.
[38]Deeds, D.L. & Decarolis, D.M.The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance:An empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(10),953-968.
[39]Dhanaraj, C.&Parkhe, A. Orchestrating innovation networks. The Academy of Management Review,2006,31(3),659-669.
[40]Dierickx, I. & Cool, K. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science,1989,35(12),1504-1511.
[41]Dittrich, K. & Duysters, G. Networking as a means to strategy change:the case of open innovation in mobile telephony. Journal of Product Innovation Management,2007,24(6),510-521.
[42]Drucker, P. Entrepreneurship in business enterprise. Journal of Business Policy, 1970,1(1),3-12.
[43]Dutta, S., Narasimhan,O. & Rajiv, S. Conceptualizing and measuring capabilities:Methodology and empirical application. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26(3),277-285.
[44]Dyer, J. & Nobeoka, K. Creating and managing a high performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 2000,21(3),345-367
[45]Eisenhardt, K.M. & Schoonhoven, C.B. Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation:Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science,1996,7(2),136-150.
[46]Eisenhardt, K.M. & Galunic, D.C. Coevolving:At last, a way to make synergies work. Harvard Business Review,2000,78(1),91-101.
[47]Eisenhardt, K.M. & Graebner, M.E. Theory building from cases:Opportunities and challenges. The Academy of Management Journal,2007,50(1),25-32.
[48]Eisenhardt, K.M. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review,1989,14(4),532-550.
[49]Elmquist, M., Fredberg, T. & Ollila, S. Exploring the field of open innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management,2009,12(3),326-345.
[50]Ensign, P.C. Innovation in the multinational firm with globally dispersed R&D: Technological knowledge utilization and accumulation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research,1999,10(2),203-221.
[51]Flap, H., et al. Intra-organizational networks and performance:A review. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory,1998,4(2),109-147.
[52]Floricel, S. & Miller, R. An exploratory comparison of the management of innovation in the new and old economies. R&D Management,2003,33(5), 501-525.
[53]Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981,18(1),39-50.
[54]Freeman, C. Networks of innovators:a synthesis of research issues. Research Policy,1991,20(5),499-514.
[55]Garcia, R., Calantone, R. & Levine, R. The role of knowledge in resource allocation to exploration versus exploitation in technologically oriented organizations*. Decision Sciences,2003,34(2),323-349.
[56]Georgantzas, N.C. & Katsamakas, E. Disruptive innovation strategy effects on hard-disk maker population:A system dynamics study. Information Resources Management Journal,2007,20(2),90-107.
[57]George, G., Zahra, S.A. & Wood, D. R. The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance:a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. Journal of Business Venturing,2002,17(6), 577-609.
[58]Ghoshal, S. & Bartlett, C.A. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of management review,1990,603-625.
[59]Ghoshal, S., Korine, H. & Szulanski, G. Interunit communication in multinational corporations. Management Science,1994,96-110.
[60]Gittell, J.H. & Weiss, L. Coordination networks within and across organizations: A multi-level framework. Journal of Management Studies,2004,41(1), 127-153.
[61]Granovetter, M. Economic action and social structure:the problem of embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3),481-510.
[62]Greve, A. & Salaff, J.W. Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2003,28(1),1-22.
[63]Greve, H.R. Exploration and exploitation in product innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change,2007,16(5),945-975.
[64]Groβler, A. A dynamic view on strategic resources and capabilities applied to an example from the manufacturing strategy literature. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,2007,18(3),250-266.
[65]GroBler, A. An exploratory system dynamics model of strategic manufacturing capabilities. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,2010, 21(6),651-669
[66]Groβler, A. & Grubner, A. An empirical model of the relationships between manufacturing capabilities. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,2006,26(5),458-485.
[67]Groβler, A., Thun, J.H. & Milling, P.M. System dynamics as a structural theory in operations management. Production and Operations Management,2008, 17(3),373-384.
[68]Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal,2004.47, 209-226.
[69]Gulati, R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(4), 293-317.
[70]Gulati, R. Network location and learning:The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal,1999, 20(5),397-420.
[71]Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3),203-315.
[72]Gupta, A.K. & Govindarajan, V. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(4),473-496.
[73]Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G., & Shalley, C.E.The interplay between exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal,2006,49(4),693-706.
[74]Hagedoorn, J. & Duysters, G. Learning in dynamic inter-firm networks:the efficacy of multiple contacts. Organization Studies,2002,23(4),525-548.
[75]Hagedoorn, J., Roijakkers, N. & Kranenburg, H. Inter-Firm R&D Networks: the Importance of Strategic Network Capabilities for High-Tech Partnership Formationl. British Journal of Management,2006,17(1),39-53.
[76]Hansen, M.T., & Lovas. B. How do multinational companies leverage technological competencies? Moving from single to interdependent explanations. Strategic Management Journal,2004,25(8-9),801-822.
[77]Hansen, M.T. & Birkinshaw, J. The innovation value chain. Harvard Business Review,2007,85(6),121.
[78]Hansen, M.T. Knowledge networks:Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science,2002,13(3),232-248.
[79]Hansson, F., Husted, K. & Vestergaard, J. Second generation science parks:from structural holes jockeys to social capital catalysts of the knowledge society. Technovation,2005,25(9),1039-1049.
[80]Harrison, J.S., et al. Resource complementarity in business combinations: Extending the logic to organizational alliances. Journal of Management,2001, 27(6),679-690.
[81]Harrison, R., Lin,Z., Carroll, G. R., & Carley,K, M. Simulation Modeling in Organizational and Management Research. The Academy of Management Review,2007,32(4),1229-1245
[82]He, Z.L. & Wong, P.K. Exploration vs. exploitation:An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science,2004,15(4),481-494.
[83]Helfat, C.E. & Peteraf, M.A. The dynamic resource-based view:capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal,2003,24(10),997-1010.
[84]Hoang, H. & Antoncic, B. Network-based research in entrepreneurship:A critical review. Journal of Business Venturing,2003,18(2),165-187.
[85]Hoang, H. & Rothaermel, F.T. Leveraging internal and external experience: exploration, exploitation, and R&D project performance. Strategic Management Journal,2010,31(7),734-758.
[86]Hoyle, R. H., and Panter, A. T. "Writing About Structural Equation Models," in Structural Equation Modeling, Concepts, Issues, and Applications, R. H. Hoyle (ed.), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA,1995, pp.158-176.
[87]Hubner, S. Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review,1995, 75(5),148.
[88]Huygens, M., et al. Co-evolution of firm capabilities and industry competition: Investigating the music Industry. Organization Studies,2001,22(6),971-1011.
[89]Ibarra, H., Kilduff, M. & Tsai, W. Zooming in and out:Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science,2005,16(4),359-371.
[90]Inkpen, A.C. & Tsang, E.W.K. Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. The Academy of Management Review,2005,30(1),146-165.
[91]Ireland, R., Hitt, M. & Vaidyanath, D. Managing strategic alliances to achieve a competitive advantage. Journal of management,2002,28(3),413-441.
[92]Jahangirian, M., et al. Simulation in manufacturing and business:A review. European Journal of Operational Research,2010,203(1),1-13.
[93]Jansen, J.J.P., Van Den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance:Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science,2006,52(11),1661-1674.
[94]Jaworski, B.J.&Kohli, A.K. Market orientation:antecedents and consequences. The Journal of Marketing,1993,57(7),53-70.
[95]Dyer, J. H. & Hatch, N, W. Relation-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers:creating advantage through network relationships Strategic Management Journal,2006,27(8):701-719.
[96]Johnston, W.J., Leach, M.P. & Liu. A.H. Theory testing using case studies in business-to-business research. Industrial Marketing Management,1999,28(3), 201-213.
[97]Juga, J. Organizing for network synergy in logistics:A case study. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,1996,26(2),51-67.
[98]Kahn, K.B. Interdepartmental integration:a definition with implications for product development performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 1996,13(2),137-151.
[99]Kash, D.E. & Rycroft, R. Emerging patterns of complex technological innovation. Technological forecasting and social change,2002,69(6),581-606.
[100]Katila, R. & Ahuja, G. Something old, something new:A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal,2002,45(8),1183-1194.
[101]Kelley, M.R. & Brooks, H. External learning opportunities and the diffusion of process innovations to small firms:The case of programmable automation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,1991,39(1-2),103-125.
[102]Khoja, F. & Maranville, S. The power of intrafirm networks. Academy of Strategic Management Journal,2009,8,51-70.
[103]Khoja, F. The triad:organizational cultural values, practices and strong social intra-firm networks. Journal of Business Strategies,2010,27(2),205-228
[104]Koka, B.R. & Prescott, J.E.Strategic alliances as social capital:A multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(9),795-816.
[105]Kor, Y.Y. & Mahoney, J.T. Penrose's Resource-Based Approach:The Process and Product of Research Creativity. Journal of Management Studies,2000, 37(1),109-139.
[106]Koza, M.P. & Lewin, A.Y. The co-evolution of strategic alliances. Organization Science,1998,9(3),255-264.
[107]Kramer, M.R. Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review,2011,89(2), 62-77.
[108]Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.1998.
[109]Kreiner, K. & Schultz, M. Informal collaboration in R & D. The formation of networks across organizations. Organization Studies,1993,14(2),189-209.
[110]Larsen, E. & Lomi, A. Representing change:a system model of organizational inertia and capabilities as dynamic accumulation processes. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory,2002,10(5),271-296.
[111]Laursen, K. & Salter, A. Open for innovation:the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal,2006,27(2),131-150.
[112]Lavie, D. & Rosenkopf, L. Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. The Academy of Management Journal,2006,49(4),797-818.
[113]Lavie, D. The evolution and strategy of interconnected firms:A study of the Unisys alliance network.2004.
[114]Leonard-Barton, D. Core capabilities and core rigidities:A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal,1992, 13(S1),111-125.
[115]Li, Y., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Schoenmakers, W. Exploration and exploitation in innovation:reframing the interpretation. Creativity and innovation management,2008,17(2),107-126.
[116]Lichtenthaler, U. Absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and the complementarity of organizational learning processes. The Academy of Management Journal ARCHIVE,2009,52(4),822-846.
[117]Lichtenthaler, U. & Lichtenthaler, E. A Capability-Based Framework for Open Innovation:Complementing Absorptive Capacity. Journal of Management Studies,2009,46(8),1315-1338.
[118]Lin, N. Social resources and social mobility: A structural theory of status attainment. Social mobility and social structure,1990,247-271.
[119]Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of applied psychology,2001,86(1), 114-121
[120]Lorenzoni, G. & Lipparini, A. The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability:A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(4),317-338.
[121]Lori Rosenkopfl, Atul Nerka Beyond local search:boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry Strategic Management Journal Volume 22, Issue 4, pages 287-306, April 2001
[122]March, J.G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science,1991,2(1),71-87.
