开放式创新模式研究
|
摘要
随着信息化和知识经济的发展,一种新的技术创新模式——开放式创新开始出现。与封闭式创新模式相比,开放式创新模式是一种全新的知识创造方式,它能够最大程度的利用分散于组织内部和外部的异质性知识,实现组织内、外部知识的充分交流,从而推动组织内和组织间知识创造。从现有研究来看,对开放式创新的研究大多集中于企业或产业层面,并未对创新的本质——知识创造进行深入的研究,而认知经济学、企业知识理论、知识治理等理论的兴起为从知识视角研究技术创新提供了新的理论工具和方法,因此,从知识的视角对开放式创新进行深入研究,具有较强的理论意义与现实指导意义。
本文从知识的视角对开放式创新的内涵进行了重新界定,深入研究了开放式创新模式下知识创造的内涵、模式,探讨了开放式创新模式下知识创造的治理问题,构建了支撑开放式创新的组织基础,在此基础上通过开放式创新实践的国际比较提出了促进开放式创新在我国发展的对策和建议。
论文的主要研究内容包括七章:第一章是导论,主要介绍了选题背景和意义、开放式创新的研究现状、研究层次与本论文的研究视角、论文的研究方法、主要研究内容、论文的创新与不足之处。第二章是技术创新理论研究综述。主要对熊彼特的创新理论、技术创新的概念与分类以及认知经济学视角下的技术创新研究进行了分析。第三章是知识、学习与开放式创新。本章主要分析了知识的本质、特性与分类,认知、个人学习与组织学习,并在此基础上对开放式创新内涵与特征进行了分析。第四章是开放式创新模式下的知识创造。本章在对现有知识创造模型系统梳理的基础上,研究了开放式创新模式下知识创造的内涵、过程与模式等问题。第五章是开放式创新模式下的知识治理。本章将开放式创新模式下的知识治理界定为对知识创造的治理,并在此基础上构建了开放式创新模式下的组织内知识治理机制体系和组织间知识治理机制体系,同时构建了推动知识治理的作用机制。第六章是开放式创新模式的组织基础构建。本章分析的重点是开放式创新模式的组织基础及其所具备的能力体系。论文在分析知识特性与组织结构关系的基础上,构建了支撑开放式创新的组织基础,并分析了它应具备的包括学习能力、吸收能力和整合能力在内的均衡能力体系。第七章是开放式创新的实践及对我国的启示。论文以3M、IBM、P&G公司为例分析了开放式创新的国际实践,以联想、海尔、春兰为例分析了开放式创新在我国的实践。在此基础上分析了阻碍开放式创新在我国实施的因素,并从微观和宏观两方面提出了相应的对策。
本文的创新点主要包括:1、论文对开放式创新的内涵进行了重新界定,认为开放式创新是一种综合利用组织内部知识和外部知识,通过个人学习、组织学习以及组织间动态学习实现二者有效融合和创新的知识创造方式。该界定强调了开放性认知模式在知识创造中的重要性,指出借助该认知模式可以降低创新活动的认知成本,使组织内外知识的协同效应得以发挥。2、论文深入分析了开放式创新模式下的知识创造模式。论文认为开放式创新模式下的知识创造有两种形式,一是组织内知识创造,二是组织间知识创造,相应地,将开放式创新模式下的知识创造模式区分为组织内知识创造模式与组织间知识创造模式,这两种知识创造模式相互依赖,相互促进,共同推动知识创造和技术创新。3、论文对开放式创新模式下的知识治理进行了深入分析,认为知识治理是对知识创造行为进行激励、引导、规范和控制的组织安排,开放式创新模式下的知识治理机制是硬机制(正式机制)与软机制(非正式机制)的有效结合。规范组织内知识创造的治理结构是合意型科层治理结构,它包括权威机制、激励机制、惯例机制和企业内社群机制;规范组织间知识创造的治理机制包括契约交易机制、信任机制和非正式交流机制,知识创造活动正是在这些知识治理机制的规范和控制下开展并实现知识创造和技术创新的。4、论文对开放式创新模式的组织基础及其构建进行了深入分析,认为开放式创新模式的组织基础具有柔性化、网络化和虚拟化的特点,组织与环境条件实现了动态契合,组织边界与知识边界保持动态一致性,组织自身具备包括学习能力、吸收能力和整合能力在内的均衡能力体系。
In the process of informatization and the development of knowledge economy, a new model of technological innovation which is called open innovation appears. Compared with the close innovation, open innovation is a new way of knowledge creation. It can fully use the heterogeneous knowledge in and out of the organization, and realize the knowledge exchange between organizations so as to promote inner-organizational and inter-organizational knowledge creation. Most existing researches on open innovation focus on the enterprise or industry level, and they neglect the nature of innovation: knowledge creation and its process and mode under the model of open innovation. The development of such theories as cognitive economics, knowledge-based theory of enterprise, knowledge governance, and so on provide new theoretical tools and methods to the research of open innovation from the perspective of knowledge. The research can improve the development of knowledge creation theory and propose practical guidance to enterprises.