[123]Marsden, P.V. Network data and measurement. Annual review of sociology, 1990,16,435-463.
[124]Marsh, H.W. & Hocevar, D. Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept:First-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin,1985,97(3),562-582.
[125]Marx, K., Lechner, C., & Floyd, S., Intrafirm networks and the performance of strategic initiatives. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper 2006, ssl-ss6.
[126]McEvily, B. & Marcus, A. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26(11),1033-1055.
[127]McFadyen, M.A. & Cannella Jr, A.A. Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange. The Academy of Management Journal,2004,47(5),735-746.
[128]Meeus, M.T.H., & Faber, J. Interorganizational relations and innovation:a review and a theoretical extension Hage, J.&Meeus, M.T.H. (Eds.), Innovation, Science, and Institutional Change, Oxford University Press, Oxford,2006,67-87.
[129]Menon, A., Jaworski, B.J. & Kohl, A.K. Product quality:Impact of interdepartmental interactions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1997,25(3),187-200.
[130]Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing. Journal of accounting and economics, 1995,19(2),179-208.
[131]Mitchell, W., & Singh, K. Survival of businesses using collaborative relationships to commercialize complex goods. Strategic Management Journal, 1996,17(3),169-195.
[132]Morgan, R.M. & Hunt, S.D. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. The Journal of Marketing,1994,20-38.
[133]Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(2), 242-266.
[134]O'connor, G.C. & Rice, M.P. Opportunity recognition and breakthrough innovation in large established firms. California Management Review,2001, 43(2),95-116.
[135]Oerlemans, L.A.G., Meeus, M.T.H., & Boekema, F.W.M. Do networks matter for innovation? The usefulness of the economic network approach in analysing innovation. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie,1998,89(3), 298-309.
[136]Ozman, M. Inter-firm networks and innovation:a survey of literature. Economic of Innovation and New Technology,2009,18(1),39-67.
[137]Papa, M.J. Communication network patterns and employee performance with new technology. Communication Research,1990,17(3),344-368.
[138]Parkhe, A., S. Wasserman, and D.A. Ralston. New frontiers in network theory development. The Academy of Management Review,2006,31(3),560-568.
[139]Paruchuri, S. Intraorganizational networks, interorganizational networks, and the impact of central inventors:A longitudinal study of pharmaceutical firms. Organization Science,2010,21(1),63-77.
[140]Pavlou, P.A. & E1 Sawy, O.A. Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities. Decision Sciences,2011,42(1),239-273.
[141]Pertusa-Ortega, E.M., Molina-Azbrin, J.F. & Claver-Cortes, E. Competitive strategy, structure and firm performance:A comparison of the resource-based view and the contingency approach. Management Decision,2010,48(8), 1282-1303.
[142]Smart, P., Bessant J., & Gupta, A. Towards technological rules for designing innovation networks:a dynamic capabilities view. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 2007,27 (10),1069-1092.
[143]Pittaway, L., et al. Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews,2004,5(3-4), 137-168.
[144]Plummer, B. A. To parcel or not to parcel:The effects of item parceling in confirmatory factor analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rhode Island.2000.
[145]Podolny, J.M. A status-based model of market competition. American journal of sociology,1993,98(4),829-872.
[146]Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology,2003,88(5),879-903
[147]Podsakoff, P., & Organ, D. Self-reports in organizational research:Problems and prospects. Journal of Management,1986,12(4),531-544.
[148]Porter, M.E. & Kramer, M.R. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review,2006,84(12),78-92.
[149]Powell, W.W., et al. Network position and firm performance:Organizational returns to collaboration in the biotechnology industry. Research in the Sociology of Organizations,1999,16(1),129-159.
[150]Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., & Smith-Doerr, L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation:Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly,1996,41(1),116-145.
[151]Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review,1990,68(3),79-91.
[152]Raisch, S., et al. Organizational ambidexterity:Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science,2009,20(4), 685-695.
[153]Reagans, R. & McEvily, B.Network structure and knowledge transfer:The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly,2003,48(2), 240-267.
[154]Reagans, R. and E.W. Zuckerman. Networks, diversity, and productivity:The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science,2001,12(4), 502-517.
[155]Rindfleisch, A. & Moorman, C. The acquisition and utilization of information in new product alliances:A strength-of-ties perspective. The Journal of Marketing,2001,65(4),1-18.
[156]Ritter, T. & Gemunden, H.G. Network competence:Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research,2003,56(9), 745-755.
[157]Ritter, T. The networking company:antecedents for coping with relationships and networks effectively. Industrial Marketing Management,1999,28(5), 467-479.
[158]Ritter, T., I.F. Wilkinson, & Johnston, W.J. Measuring network competence: some international evidence. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,2002, 17(2/3),119-138.
[159]Rose-Anderssen, C., et al. Innovation in manufacturing as an evolutionary complex system. Technovation,2005,25(10),1093-1105.
[160]Rosenberg, Nathan. Inside the Black Box:Technology and Economics. New York:Cambridge University Press 1982.245-255.
[161]Rothaermel, F.T. & Deeds, D.L. Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology:A system of new product development. Strategic Management Journal,2004,25(3),201-221.
[162]Rothwell, R. Towards the fifth-generation innovation process. International Marketing Review,1994,11(1),7-31.
[163]Rowley, T., Behrens, D. & Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures:An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3),369-386.
[164]Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3),369-386.
[165]Rudolph, J.W., Morrison, J.B., & Carroll, J.S. The dynamics of action-oriented problem solving:linking interpretation and choice. The Academy of Management Review,2009,34(4),733-756.
[166]Schildt, H.A., Maula, M.V.J., & Keil, T. Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2005, 29(4),493-515.
[167]Serrano, V. & Fischer, T. Collaborative innovation in ubiquitous systems. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing,2007,18(5),599-615.
[168]Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods,2010,13(3),456-476.
[169]Siemsen, E., A. Roth, et al., "Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects." Organizational Research Methods 2010,13(3),456-476.
[170]Skerlavaj, M., & Dimovski, V. Social network approach to organizational learning. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR),2011,22(2).
[171]Smart, P., Bessant, J., & Gupta, A. Towards technological rules for designing innovation networks:a dynamic capabilities view. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,2007,27(10),1069-1092.
[172]Subramaniam, M. & Youndt, M.A. The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. The Academy of Management Journal,2005, 48(3),450-463.
[173]Swan, J., et al. Knowledge management and innovation:networks and networking. Journal of Knowledge Management,1999,3(4),262-275.
[174]Tamayo Torres, J., et al. Exploitation versus exploration:the influence of manufacturing flexibility and the environment. International Journal of Business Environment,2011,4(1),92-105.
[175]Tanriverdi, H. & Venkatraman, N. Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26(2),97-119.
[176]Tanriverdi, H. Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms. MIS Quarterly,2006,57-77.
[177]Teece, D.J.Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7),509-533.
[178]Teece, D.J. Explicating dynamic capabilities:the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance Strategic Management Journal, 2007,28(13),1319-1350.
[179]Tempelaar, M., Jansen, J. J. P. & van den Bosch, F. A. J. Knowingyour clients: The joint effect of client and internal social capital on organizational ambidexterity. Strategic Management Society Annual Conference, Cologne, Germany.2008.
[180]Thorelli, H.B. Networks:between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal,1986,7(1),37-51.
[181]Tippins, M.J. & Sohi, R.S. IT competency and firm performance:is organizational learning a missing link? Strategic Management Journal,2003, 24(8),745-761.
[182]Tiwana, A., Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity. Strategic Management Journal,2008,29(3),251-272.
[183]Tripsas, M. Unraveling the process of creative destruction:Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(s 1),119-142.
[184]Tsai, W. & Ghoshal, S. Social capital and value creation:The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal,1998,41(4),464-476.
[185]Tsai, W. Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks:effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44(5),996-1004.
[186]Tsai, W. Social structure of "coopetition" within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science,2002,179-190.
[187]Tushman, M. & O'Reilly, I. Ambidextrous organizations:Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review,1996, 38(4),8-29.
[188]Uzzi, B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks:The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42(1),35-67.
[189]Uzzi, B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations:the network effect. American Sociological Review,1996,61(4),674-698.
[190]Van de Ven, A.H., Delbecq, A.L., & Koenig Jr, R. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review,1976,41(4), 322-338.
[191]Van der Panne, G. Agglomeration externalities:Marshall versus Jacobs. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,2004,14(5),593-604.
[192]Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J.J.P., & Lyles, M.A. Inter-and Intra-Organizational Knowledge Transfer:A Meta-Analytic Review and Assessment of its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Management Studies,2008,45(4), 830-853.
[193]Venkatraman, N. The concept of fit in strategy research:Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review,1989,14(3), 423-444.
[194]Volberda, H.W. & Lewin, A.Y. Co-evolutionary Dynamics Within and Between Firms:From Evolution to Co-evolution. Journal of Management Studies,2003, 40(8),2111-2136.
[195]Volberda, H.W. Building flexible organizations for fast-moving markets. Long Range Planning,1997,30(2),169-183.
[196]Von Hippel, E. Sticky information" and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science,1994,40(4),429-439.
[197]Walker, G., Kogut, B., & Shan, W. Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science,1997,8(2),109-125.
[198]Walter, J., Lechner, C., & Kellermanns, F.W. Knowledge transfer between and within alliance partners:Private versus collective benefits of social capital. Journal of Business Research,2007,60(7),698-710.
[199]Wernerfelt, B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal,1984,5(2),171-180.
[200]Williamson,O.,E.-Transaction-Cost Economics The governance of contractual relations Journal of Law and Economics,1979.22(2):233-261.
[201]Woerter, M. Industry diversity and its impact on the innovation performance of firms. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,2009,19(5),675-700.
[202]Wu, D.D., et, al. Modeling technological innovation risks of an entrepreneurial team using system dynamics:An agent-based perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2010,77(6),857-869.
[203]Yalcinkaya, G., Calantone, R.J., & Griffith, D.A. An examination of exploration and exploitation capabilities:Implications for product innovation and market performance. Journal of International Marketing,2007,15(4),63-93.
[204]Zaheer, A. & McEvily, B. Bridging ties:A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(12), 1133-1256.
[205]Zahra, S.A. & George, G. Absorptive capacity:A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(2),185-203.
[206]Markard, J., & Truffer, B.Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective:Towards an integrated framework. Research Policy.2008,37(4), 596-615.
[207]Goold, M. & Campbell,A. Desperately seeking synergy. Harvard business review 1998.76(5),131-143
[208]Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. Overcoming Local Search through Alliances and Mobility. Management Science,2003, (49),6,751-766
[209]Teece, D.J. Profiting from technological innovation:Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy.Research Policy.1986.15(6), 285-305
[210]Moore, J.F. The Death of Competition:Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems New York:Harper Business,1996.
[211]Jansen, J.J.P. Ambidextrous Organizations:A Multiple-Level Study of 'Absorptive Capacity, Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation and Performance Doctoral dissertation Erasmus University Rotterdam,2005.
[212]Coles, A., Harris, L. & Dickson, K. Testing goodwill:conflict and cooperation in new product development networks. International Journal of Technology Management,2003(25),51-64.
[213]Droge, C., Calantone, R.J. & Harmancioglu, N. New product success:is it really controllable by managers in highly turbulent environments? Journal of Product Innovation Management,2008.25 (3),272-86.
[214]Castaner, J. Diversification as learning:The Role of Corporate Exploitation and Exploration under Different Environment Conditions in the US Phone Industry Doctoral Dissertation University of Minnesota 2002.
[215]Burt, R.S. Network items and the general social survey, Social Networks,1984, 6:293-339.
[216]Ireland, R.D., Hitt, M.A., & Vaidyanath, D. Managing Strategic alliances to achieve a competitive advantage. Journal of Management,2002.28(3),413-446.
[217]Dyer,J. H.&Singh, H. The Relational View:Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review,1998,23(4):660-679
[218]Granovetter,M. The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 1973(78),1360-1380
[219]Tsai, W. Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21, 925-939.
[220]Garcia, R., Calantone,R., & Levine,R.,The Role of Knowledge in Resource Allocation to Exploration versus Exploitation in Technologically Oriented Organizations. Decision Sciences.2003,34(2),323-349.
[221]White, J.C., Conant, J.S. and Echambadi, R. Marketing strategy development styles, implementation capability, and firm performance:investigating the curvilinear impact of multiple strategy-making styles, Marketing Letters,2003, (14)2,111-124.
[222]Lukas, B.A., Tan, J.J. and Hult, G.T.M. Strategic fit in transitional economies: the case of China's electronics industry, Journal of Management,2001,27(4), 409-429.
[223]Powell, T.C. and Dent-Micallef, A., Information technology as competitive advantage:the role of human, business, and technology resources, Strategic Management Journal,1997,18 (5),375-405.
[224]Lee, J. and Miller, D. Strategy, environment and performance in two technologicalcontexts:contingency theory in Korea, Organization Studies, 1996,17(5)729-750.
[225]Itami, H. Mobilizing Invisible Assets, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1987
[226]Moliterno, T.P. & Mahony, D.M. Network Theory of Organization:A Multilevel Approach. Journal of Management.2011.37 (2),443-467
[227]Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall.2006.
[228]Whittington, R., Pettigrew, A., Peck, S., Fenton, E., & Conyon, M. Change and complementarities in the new competitive landscape:A European panel study, 1992-1996. Organization Science,1999,10,583-600.
[229]Rindskopf, D., & Rose, T. Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research,1988,23, 51-67.
[230]Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London:Erlbaum. 2003.
[231]Lee, T.L. & vonTunzelmann, N. A dynamic analytic approach to national innovation systems:The IC industry in Taiwan. Research Policy,2005 (34) 425-440
[232]Adamides, E.D., & Voutsina, M. The double-helix model of manufacturing and marketing strategies. International Journal of Production Economics,2006(104), 3-18.
[233]Voss, G.B., Sirdeshmukh,D., & Voss,Z.G.The Effects of Slack Resources and Environmental Threat on Product Exploration and Exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal.2008,51(1),147-164
[234]Aldrieh, H., Rosen, B., & Woodward, W. The impactof social networks on business foundings and profit:a longitudinal study. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research,1987,11(7),154-168.
[235]Roberts, E. & Hauptman, O. The process of technology transfer to the new biomedical and pharmaceutical firm. Research Policy,1986,15(3),107-119
[236]Jarillo, J.C. On strategic networks Strategic management Journal,1988,9(1), 31-41.
[237]Brown, J. S., & Hagel Ⅲ. J.,创新网络：从开放式创新中获得最大收益.麦肯锡季刊,2006.4
[238]Edquist, C(柳卸林等译)Systems of innovation:perspectives and challenges.牛津创新手册,北京：知识产权出版社2009,181-202.
[239]Forbs, N., & Wield.D., 从追随者到领先者:管理新兴工业化经济的技术与创新.北京：高等教育出版社,2005,11-20
[240]Fowler,F.J(孙振东等译)Survey Research Methods重庆：重庆大学出版社,2004
[241]Owen, L., Goldwasser,C., Choate,K., & Blitz,A协作的力量,在扩展企业网络中实现协作创新.IBM商业价值研究院研究报告,2007
[242]Porter,K.M.,竞争优势(陈小悦译).北京：华夏出版社2005 p.307-366
[243]Yin. K.R.,案例研究：设计与方法(中文第2版).重庆：重庆大学出版社,2010
[244]Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K(王跃红,李伟力译)管理创新(第三版).北京：清华大学出版社2008.
[245]Senge,P. M张成林(译)第五项修炼学习型组织的艺术与实践(修订版)北京：中信出版社2009
[246]Sterman J.D.,商务动态分析方法基于复杂世界的系统思考与建模(朱岩,钟永光译).北京：清华大学出版社2008
[247]Yin,R.K(周海涛译)案例研究方法的应用.重庆：重庆大学出版社2004
[248]Kilduff, M., & Tsai,W.王凤彬等(译)社会网络与组织.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,33-63.
[249]毕克新,孙德花,李柏洲.基于系统动力学的制造业企业产品创新与工艺创新互动关系仿真研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2008.12：75-80
[250]边燕杰.城市居民社会资本的来源及作用：网络观点与调查发现.中国社会科学,2004(3)：136-146
[251]卞冉,车宏生,阳辉.项目组合在结构方程模型中的应用.心理科学进展2007.15(3)：567—576.
[252]蔡宁,潘松挺.网络关系强度与企业技术创新模式的耦合性及其协同演化,以海正药业技术创新网络为例.中国工业经济,2008(4),137-144
[253]陈劲,阳银娟.协同创新的理论基础与内涵.科学学研究,2012,30(2)：161-164.
[254]陈光.企业内部协同创新研究.博士学位论文,西南交通大学,2005
[255]陈劲,王方瑞.突破全面创新：技术和市场协同创新管理研究.科学学研究2005.23(增刊)：250-254.
[256]陈劲.技术创新的系统观与系统框架.管理科学学报,1999.2(3)：66-73
[257]陈学光.企业网络能力：网络能力、创新网络及创新绩效关系研究.北京：经济管理出版社,2008.
[258]陈钰芬,陈劲.开放式创新：机理与模式.北京：科学出版社2008.
[259]池仁勇.中小企业创新网络的理论与实践,2009,183-201.
[260]大卫·史密斯,克雷格·米哲姆.如何抓住创新的本质.哈佛商业评论网.http://www.ebusinessreview.cn/articleList-39-22.html 2009-02-20
[261]樊景立,梁建,陈志俊.理论构念的测量.(陈晓萍、徐淑英、樊景立.组织与管理研究的实证方法.北京：北京大学出版社,2008.p229-254.
[262]方刚.基于资源观的企业网络能力与创新绩效关系研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2008.
[263]冯婷婷.基于系统动力学的国家创新体系运行机理研究.硕士学位论文,大连理工大学,2009.
[264]傅家骥 雷家骕 程源.技术经济学前沿问题.北京：经济科学出版社,2003p-97-123.
[265]傅家骥 仝允桓 高建 雷家骕.技术创新学,北京：清华大学出版社2005
[266]顾伟.范围经济视角下的企业内部组织网络化研究.硕士学位论文,南京理工大学,2007.
[267]顾幸之,甘绮翠,Harreld,C.,通过全球化整合实现转型,中国公司真正成为全球企业.IBM商业价值研究院研究报告,2008.
[268]郭斌.基于核心能力的企业组合创新理论与实证研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,1998.
[269]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用.北京：教育科学出版社2004.
[270]贾根良.转变对外经济发展方式的实质及政策建议.社会科学辑刊,2012(1)：120-123.
[271]江辉,陈劲.集成创新：一类新的创新模式.科研管理,2000.21(5)：31-39.
[272]蒋春燕.中国新兴企业自主创新陷阱突破路径分析.管理科学学报,2011.14(4)：36-49.
[273]解学梅.中小企业协同创新网络与创新绩效的实证研究.管理科学学报,2010.13(8)：51-63.
[274]孔继红,茅宁.吸收能力与组织探索性：开发性创新的形成及惯性.南京师大学报(社会科学版).2007(5),63-67.
[275]李怀祖.管理研究方法论.西安：西安交通大学出版社,2004.
[276]李剑力.探索性创新,开发性创新及其平衡研究前沿探析.外国经济与管理,2009.31(3)：23-29.
[277]李剑力.探索性创新、开发性创新与企业绩效关系研究.北京：经济管理出版社2010,29-75.
[278]李培林,梁栋.网络化：企业组织变化的趋势——北京中关村200家高新技术企业的调查.社会学研究,2003(2)：43--53.
[279]李平.应积极推动协同创新.黑龙江日报,2012.3.12.第12版.
[280]李维安等.网络组织：组织发展新趋势.北京：经济科学出版社,2003
[281]李文博,郑文哲,刘爽.产业集群中知识网络结构的测量研究.科学学研究,2008.26(4),787-792.
[282]李志刚.基于网络结构的产业集群创新机制和创新绩效研究博士学位论文.中国科学技术大学,2007.
[283]李兴华.协同创新是提高自主创新能力和效率的最佳形式和途径.科技日报,2011.9.22.
[284]梁建,樊景立.理论构念的测量.(陈晓萍、徐淑英、樊景立.组织与管理研究的实证方法).北京：北京大学出版社,2008,229-254.
[285]林聚任.社会网络分析：理论、方法与应用.北京：北京师范大学出版社2009.
[286]刘刚.企业的异质性假设：企业本质和行为的演化经济学解释北京：中国人民大学出版社2005,248-255.
[287]刘景江.网络环境下制造企业组织创新的机理与模式研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2004.
[288]刘炬.企业技术创新网络形成机理研究：基于瑞士与中国的跨国案例比较.博士学位论文,电子科技大学,2010.
[289]刘兰剑,司春林.创新网络17年研究文献述评.研究与发展管理,2009,21(4)：68-77.
[290]刘璐.企业外部网络对企业绩效影响研究：基于吸收能力视角.博士学位论文山东大学2009.
[291]刘仁军,交易成本、社会资本与企业网络——关系契约理论及应用.博士学位论文.华中科技大学,2004.
[292]卢福财,胡平波.网络租金及其形成机理分析.中国工业经济,2006(6)：84-90.
[293]路甬祥.对国家创新体系的再思考.求是,2002(20)：6-8.