The thesis redefines open innovation using a variety of analytical methods from the perspective of knowledge, researches the definition of knowledge creation and its process and governance under the model of open innovation, and builds organizational foundation for open innovation. On the basis of the analysis, the thesis proposes some suggestions to promote the development of open innovation in our country through the international comparison of the practices of open innovation.
The thesis includes six chapters. Chapter I is an introduction. It discusses the background, significance, general review on the status and the research levels of open innovation, research methods, main idea, innovations and points to be further discussed. Chapter II reviews the researches of technological innovation. This chapter discusses the Schumpeterian innovation theory, the concept and classification of technological innovation and cognitive perspective of technological innovation. Chapter III analyzes the relationships between knowledge, learning and open innovation. This chapter mainly analyzes the nature of knowledge and its characteristics and classification, the relationship between knowledge, personal learning and organizational learning. On the basis of the research, the thesis analyzes the definition and characteristics of open innovation. Chapter IV analyzes the knowledge creation under the model of open innovation. This chapter discusses the existing model of knowledge creation, and then redefines the meaning of knowledge creation under the open innovation model, analyzes the process of the knowledge creation. At last, the chapter analyzes two kinds of knowledge creation: intra-organizational and inter-organizational knowledge creation. Chapter V discusses the problem of knowledge governance in the model of open innovation. This chapter defines the knowledge governance under the model open innovation as the governance of knowledge creation. The thesis builds a system of knowledge governance mechanisms that includes intra-organizational and inter-organizational knowledge governance mechanisms and tow kinds of action mechanisms. Chapter VI analyzes the organizational foundation of the open innovation. This chapter mainly focuses on the analysis the organizational foundation of open innovation and its organizational capability system. The chapter builds the organizational foundation that support open innovation model on the basis of analysis of the relationship between knowledge characteristics and organizational structure, and analyzes the balanced ability system including learning ability, absorptive capacity and integration ability. Chapter VII is the practice of open innovation and inspirations to our country. Taking 3M, IBM, P&G as examples, the chapter discusses the international practice of open innovation. The chapter also analyzes three enterprises' open innovation practices that include Lenovo, Haier, and Chunlan. On the basis of analysis, the chapter discusses the factors that hinder the implementation of open innovation in our country, and puts forward suggestions to promote the practice of open innovation in our country from both microscopic and macroscopic aspects.
The main innovations of this thesis include: Firstly, the thesis redefines open innovation. In the thesis, open innovation is defined as a new way of knowledge creation which comprehensively utilizes internal and external knowledge through individual learning, organizational learning and inter-organizational dynamic learning to achieve the effective integration of two kinds of knowledge. The definition stresses the importance of open cognitive model to knowledge creation, and points out that the model can reduce the cognitive costs of innovation and the synergistic effect of knowledge can be realized. Secondly, the thesis analyzes the model of knowledge creation in the open innovation model. We think there are two models of knowledge creation in the open innovation model which includes the model of intra-organizational knowledge creation and the model of inter-organizational knowledge creation. The two kinds of knowledge creation model jointly promote knowledge creation and technological innovation. Thirdly, the thesis analyzes the problem of knowledge governance in the model of open innovation. We think that knowledge governance is an organizational arrangement to stimulate, guide, regulate and control the knowledge creation behaviors. The knowledge governance mechanisms in the open innovation model are the effective integration of hard mechanisms (formal mechanisms) and the soft mechanisms (informal mechanisms). The governance structure which regulates intra-organizational knowledge creation is consensus-based hierarchy including such governance mechanisms as authority mechanism, incentive mechanism, routine mechanism, community mechanisms and so on. The governance mechanisms governed inter-organizational knowledge creation include trade mechanism, trust mechanism, informal communication mechanism, and so on. Fourthly, the thesis analyzes the organizational basis of open innovation model and its construction. We think that the organizational basis of open innovation model should have such properties as flexible, networking and virtualization. The relationship between organization and environmental conditions should achieve a dynamic fitness. The organizational border and knowledge border should maintain dynamic consistency. The organization should have a balanced ability system which includes learning ability, absorptive capacity and knowledge integration ability.