[294]罗珉,王睢.组织间关系的拓展与演进：基于组织间知识互动的研究.中国工业经济,2008(1)：40-49.
[295]罗珉.企业内部市场：理论、要素与变革趋势.中国工业经济,2004(10)：59-68.
[296]马庆国.管理统计.北京：科学出版社,2002
[297]彭继生,吴林海.论技术创新协同模式构建.研究与发展管理,2000.12(5)：12-16.
[298]彭新敏.企业网络对技术创新绩效的作用机制研究,利用性和探索性学习中介效应.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2009.
[299]彭正银.网络治理、四重维度与扩展的交易成本理论,经济管理·新管理2003(18)：4-12.
[300]彭正银等.基于任务复杂性的企业网络组织协同行为研究.北京：经济科学出版社,2011,22-34.
[301]邱昭良.网络组织学习机制研究.博士学位论文,南开大学,2006
[302]曲然,张少杰.区域创新系统建设与运行系统动力学研究.工业技术经济,2008.27(8)：94-97.
[303]屈维意,周海炜,姜骞.组织间关系维度分析及其实证研究.情报杂志,2011 (8)：169-174.
[304]全利平,蒋晓阳.协同创新网络组织实现创新协同的路径选择.科技进步与对策,2011,28(9),15-18.
[305]任胜钢,宋迎春,王龙伟.基于企业内外部网络视角的创新绩效多因素影响模型与实证研究.中国工业经济,2010(4),100-109.
[306]石林芬,胡翠平.原创技术的基本特征与研发要素.管理学报,2004,1(2),224-227.
[307]石芝玲.基于技术能力和网络能力协同的企业开放式创新研究.博士学位论文,天津大学,2010.
[308]水常青.基于市场导向的全面创新机制及绩效实证研究.博士学位论文.浙江大学,2009.
[309]宋迎春.基于企业内外部网络视角的创新绩效多因素影响模型与实证研究硕士学位论文,中南大学,2010.
[310]苏屹,柏洲.大型企业原始创新支持体系的系统动力学研究科学学研究,2010.28(1),141-150.
[311]孙国强.关系互动与协同网络组织的治理逻辑.中国工业经济,2003(11),14-20.
[312]孙国强.网络组织的内涵特征与构成要素.南开管理评论,2001(4),38-40.
[313]孙贤伟,崔新坤.知识经济下企业组织内部网络化.大连海事大学学报(社会科学版),2008,7(6),84-87.
[314]孙元欣,于茂荐.关系契约理论研究述评.学术交流,2010(8)：117-123.
[315]陶在朴.系统动态学：直击第五项修炼奥秘.北京：中国税务出版社2005p37-58.
[316]屠骏.认清出口制造业转型升级新路径.上海证券报,2011-10-24.
[317]万幼清,邓明然.基于知识视角的产业集群协同创新绩效分析.科学学与科学技术管理,2007(4)：88-91.
[318]王端旭,国维潇,刘晓莉.团队内部社会网络特征影响团队创造力过程的实证研究.软科学,2009.23(9)25-28.
[319]王核成.基于动态能力观的企业争力及其演化研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2005.
[320]王核成.我国制造企业能力体系演化及竞争优势再造研究.博士后论文上海交通大学,2008.
[321]王其蕃.系统动力学(修订版).上海：上海财经大学出版社2009.
[322]王天夫.社会研究中的因果分析.社会学研究,2006(4)：132-156.
[323]王为东.面向集群创新的企业网络作用及其演化机制研究.博士学位论文 东南大学,2010.
[324]王毅.企业核心能力与技术创新战略.北京：中国金融出版社,2004.
[325]危钰.基于现代企业能力理论视角的能力评价体系建立.经济论坛,2008(6),85-88.
[326]魏江.企业技术能力论：技术创新的一个新视角.北京：科学出版社2002.
[327]邬爱其.集群企业网络化成长机制：理论分析与浙江经验.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007.
[328]吴波.基于匹配视角的集群企业网络化成长机制研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2007.
[329]吴传荣,曾德明,陈英武.高技术企业技术创新网络的系统动力学建模与仿真.系统工程理论与实践,2010,30(4),587-593.
[330]吴贵生,王毅.技术创新管理(第二版).北京：清华大学出版社2009.
[331]吴昊,杨梅英,陈良猷.超竞争环境下企业的纵向效率边界分析.北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版),2003,16(2)：32-36.
[332]吴明隆.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用.重庆：重庆大学出版社2010.
[333]吴金明,彭礼红等.自主创新：21世纪中国企业战略选择.北京：中国经济出版社2011
[334]吴晓波,刘雪锋.全球制造网络及其对发展中国家的意义.西安电子科技大学学报社会科学版,2006,16(2),1-6.
[335]吴晓波,倪义芳.二次创新与我国制造业全球化竞争战略.科研管理,2001.22(3)：43-52.
[336]吴晓燕.开放式创新：从公司外部寻找创意.中国经营报-中国经营网http://www.cb.com.cn/1634427/2000112/88846.html
[337]谢恩.内部资源能力及外部网络对企业竞争优势的整合分析.企业活力,2004(6)：51-52.
[338]谢芳.企业集团内部协同创新机理研究.硕士学位论文,浙江大学,2006.
[339]谢洪明,区毅勇,王成,罗惠玲.市场导向、组织创新与组织绩效的关系：珠三角地区企业的实证研究.科技进步与对策,2008.25(3)：101-104.
[340]谢祖墀.中国制造业酝酿新格局.博斯公司研究报告Booz & Company Inc2009.
[341]许冠南.关系嵌入性对技术创新绩效的影响研究：基于探索型学习的中介机制.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2008.
[342]许庆瑞,陈重.企业经营管理基本规律与模式.杭州：浙江大学出版社2001,106-109.
[343]许庆瑞.全面创新管理：理论与实践.北京：科学出版社2007.
[344]许庆瑞.走中国特色自主创新道路,光明日报2011.04-06.
[345]杨文斌.基于系统动力学的企业成长研究.博士学位论文.复旦大学,2006.
[346]游达明,孙洁.企业开放式集成创新能力的评价方法.统计与决策,2008(22)：179-181.
[347]韵江,刘立,高杰.企业集团的价值创造与协同效应的实现机制.财经问题研究,2006(4)：79-86.
[348]曾楠,高山行,崔宁宁.企业内部资源、能力与外部网络对绩效的交互效应研究.技术与创新管理,2011.32(3)：230-236.
[349]张钢等.企业组织网络化发展.杭州：浙江大学出版社2005.
[350]张浩.企业战略协同机制的优化：基于混沌理论与协同学的视角.北京：经济科学出版社,2010,86-87.
[351]张永安,李晨光.创新网络结构对创新资源利用率的影响研究.科学学与科学技术管理2010(01),81-89.
[352]张玉臣.构建协同创新的管理体制.科技日报,2011.10.17第1版.
[353]赵黎明,李振华.城市创新系统的动力学机制研究.科学学研究,2003.21(1),97-100.
[354]赵黎明,李振华.城市创新系统的动力学机制研究.科学学研究,2003.21(1)：97-100.
[355]赵晓庆.企业技术学习的模式与技术能力积累途径的螺旋运动过程.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2001.
[356]赵玉林,李文超.基于系统动力学的产业结构演变规律仿真模拟实验研究,系统科学学报,2008,16(4),51-58.
[357]郑刚.基于TIM视角的企业技术创新过程中各要素全面协同机制研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2004.
[358]钟永光,伯大辉,封红雨,孔丽娟.海信集团技术创新能力的系统动力学仿真研究.上海管理科学,2010.32(2)：92-96.
[359]朱朝晖,陈劲.开放创新的技术学习模式.北京：科学出版社,2008,145-155.
[360]邹志勇.企业集团协同能力研究.博士学位论文.大连理工大学,2008.
1吴敬琏“中国发展高层论坛2012年会”2012.3.17发言
2以中国科技统计年度数据2009计算
1陈至立中国自主创新.品牌高层论坛讲话,提高自主创新能力建设创新型国家2005.11
1许庆瑞,走中国特色自主创新道路,光明日报2011.04-06
1吴玲 协同创新,探索产学研结合新模式,半导体照明2012.2http://www.china-led.net/info/2012423/2012423152810.shtml
1陈晓萍等主编组织与管理研究的实证方法2008 p.231
1本节参照王其蕃(2009)系统动力学(修订版)：p31-32
1 Bill Russo等中国的下一轮革命：改变全球汽车产业Booz & Company研究报告2009
2陈劲中国科技体制改革笔谈科学学研究2011.12(p：1762-1763)
3摘自富通集团网站2011http://www.futonggroup.com.cn/
1引自Forbs & Wield(沈瑶等译).从追随者到领先者.北京.高等教育出版社2005 p.167
1 Bill Russo等 无机式全球化Booz & Company研究报告2010 http://www.booz.com/cn
1评论员文章科技日报积极推动协同创新2011.9.1第一版
2吴敬琏“中国发展高层论坛2012年会”2012.3.17发言
[1]Achrol, R.S., & Kotler, P. Marketing in the network economy. The Journal of Marketing,1999,63 (Special Issue),146-163.
[2]Adler, P.S. & Kwon, S.W. Social capital:Prospects for a new concept. Academy of management review,2002,27 (1),17-40.
[3]Ahuja, G. & Katila, R. Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations. Strategic Management Journal,2004,25(8-9),887-907.
[4]Ahuja, G. Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation:A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly,2000,45(3),425-455.
[5]Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. The strategic impact of external networks:subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(11), 979-996.
[6]Atuahene-Gima, K. & Ko, A. An empirical investigation of the effect of market orientation and entrepreneurship orientation alignment on product innovation. Organization Science,2001,12(1),54-74.
[7]Atuahene-Gima, K. & Evangelista, F. Cross-functional influence in new product development:An exploratory study of marketing and R&D perspectives. Management Science,2000,46(10),1269-1284.
[8]Atuahene-Gima, K. The effects of centrifugal and centripetal forces on product development speed and quality:How does problem solving matter? The Academy of Management Journal,2003,46(3)359-373.
[9]Auh, S. & Menguc,B. Balancing exploration and exploitation:The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research,2005,58(12), 1652-1661.
[10]Auh, S. & Menguc, B. Top management team diversity and innovativeness:The moderating role of interfunctional coordination. Industrial Marketing Management,2005,34(3),249-261.
[11]Baker, W.E. & Sinkula, J.M. The synergistic effect of market orientation and learning orientation on organizational performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,1999,27(4),411-427.
[12]Bandalos, D.L. Is parceling really necessary? A comparison of results from item parceling and categorical variable methodology. Structural Equation Modeling, 2008,15(2),211-240.
[13]Baraldi, E., Gressetvold, E., & Harrison, D. Resource interaction in inter-organizational networks:foundations comparison and a research agenda. Journal of Business Research,2011,65 (2),266-276.
[14]Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,1991,17(1),99-120.
[15]Barney, J.B. Strategic factor markets:expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science,1986,1231-1241.
[16]Bendersky, C. Organizational dispute resolution systems:A complementarities model. The Academy of Management Review,2003,28(4),643-656.
[17]Benner, M.J., & Tushman, M. Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Administrative Science Quarterly,2002,47(4),676-707.
[18]Bolton, P., & Dewatripont, M. The firm as a communication network. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(4),809-839.
[19]Borgatti, S.P., & Foster, P.C. The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management,2003,29(6),991-1013.
[20]Borgatti, S.P., et al. Network analysis in the social sciences. Science,2009, 323(5916),892-895.
[21]Branzei, O. Product innovation in heterogeneous networks pathways to exploration and exploitation. Doctoral dissertation. University of British Columbia,2004.
[22]Brass, D.J., et al. Taking stock of networks and organizations:A multilevel perspective. The Academy of Management Journal,2004,47(8),795-817.
[23]Burt, R.S. & Ronchi, D. Measuring a large network quickly. Social Networks, 1994,16(2),91-135.
[24]Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T. & Zhao, Y. Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management,2002, 31(6),515-524.
[25]Capaldo, A. Network structure and innovation:The leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability. Strategic Management Journal,2007,28(6), 585-608.
[26]Cassiman, B. & Veugelers, R. In search of complementarity in innovation strategy:Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science,2006,52(1),68-82.
[27]Chesbrough, H.W., Open innovation:The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, Mass.:Harvard Business School Press. 2003
[28]Christensen, C.M., The Innovator's Dilemma:When New Technologies Cause Great Firms To Fail. Harvard Business Press.1997.
[29]Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A. Absorptive capacity:a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35(1), 128-152.
[30]Coleman, J.S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,1988,94(S),95-120.
[31]Collins, J.D. & Hitt, M.A. Leveraging tacit knowledge in alliances:The importance of using relational capabilities to build and leverage relational capital. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,2006,23(3), 147-167.
[32]Corbin, J.M. & Strauss, A. Grounded theory research:Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology,1990,13(1),3-21.
[33]Cortina, J.M., Chen, G. & Dunlap, W.P. Testing interaction effects in LISREL: Examination and illustration of available procedures. Organizational Research Methods,2001,4(4),324-360.
[34]Creti, A. Firms' organization and efficient communications networks. The Manchester School,2001,69(1),77-102.
[35]Crossland, P. Value creation in fine arts:A system dynamics model of inverse demand and information cascades. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(5), 417-434.
[36]Dangelico, R.M., Garavelli, A.C. & Petruzzelli, A.M. A system dynamics model to analyze technology districts' evolution in a knowledge-based perspective. Technovation,2010,30(2),142-153.
[37]Levinthal, D.A. & March, J. G. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal,1993,14(S2),95-112.
[38]Deeds, D.L. & Decarolis, D.M.The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance:An empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(10),953-968.
[39]Dhanaraj, C.&Parkhe, A. Orchestrating innovation networks. The Academy of Management Review,2006,31(3),659-669.
[40]Dierickx, I. & Cool, K. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science,1989,35(12),1504-1511.
[41]Dittrich, K. & Duysters, G. Networking as a means to strategy change:the case of open innovation in mobile telephony. Journal of Product Innovation Management,2007,24(6),510-521.
[42]Drucker, P. Entrepreneurship in business enterprise. Journal of Business Policy, 1970,1(1),3-12.
[43]Dutta, S., Narasimhan,O. & Rajiv, S. Conceptualizing and measuring capabilities:Methodology and empirical application. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26(3),277-285.
[44]Dyer, J. & Nobeoka, K. Creating and managing a high performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 2000,21(3),345-367
[45]Eisenhardt, K.M. & Schoonhoven, C.B. Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation:Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science,1996,7(2),136-150.
[46]Eisenhardt, K.M. & Galunic, D.C. Coevolving:At last, a way to make synergies work. Harvard Business Review,2000,78(1),91-101.
[47]Eisenhardt, K.M. & Graebner, M.E. Theory building from cases:Opportunities and challenges. The Academy of Management Journal,2007,50(1),25-32.
[48]Eisenhardt, K.M. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review,1989,14(4),532-550.
[49]Elmquist, M., Fredberg, T. & Ollila, S. Exploring the field of open innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management,2009,12(3),326-345.
[50]Ensign, P.C. Innovation in the multinational firm with globally dispersed R&D: Technological knowledge utilization and accumulation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research,1999,10(2),203-221.
[51]Flap, H., et al. Intra-organizational networks and performance:A review. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory,1998,4(2),109-147.
[52]Floricel, S. & Miller, R. An exploratory comparison of the management of innovation in the new and old economies. R&D Management,2003,33(5), 501-525.
[53]Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981,18(1),39-50.
[54]Freeman, C. Networks of innovators:a synthesis of research issues. Research Policy,1991,20(5),499-514.
[55]Garcia, R., Calantone, R. & Levine, R. The role of knowledge in resource allocation to exploration versus exploitation in technologically oriented organizations*. Decision Sciences,2003,34(2),323-349.
[56]Georgantzas, N.C. & Katsamakas, E. Disruptive innovation strategy effects on hard-disk maker population:A system dynamics study. Information Resources Management Journal,2007,20(2),90-107.
[57]George, G., Zahra, S.A. & Wood, D. R. The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance:a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. Journal of Business Venturing,2002,17(6), 577-609.
[58]Ghoshal, S. & Bartlett, C.A. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of management review,1990,603-625.
[59]Ghoshal, S., Korine, H. & Szulanski, G. Interunit communication in multinational corporations. Management Science,1994,96-110.
[60]Gittell, J.H. & Weiss, L. Coordination networks within and across organizations: A multi-level framework. Journal of Management Studies,2004,41(1), 127-153.
[61]Granovetter, M. Economic action and social structure:the problem of embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3),481-510.
[62]Greve, A. & Salaff, J.W. Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2003,28(1),1-22.
[63]Greve, H.R. Exploration and exploitation in product innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change,2007,16(5),945-975.
[64]Groβler, A. A dynamic view on strategic resources and capabilities applied to an example from the manufacturing strategy literature. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,2007,18(3),250-266.
[65]GroBler, A. An exploratory system dynamics model of strategic manufacturing capabilities. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,2010, 21(6),651-669
[66]Groβler, A. & Grubner, A. An empirical model of the relationships between manufacturing capabilities. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,2006,26(5),458-485.
[67]Groβler, A., Thun, J.H. & Milling, P.M. System dynamics as a structural theory in operations management. Production and Operations Management,2008, 17(3),373-384.
[68]Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal,2004.47, 209-226.
[69]Gulati, R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(4), 293-317.
[70]Gulati, R. Network location and learning:The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal,1999, 20(5),397-420.
[71]Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3),203-315.
[72]Gupta, A.K. & Govindarajan, V. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(4),473-496.
[73]Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G., & Shalley, C.E.The interplay between exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal,2006,49(4),693-706.
[74]Hagedoorn, J. & Duysters, G. Learning in dynamic inter-firm networks:the efficacy of multiple contacts. Organization Studies,2002,23(4),525-548.
[75]Hagedoorn, J., Roijakkers, N. & Kranenburg, H. Inter-Firm R&D Networks: the Importance of Strategic Network Capabilities for High-Tech Partnership Formationl. British Journal of Management,2006,17(1),39-53.
[76]Hansen, M.T., & Lovas. B. How do multinational companies leverage technological competencies? Moving from single to interdependent explanations. Strategic Management Journal,2004,25(8-9),801-822.
[77]Hansen, M.T. & Birkinshaw, J. The innovation value chain. Harvard Business Review,2007,85(6),121.
[78]Hansen, M.T. Knowledge networks:Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science,2002,13(3),232-248.
[79]Hansson, F., Husted, K. & Vestergaard, J. Second generation science parks:from structural holes jockeys to social capital catalysts of the knowledge society. Technovation,2005,25(9),1039-1049.
[80]Harrison, J.S., et al. Resource complementarity in business combinations: Extending the logic to organizational alliances. Journal of Management,2001, 27(6),679-690.
[81]Harrison, R., Lin,Z., Carroll, G. R., & Carley,K, M. Simulation Modeling in Organizational and Management Research. The Academy of Management Review,2007,32(4),1229-1245
[82]He, Z.L. & Wong, P.K. Exploration vs. exploitation:An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science,2004,15(4),481-494.
[83]Helfat, C.E. & Peteraf, M.A. The dynamic resource-based view:capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal,2003,24(10),997-1010.
[84]Hoang, H. & Antoncic, B. Network-based research in entrepreneurship:A critical review. Journal of Business Venturing,2003,18(2),165-187.
[85]Hoang, H. & Rothaermel, F.T. Leveraging internal and external experience: exploration, exploitation, and R&D project performance. Strategic Management Journal,2010,31(7),734-758.
[86]Hoyle, R. H., and Panter, A. T. "Writing About Structural Equation Models," in Structural Equation Modeling, Concepts, Issues, and Applications, R. H. Hoyle (ed.), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA,1995, pp.158-176.
[87]Hubner, S. Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review,1995, 75(5),148.
[88]Huygens, M., et al. Co-evolution of firm capabilities and industry competition: Investigating the music Industry. Organization Studies,2001,22(6),971-1011.
[89]Ibarra, H., Kilduff, M. & Tsai, W. Zooming in and out:Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science,2005,16(4),359-371.
[90]Inkpen, A.C. & Tsang, E.W.K. Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. The Academy of Management Review,2005,30(1),146-165.
[91]Ireland, R., Hitt, M. & Vaidyanath, D. Managing strategic alliances to achieve a competitive advantage. Journal of management,2002,28(3),413-441.
[92]Jahangirian, M., et al. Simulation in manufacturing and business:A review. European Journal of Operational Research,2010,203(1),1-13.
[93]Jansen, J.J.P., Van Den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance:Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science,2006,52(11),1661-1674.
[94]Jaworski, B.J.&Kohli, A.K. Market orientation:antecedents and consequences. The Journal of Marketing,1993,57(7),53-70.
[95]Dyer, J. H. & Hatch, N, W. Relation-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers:creating advantage through network relationships Strategic Management Journal,2006,27(8):701-719.
[96]Johnston, W.J., Leach, M.P. & Liu. A.H. Theory testing using case studies in business-to-business research. Industrial Marketing Management,1999,28(3), 201-213.
[97]Juga, J. Organizing for network synergy in logistics:A case study. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,1996,26(2),51-67.
[98]Kahn, K.B. Interdepartmental integration:a definition with implications for product development performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 1996,13(2),137-151.
[99]Kash, D.E. & Rycroft, R. Emerging patterns of complex technological innovation. Technological forecasting and social change,2002,69(6),581-606.
[100]Katila, R. & Ahuja, G. Something old, something new:A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal,2002,45(8),1183-1194.
[101]Kelley, M.R. & Brooks, H. External learning opportunities and the diffusion of process innovations to small firms:The case of programmable automation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,1991,39(1-2),103-125.
[102]Khoja, F. & Maranville, S. The power of intrafirm networks. Academy of Strategic Management Journal,2009,8,51-70.
[103]Khoja, F. The triad:organizational cultural values, practices and strong social intra-firm networks. Journal of Business Strategies,2010,27(2),205-228
[104]Koka, B.R. & Prescott, J.E.Strategic alliances as social capital:A multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(9),795-816.
[105]Kor, Y.Y. & Mahoney, J.T. Penrose's Resource-Based Approach:The Process and Product of Research Creativity. Journal of Management Studies,2000, 37(1),109-139.
[106]Koza, M.P. & Lewin, A.Y. The co-evolution of strategic alliances. Organization Science,1998,9(3),255-264.
[107]Kramer, M.R. Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review,2011,89(2), 62-77.
[108]Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.1998.
[109]Kreiner, K. & Schultz, M. Informal collaboration in R & D. The formation of networks across organizations. Organization Studies,1993,14(2),189-209.
[110]Larsen, E. & Lomi, A. Representing change:a system model of organizational inertia and capabilities as dynamic accumulation processes. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory,2002,10(5),271-296.
[111]Laursen, K. & Salter, A. Open for innovation:the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal,2006,27(2),131-150.
[112]Lavie, D. & Rosenkopf, L. Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. The Academy of Management Journal,2006,49(4),797-818.
[113]Lavie, D. The evolution and strategy of interconnected firms:A study of the Unisys alliance network.2004.
[114]Leonard-Barton, D. Core capabilities and core rigidities:A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal,1992, 13(S1),111-125.
[115]Li, Y., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Schoenmakers, W. Exploration and exploitation in innovation:reframing the interpretation. Creativity and innovation management,2008,17(2),107-126.
[116]Lichtenthaler, U. Absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and the complementarity of organizational learning processes. The Academy of Management Journal ARCHIVE,2009,52(4),822-846.
[117]Lichtenthaler, U. & Lichtenthaler, E. A Capability-Based Framework for Open Innovation:Complementing Absorptive Capacity. Journal of Management Studies,2009,46(8),1315-1338.
[118]Lin, N. Social resources and social mobility: A structural theory of status attainment. Social mobility and social structure,1990,247-271.
[119]Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of applied psychology,2001,86(1), 114-121
[120]Lorenzoni, G. & Lipparini, A. The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability:A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(4),317-338.
[121]Lori Rosenkopfl, Atul Nerka Beyond local search:boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry Strategic Management Journal Volume 22, Issue 4, pages 287-306, April 2001
[122]March, J.G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science,1991,2(1),71-87.
[123]Marsden, P.V. Network data and measurement. Annual review of sociology, 1990,16,435-463.
[124]Marsh, H.W. & Hocevar, D. Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept:First-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin,1985,97(3),562-582.
[125]Marx, K., Lechner, C., & Floyd, S., Intrafirm networks and the performance of strategic initiatives. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper 2006, ssl-ss6.
[126]McEvily, B. & Marcus, A. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26(11),1033-1055.
[127]McFadyen, M.A. & Cannella Jr, A.A. Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange. The Academy of Management Journal,2004,47(5),735-746.
[128]Meeus, M.T.H., & Faber, J. Interorganizational relations and innovation:a review and a theoretical extension Hage, J.&Meeus, M.T.H. (Eds.), Innovation, Science, and Institutional Change, Oxford University Press, Oxford,2006,67-87.
[129]Menon, A., Jaworski, B.J. & Kohl, A.K. Product quality:Impact of interdepartmental interactions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1997,25(3),187-200.
[130]Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing. Journal of accounting and economics, 1995,19(2),179-208.
[131]Mitchell, W., & Singh, K. Survival of businesses using collaborative relationships to commercialize complex goods. Strategic Management Journal, 1996,17(3),169-195.
[132]Morgan, R.M. & Hunt, S.D. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. The Journal of Marketing,1994,20-38.
[133]Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(2), 242-266.
[134]O'connor, G.C. & Rice, M.P. Opportunity recognition and breakthrough innovation in large established firms. California Management Review,2001, 43(2),95-116.
[135]Oerlemans, L.A.G., Meeus, M.T.H., & Boekema, F.W.M. Do networks matter for innovation? The usefulness of the economic network approach in analysing innovation. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie,1998,89(3), 298-309.
[136]Ozman, M. Inter-firm networks and innovation:a survey of literature. Economic of Innovation and New Technology,2009,18(1),39-67.
[137]Papa, M.J. Communication network patterns and employee performance with new technology. Communication Research,1990,17(3),344-368.
[138]Parkhe, A., S. Wasserman, and D.A. Ralston. New frontiers in network theory development. The Academy of Management Review,2006,31(3),560-568.
[139]Paruchuri, S. Intraorganizational networks, interorganizational networks, and the impact of central inventors:A longitudinal study of pharmaceutical firms. Organization Science,2010,21(1),63-77.
[140]Pavlou, P.A. & E1 Sawy, O.A. Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities. Decision Sciences,2011,42(1),239-273.
[141]Pertusa-Ortega, E.M., Molina-Azbrin, J.F. & Claver-Cortes, E. Competitive strategy, structure and firm performance:A comparison of the resource-based view and the contingency approach. Management Decision,2010,48(8), 1282-1303.
[142]Smart, P., Bessant J., & Gupta, A. Towards technological rules for designing innovation networks:a dynamic capabilities view. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 2007,27 (10),1069-1092.
[143]Pittaway, L., et al. Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews,2004,5(3-4), 137-168.
[144]Plummer, B. A. To parcel or not to parcel:The effects of item parceling in confirmatory factor analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rhode Island.2000.
[145]Podolny, J.M. A status-based model of market competition. American journal of sociology,1993,98(4),829-872.
[146]Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology,2003,88(5),879-903
[147]Podsakoff, P., & Organ, D. Self-reports in organizational research:Problems and prospects. Journal of Management,1986,12(4),531-544.
[148]Porter, M.E. & Kramer, M.R. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review,2006,84(12),78-92.
[149]Powell, W.W., et al. Network position and firm performance:Organizational returns to collaboration in the biotechnology industry. Research in the Sociology of Organizations,1999,16(1),129-159.
[150]Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., & Smith-Doerr, L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation:Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly,1996,41(1),116-145.
[151]Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review,1990,68(3),79-91.
[152]Raisch, S., et al. Organizational ambidexterity:Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science,2009,20(4), 685-695.
[153]Reagans, R. & McEvily, B.Network structure and knowledge transfer:The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly,2003,48(2), 240-267.
[154]Reagans, R. and E.W. Zuckerman. Networks, diversity, and productivity:The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science,2001,12(4), 502-517.
[155]Rindfleisch, A. & Moorman, C. The acquisition and utilization of information in new product alliances:A strength-of-ties perspective. The Journal of Marketing,2001,65(4),1-18.
[156]Ritter, T. & Gemunden, H.G. Network competence:Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research,2003,56(9), 745-755.
[157]Ritter, T. The networking company:antecedents for coping with relationships and networks effectively. Industrial Marketing Management,1999,28(5), 467-479.
[158]Ritter, T., I.F. Wilkinson, & Johnston, W.J. Measuring network competence: some international evidence. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,2002, 17(2/3),119-138.
[159]Rose-Anderssen, C., et al. Innovation in manufacturing as an evolutionary complex system. Technovation,2005,25(10),1093-1105.
[160]Rosenberg, Nathan. Inside the Black Box:Technology and Economics. New York:Cambridge University Press 1982.245-255.
[161]Rothaermel, F.T. & Deeds, D.L. Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology:A system of new product development. Strategic Management Journal,2004,25(3),201-221.
[162]Rothwell, R. Towards the fifth-generation innovation process. International Marketing Review,1994,11(1),7-31.
[163]Rowley, T., Behrens, D. & Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures:An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3),369-386.
[164]Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3),369-386.
[165]Rudolph, J.W., Morrison, J.B., & Carroll, J.S. The dynamics of action-oriented problem solving:linking interpretation and choice. The Academy of Management Review,2009,34(4),733-756.
[166]Schildt, H.A., Maula, M.V.J., & Keil, T. Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2005, 29(4),493-515.
[167]Serrano, V. & Fischer, T. Collaborative innovation in ubiquitous systems. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing,2007,18(5),599-615.
[168]Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods,2010,13(3),456-476.
[169]Siemsen, E., A. Roth, et al., "Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects." Organizational Research Methods 2010,13(3),456-476.
[170]Skerlavaj, M., & Dimovski, V. Social network approach to organizational learning. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR),2011,22(2).
[171]Smart, P., Bessant, J., & Gupta, A. Towards technological rules for designing innovation networks:a dynamic capabilities view. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,2007,27(10),1069-1092.
[172]Subramaniam, M. & Youndt, M.A. The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. The Academy of Management Journal,2005, 48(3),450-463.
[173]Swan, J., et al. Knowledge management and innovation:networks and networking. Journal of Knowledge Management,1999,3(4),262-275.
[174]Tamayo Torres, J., et al. Exploitation versus exploration:the influence of manufacturing flexibility and the environment. International Journal of Business Environment,2011,4(1),92-105.
[175]Tanriverdi, H. & Venkatraman, N. Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26(2),97-119.
[176]Tanriverdi, H. Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms. MIS Quarterly,2006,57-77.
[177]Teece, D.J.Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7),509-533.
[178]Teece, D.J. Explicating dynamic capabilities:the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance Strategic Management Journal, 2007,28(13),1319-1350.
[179]Tempelaar, M., Jansen, J. J. P. & van den Bosch, F. A. J. Knowingyour clients: The joint effect of client and internal social capital on organizational ambidexterity. Strategic Management Society Annual Conference, Cologne, Germany.2008.
[180]Thorelli, H.B. Networks:between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal,1986,7(1),37-51.
[181]Tippins, M.J. & Sohi, R.S. IT competency and firm performance:is organizational learning a missing link? Strategic Management Journal,2003, 24(8),745-761.
[182]Tiwana, A., Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity. Strategic Management Journal,2008,29(3),251-272.
[183]Tripsas, M. Unraveling the process of creative destruction:Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(s 1),119-142.
[184]Tsai, W. & Ghoshal, S. Social capital and value creation:The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal,1998,41(4),464-476.
[185]Tsai, W. Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks:effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44(5),996-1004.
[186]Tsai, W. Social structure of "coopetition" within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science,2002,179-190.
[187]Tushman, M. & O'Reilly, I. Ambidextrous organizations:Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review,1996, 38(4),8-29.
[188]Uzzi, B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks:The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42(1),35-67.
[189]Uzzi, B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations:the network effect. American Sociological Review,1996,61(4),674-698.
[190]Van de Ven, A.H., Delbecq, A.L., & Koenig Jr, R. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review,1976,41(4), 322-338.
[191]Van der Panne, G. Agglomeration externalities:Marshall versus Jacobs. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,2004,14(5),593-604.
[192]Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J.J.P., & Lyles, M.A. Inter-and Intra-Organizational Knowledge Transfer:A Meta-Analytic Review and Assessment of its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Management Studies,2008,45(4), 830-853.
[193]Venkatraman, N. The concept of fit in strategy research:Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review,1989,14(3), 423-444.
[194]Volberda, H.W. & Lewin, A.Y. Co-evolutionary Dynamics Within and Between Firms:From Evolution to Co-evolution. Journal of Management Studies,2003, 40(8),2111-2136.
[195]Volberda, H.W. Building flexible organizations for fast-moving markets. Long Range Planning,1997,30(2),169-183.
[196]Von Hippel, E. Sticky information" and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science,1994,40(4),429-439.
[197]Walker, G., Kogut, B., & Shan, W. Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science,1997,8(2),109-125.
[198]Walter, J., Lechner, C., & Kellermanns, F.W. Knowledge transfer between and within alliance partners:Private versus collective benefits of social capital. Journal of Business Research,2007,60(7),698-710.
[199]Wernerfelt, B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal,1984,5(2),171-180.
[200]Williamson,O.,E.-Transaction-Cost Economics The governance of contractual relations Journal of Law and Economics,1979.22(2):233-261.
[201]Woerter, M. Industry diversity and its impact on the innovation performance of firms. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,2009,19(5),675-700.
[202]Wu, D.D., et, al. Modeling technological innovation risks of an entrepreneurial team using system dynamics:An agent-based perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2010,77(6),857-869.
[203]Yalcinkaya, G., Calantone, R.J., & Griffith, D.A. An examination of exploration and exploitation capabilities:Implications for product innovation and market performance. Journal of International Marketing,2007,15(4),63-93.
[204]Zaheer, A. & McEvily, B. Bridging ties:A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(12), 1133-1256.
[205]Zahra, S.A. & George, G. Absorptive capacity:A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(2),185-203.
[206]Markard, J., & Truffer, B.Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective:Towards an integrated framework. Research Policy.2008,37(4), 596-615.
[207]Goold, M. & Campbell,A. Desperately seeking synergy. Harvard business review 1998.76(5),131-143
[208]Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. Overcoming Local Search through Alliances and Mobility. Management Science,2003, (49),6,751-766
[209]Teece, D.J. Profiting from technological innovation:Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy.Research Policy.1986.15(6), 285-305
[210]Moore, J.F. The Death of Competition:Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems New York:Harper Business,1996.
[211]Jansen, J.J.P. Ambidextrous Organizations:A Multiple-Level Study of 'Absorptive Capacity, Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation and Performance Doctoral dissertation Erasmus University Rotterdam,2005.
[212]Coles, A., Harris, L. & Dickson, K. Testing goodwill:conflict and cooperation in new product development networks. International Journal of Technology Management,2003(25),51-64.
[213]Droge, C., Calantone, R.J. & Harmancioglu, N. New product success:is it really controllable by managers in highly turbulent environments? Journal of Product Innovation Management,2008.25 (3),272-86.
[214]Castaner, J. Diversification as learning:The Role of Corporate Exploitation and Exploration under Different Environment Conditions in the US Phone Industry Doctoral Dissertation University of Minnesota 2002.
[215]Burt, R.S. Network items and the general social survey, Social Networks,1984, 6:293-339.
[216]Ireland, R.D., Hitt, M.A., & Vaidyanath, D. Managing Strategic alliances to achieve a competitive advantage. Journal of Management,2002.28(3),413-446.
[217]Dyer,J. H.&Singh, H. The Relational View:Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review,1998,23(4):660-679
[218]Granovetter,M. The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 1973(78),1360-1380
[219]Tsai, W. Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21, 925-939.
[220]Garcia, R., Calantone,R., & Levine,R.,The Role of Knowledge in Resource Allocation to Exploration versus Exploitation in Technologically Oriented Organizations. Decision Sciences.2003,34(2),323-349.
[221]White, J.C., Conant, J.S. and Echambadi, R. Marketing strategy development styles, implementation capability, and firm performance:investigating the curvilinear impact of multiple strategy-making styles, Marketing Letters,2003, (14)2,111-124.
[222]Lukas, B.A., Tan, J.J. and Hult, G.T.M. Strategic fit in transitional economies: the case of China's electronics industry, Journal of Management,2001,27(4), 409-429.
[223]Powell, T.C. and Dent-Micallef, A., Information technology as competitive advantage:the role of human, business, and technology resources, Strategic Management Journal,1997,18 (5),375-405.
[224]Lee, J. and Miller, D. Strategy, environment and performance in two technologicalcontexts:contingency theory in Korea, Organization Studies, 1996,17(5)729-750.
[225]Itami, H. Mobilizing Invisible Assets, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1987
[226]Moliterno, T.P. & Mahony, D.M. Network Theory of Organization:A Multilevel Approach. Journal of Management.2011.37 (2),443-467
[227]Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall.2006.
[228]Whittington, R., Pettigrew, A., Peck, S., Fenton, E., & Conyon, M. Change and complementarities in the new competitive landscape:A European panel study, 1992-1996. Organization Science,1999,10,583-600.
[229]Rindskopf, D., & Rose, T. Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research,1988,23, 51-67.
[230]Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London:Erlbaum. 2003.
[231]Lee, T.L. & vonTunzelmann, N. A dynamic analytic approach to national innovation systems:The IC industry in Taiwan. Research Policy,2005 (34) 425-440
[232]Adamides, E.D., & Voutsina, M. The double-helix model of manufacturing and marketing strategies. International Journal of Production Economics,2006(104), 3-18.
[233]Voss, G.B., Sirdeshmukh,D., & Voss,Z.G.The Effects of Slack Resources and Environmental Threat on Product Exploration and Exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal.2008,51(1),147-164
[234]Aldrieh, H., Rosen, B., & Woodward, W. The impactof social networks on business foundings and profit:a longitudinal study. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research,1987,11(7),154-168.
[235]Roberts, E. & Hauptman, O. The process of technology transfer to the new biomedical and pharmaceutical firm. Research Policy,1986,15(3),107-119
[236]Jarillo, J.C. On strategic networks Strategic management Journal,1988,9(1), 31-41.
[237]Brown, J. S., & Hagel Ⅲ. J.,创新网络：从开放式创新中获得最大收益.麦肯锡季刊,2006.4
[238]Edquist, C(柳卸林等译)Systems of innovation:perspectives and challenges.牛津创新手册,北京：知识产权出版社2009,181-202.
[239]Forbs, N., & Wield.D., 从追随者到领先者:管理新兴工业化经济的技术与创新.北京：高等教育出版社,2005,11-20
[240]Fowler,F.J(孙振东等译)Survey Research Methods重庆：重庆大学出版社,2004
[241]Owen, L., Goldwasser,C., Choate,K., & Blitz,A协作的力量,在扩展企业网络中实现协作创新.IBM商业价值研究院研究报告,2007
[242]Porter,K.M.,竞争优势(陈小悦译).北京：华夏出版社2005 p.307-366
[243]Yin. K.R.,案例研究：设计与方法(中文第2版).重庆：重庆大学出版社,2010
[244]Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K(王跃红,李伟力译)管理创新(第三版).北京：清华大学出版社2008.
[245]Senge,P. M张成林(译)第五项修炼学习型组织的艺术与实践(修订版)北京：中信出版社2009
[246]Sterman J.D.,商务动态分析方法基于复杂世界的系统思考与建模(朱岩,钟永光译).北京：清华大学出版社2008
[247]Yin,R.K(周海涛译)案例研究方法的应用.重庆：重庆大学出版社2004
[248]Kilduff, M., & Tsai,W.王凤彬等(译)社会网络与组织.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,33-63.
[249]毕克新,孙德花,李柏洲.基于系统动力学的制造业企业产品创新与工艺创新互动关系仿真研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2008.12：75-80
[250]边燕杰.城市居民社会资本的来源及作用：网络观点与调查发现.中国社会科学,2004(3)：136-146
[251]卞冉,车宏生,阳辉.项目组合在结构方程模型中的应用.心理科学进展2007.15(3)：567—576.
[252]蔡宁,潘松挺.网络关系强度与企业技术创新模式的耦合性及其协同演化,以海正药业技术创新网络为例.中国工业经济,2008(4),137-144
[253]陈劲,阳银娟.协同创新的理论基础与内涵.科学学研究,2012,30(2)：161-164.
[254]陈光.企业内部协同创新研究.博士学位论文,西南交通大学,2005
[255]陈劲,王方瑞.突破全面创新：技术和市场协同创新管理研究.科学学研究2005.23(增刊)：250-254.
[256]陈劲.技术创新的系统观与系统框架.管理科学学报,1999.2(3)：66-73
[257]陈学光.企业网络能力：网络能力、创新网络及创新绩效关系研究.北京：经济管理出版社,2008.
[258]陈钰芬,陈劲.开放式创新：机理与模式.北京：科学出版社2008.
[259]池仁勇.中小企业创新网络的理论与实践,2009,183-201.
[260]大卫·史密斯,克雷格·米哲姆.如何抓住创新的本质.哈佛商业评论网.http://www.ebusinessreview.cn/articleList-39-22.html 2009-02-20
[261]樊景立,梁建,陈志俊.理论构念的测量.(陈晓萍、徐淑英、樊景立.组织与管理研究的实证方法.北京：北京大学出版社,2008.p229-254.
[262]方刚.基于资源观的企业网络能力与创新绩效关系研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2008.
[263]冯婷婷.基于系统动力学的国家创新体系运行机理研究.硕士学位论文,大连理工大学,2009.
[264]傅家骥 雷家骕 程源.技术经济学前沿问题.北京：经济科学出版社,2003p-97-123.
[265]傅家骥 仝允桓 高建 雷家骕.技术创新学,北京：清华大学出版社2005
[266]顾伟.范围经济视角下的企业内部组织网络化研究.硕士学位论文,南京理工大学,2007.
[267]顾幸之,甘绮翠,Harreld,C.,通过全球化整合实现转型,中国公司真正成为全球企业.IBM商业价值研究院研究报告,2008.
[268]郭斌.基于核心能力的企业组合创新理论与实证研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,1998.
[269]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用.北京：教育科学出版社2004.
[270]贾根良.转变对外经济发展方式的实质及政策建议.社会科学辑刊,2012(1)：120-123.
[271]江辉,陈劲.集成创新：一类新的创新模式.科研管理,2000.21(5)：31-39.
[272]蒋春燕.中国新兴企业自主创新陷阱突破路径分析.管理科学学报,2011.14(4)：36-49.
[273]解学梅.中小企业协同创新网络与创新绩效的实证研究.管理科学学报,2010.13(8)：51-63.
[274]孔继红,茅宁.吸收能力与组织探索性：开发性创新的形成及惯性.南京师大学报(社会科学版).2007(5),63-67.
[275]李怀祖.管理研究方法论.西安：西安交通大学出版社,2004.
[276]李剑力.探索性创新,开发性创新及其平衡研究前沿探析.外国经济与管理,2009.31(3)：23-29.
[277]李剑力.探索性创新、开发性创新与企业绩效关系研究.北京：经济管理出版社2010,29-75.
[278]李培林,梁栋.网络化：企业组织变化的趋势——北京中关村200家高新技术企业的调查.社会学研究,2003(2)：43--53.
[279]李平.应积极推动协同创新.黑龙江日报,2012.3.12.第12版.
[280]李维安等.网络组织：组织发展新趋势.北京：经济科学出版社,2003
[281]李文博,郑文哲,刘爽.产业集群中知识网络结构的测量研究.科学学研究,2008.26(4),787-792.
[282]李志刚.基于网络结构的产业集群创新机制和创新绩效研究博士学位论文.中国科学技术大学,2007.
[283]李兴华.协同创新是提高自主创新能力和效率的最佳形式和途径.科技日报,2011.9.22.
[284]梁建,樊景立.理论构念的测量.(陈晓萍、徐淑英、樊景立.组织与管理研究的实证方法).北京：北京大学出版社,2008,229-254.
[285]林聚任.社会网络分析：理论、方法与应用.北京：北京师范大学出版社2009.
[286]刘刚.企业的异质性假设：企业本质和行为的演化经济学解释北京：中国人民大学出版社2005,248-255.
[287]刘景江.网络环境下制造企业组织创新的机理与模式研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2004.
[288]刘炬.企业技术创新网络形成机理研究：基于瑞士与中国的跨国案例比较.博士学位论文,电子科技大学,2010.
[289]刘兰剑,司春林.创新网络17年研究文献述评.研究与发展管理,2009,21(4)：68-77.
[290]刘璐.企业外部网络对企业绩效影响研究：基于吸收能力视角.博士学位论文山东大学2009.
[291]刘仁军,交易成本、社会资本与企业网络——关系契约理论及应用.博士学位论文.华中科技大学,2004.
[292]卢福财,胡平波.网络租金及其形成机理分析.中国工业经济,2006(6)：84-90.
[293]路甬祥.对国家创新体系的再思考.求是,2002(20)：6-8.
[294]罗珉,王睢.组织间关系的拓展与演进：基于组织间知识互动的研究.中国工业经济,2008(1)：40-49.
[295]罗珉.企业内部市场：理论、要素与变革趋势.中国工业经济,2004(10)：59-68.
[296]马庆国.管理统计.北京：科学出版社,2002
[297]彭继生,吴林海.论技术创新协同模式构建.研究与发展管理,2000.12(5)：12-16.
[298]彭新敏.企业网络对技术创新绩效的作用机制研究,利用性和探索性学习中介效应.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2009.
[299]彭正银.网络治理、四重维度与扩展的交易成本理论,经济管理·新管理2003(18)：4-12.
[300]彭正银等.基于任务复杂性的企业网络组织协同行为研究.北京：经济科学出版社,2011,22-34.
[301]邱昭良.网络组织学习机制研究.博士学位论文,南开大学,2006
[302]曲然,张少杰.区域创新系统建设与运行系统动力学研究.工业技术经济,2008.27(8)：94-97.
[303]屈维意,周海炜,姜骞.组织间关系维度分析及其实证研究.情报杂志,2011 (8)：169-174.
[304]全利平,蒋晓阳.协同创新网络组织实现创新协同的路径选择.科技进步与对策,2011,28(9),15-18.
[305]任胜钢,宋迎春,王龙伟.基于企业内外部网络视角的创新绩效多因素影响模型与实证研究.中国工业经济,2010(4),100-109.
[306]石林芬,胡翠平.原创技术的基本特征与研发要素.管理学报,2004,1(2),224-227.
[307]石芝玲.基于技术能力和网络能力协同的企业开放式创新研究.博士学位论文,天津大学,2010.
[308]水常青.基于市场导向的全面创新机制及绩效实证研究.博士学位论文.浙江大学,2009.
[309]宋迎春.基于企业内外部网络视角的创新绩效多因素影响模型与实证研究硕士学位论文,中南大学,2010.
[310]苏屹,柏洲.大型企业原始创新支持体系的系统动力学研究科学学研究,2010.28(1),141-150.
[311]孙国强.关系互动与协同网络组织的治理逻辑.中国工业经济,2003(11),14-20.
[312]孙国强.网络组织的内涵特征与构成要素.南开管理评论,2001(4),38-40.
[313]孙贤伟,崔新坤.知识经济下企业组织内部网络化.大连海事大学学报(社会科学版),2008,7(6),84-87.
[314]孙元欣,于茂荐.关系契约理论研究述评.学术交流,2010(8)：117-123.
[315]陶在朴.系统动态学：直击第五项修炼奥秘.北京：中国税务出版社2005p37-58.
[316]屠骏.认清出口制造业转型升级新路径.上海证券报,2011-10-24.
[317]万幼清,邓明然.基于知识视角的产业集群协同创新绩效分析.科学学与科学技术管理,2007(4)：88-91.
[318]王端旭,国维潇,刘晓莉.团队内部社会网络特征影响团队创造力过程的实证研究.软科学,2009.23(9)25-28.
[319]王核成.基于动态能力观的企业争力及其演化研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2005.
[320]王核成.我国制造企业能力体系演化及竞争优势再造研究.博士后论文上海交通大学,2008.
[321]王其蕃.系统动力学(修订版).上海：上海财经大学出版社2009.
[322]王天夫.社会研究中的因果分析.社会学研究,2006(4)：132-156.
[323]王为东.面向集群创新的企业网络作用及其演化机制研究.博士学位论文 东南大学,2010.
[324]王毅.企业核心能力与技术创新战略.北京：中国金融出版社,2004.
[325]危钰.基于现代企业能力理论视角的能力评价体系建立.经济论坛,2008(6),85-88.
[326]魏江.企业技术能力论：技术创新的一个新视角.北京：科学出版社2002.
[327]邬爱其.集群企业网络化成长机制：理论分析与浙江经验.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007.
[328]吴波.基于匹配视角的集群企业网络化成长机制研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2007.
[329]吴传荣,曾德明,陈英武.高技术企业技术创新网络的系统动力学建模与仿真.系统工程理论与实践,2010,30(4),587-593.
[330]吴贵生,王毅.技术创新管理(第二版).北京：清华大学出版社2009.
[331]吴昊,杨梅英,陈良猷.超竞争环境下企业的纵向效率边界分析.北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版),2003,16(2)：32-36.
[332]吴明隆.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用.重庆：重庆大学出版社2010.
[333]吴金明,彭礼红等.自主创新：21世纪中国企业战略选择.北京：中国经济出版社2011
[334]吴晓波,刘雪锋.全球制造网络及其对发展中国家的意义.西安电子科技大学学报社会科学版,2006,16(2),1-6.
[335]吴晓波,倪义芳.二次创新与我国制造业全球化竞争战略.科研管理,2001.22(3)：43-52.
[336]吴晓燕.开放式创新：从公司外部寻找创意.中国经营报-中国经营网http://www.cb.com.cn/1634427/2000112/88846.html
[337]谢恩.内部资源能力及外部网络对企业竞争优势的整合分析.企业活力,2004(6)：51-52.
[338]谢芳.企业集团内部协同创新机理研究.硕士学位论文,浙江大学,2006.
[339]谢洪明,区毅勇,王成,罗惠玲.市场导向、组织创新与组织绩效的关系：珠三角地区企业的实证研究.科技进步与对策,2008.25(3)：101-104.
[340]谢祖墀.中国制造业酝酿新格局.博斯公司研究报告Booz & Company Inc2009.
[341]许冠南.关系嵌入性对技术创新绩效的影响研究：基于探索型学习的中介机制.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2008.
[342]许庆瑞,陈重.企业经营管理基本规律与模式.杭州：浙江大学出版社2001,106-109.
[343]许庆瑞.全面创新管理：理论与实践.北京：科学出版社2007.
[344]许庆瑞.走中国特色自主创新道路,光明日报2011.04-06.
[345]杨文斌.基于系统动力学的企业成长研究.博士学位论文.复旦大学,2006.
[346]游达明,孙洁.企业开放式集成创新能力的评价方法.统计与决策,2008(22)：179-181.
[347]韵江,刘立,高杰.企业集团的价值创造与协同效应的实现机制.财经问题研究,2006(4)：79-86.
[348]曾楠,高山行,崔宁宁.企业内部资源、能力与外部网络对绩效的交互效应研究.技术与创新管理,2011.32(3)：230-236.
[349]张钢等.企业组织网络化发展.杭州：浙江大学出版社2005.
[350]张浩.企业战略协同机制的优化：基于混沌理论与协同学的视角.北京：经济科学出版社,2010,86-87.
[351]张永安,李晨光.创新网络结构对创新资源利用率的影响研究.科学学与科学技术管理2010(01),81-89.
[352]张玉臣.构建协同创新的管理体制.科技日报,2011.10.17第1版.
[353]赵黎明,李振华.城市创新系统的动力学机制研究.科学学研究,2003.21(1),97-100.
[354]赵黎明,李振华.城市创新系统的动力学机制研究.科学学研究,2003.21(1)：97-100.
[355]赵晓庆.企业技术学习的模式与技术能力积累途径的螺旋运动过程.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2001.
[356]赵玉林,李文超.基于系统动力学的产业结构演变规律仿真模拟实验研究,系统科学学报,2008,16(4),51-58.
[357]郑刚.基于TIM视角的企业技术创新过程中各要素全面协同机制研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2004.
[358]钟永光,伯大辉,封红雨,孔丽娟.海信集团技术创新能力的系统动力学仿真研究.上海管理科学,2010.32(2)：92-96.
[359]朱朝晖,陈劲.开放创新的技术学习模式.北京：科学出版社,2008,145-155.
[360]邹志勇.企业集团协同能力研究.博士学位论文.大连理工大学,2008.