本文从知识的视角对开放式创新的内涵进行了重新界定,深入研究了开放式创新模式下知识创造的内涵、模式,探讨了开放式创新模式下知识创造的治理问题,构建了支撑开放式创新的组织基础,在此基础上通过开放式创新实践的国际比较提出了促进开放式创新在我国发展的对策和建议。
论文的主要研究内容包括七章:第一章是导论,主要介绍了选题背景和意义、开放式创新的研究现状、研究层次与本论文的研究视角、论文的研究方法、主要研究内容、论文的创新与不足之处。第二章是技术创新理论研究综述。主要对熊彼特的创新理论、技术创新的概念与分类以及认知经济学视角下的技术创新研究进行了分析。第三章是知识、学习与开放式创新。本章主要分析了知识的本质、特性与分类,认知、个人学习与组织学习,并在此基础上对开放式创新内涵与特征进行了分析。第四章是开放式创新模式下的知识创造。本章在对现有知识创造模型系统梳理的基础上,研究了开放式创新模式下知识创造的内涵、过程与模式等问题。第五章是开放式创新模式下的知识治理。本章将开放式创新模式下的知识治理界定为对知识创造的治理,并在此基础上构建了开放式创新模式下的组织内知识治理机制体系和组织间知识治理机制体系,同时构建了推动知识治理的作用机制。第六章是开放式创新模式的组织基础构建。本章分析的重点是开放式创新模式的组织基础及其所具备的能力体系。论文在分析知识特性与组织结构关系的基础上,构建了支撑开放式创新的组织基础,并分析了它应具备的包括学习能力、吸收能力和整合能力在内的均衡能力体系。第七章是开放式创新的实践及对我国的启示。论文以3M、IBM、P&G公司为例分析了开放式创新的国际实践,以联想、海尔、春兰为例分析了开放式创新在我国的实践。在此基础上分析了阻碍开放式创新在我国实施的因素,并从微观和宏观两方面提出了相应的对策。
本文的创新点主要包括:1、论文对开放式创新的内涵进行了重新界定,认为开放式创新是一种综合利用组织内部知识和外部知识,通过个人学习、组织学习以及组织间动态学习实现二者有效融合和创新的知识创造方式。该界定强调了开放性认知模式在知识创造中的重要性,指出借助该认知模式可以降低创新活动的认知成本,使组织内外知识的协同效应得以发挥。2、论文深入分析了开放式创新模式下的知识创造模式。论文认为开放式创新模式下的知识创造有两种形式,一是组织内知识创造,二是组织间知识创造,相应地,将开放式创新模式下的知识创造模式区分为组织内知识创造模式与组织间知识创造模式,这两种知识创造模式相互依赖,相互促进,共同推动知识创造和技术创新。3、论文对开放式创新模式下的知识治理进行了深入分析,认为知识治理是对知识创造行为进行激励、引导、规范和控制的组织安排,开放式创新模式下的知识治理机制是硬机制(正式机制)与软机制(非正式机制)的有效结合。规范组织内知识创造的治理结构是合意型科层治理结构,它包括权威机制、激励机制、惯例机制和企业内社群机制;规范组织间知识创造的治理机制包括契约交易机制、信任机制和非正式交流机制,知识创造活动正是在这些知识治理机制的规范和控制下开展并实现知识创造和技术创新的。4、论文对开放式创新模式的组织基础及其构建进行了深入分析,认为开放式创新模式的组织基础具有柔性化、网络化和虚拟化的特点,组织与环境条件实现了动态契合,组织边界与知识边界保持动态一致性,组织自身具备包括学习能力、吸收能力和整合能力在内的均衡能力体系。
In the process of informatization and the development of knowledge economy, a new model of technological innovation which is called open innovation appears. Compared with the close innovation, open innovation is a new way of knowledge creation. It can fully use the heterogeneous knowledge in and out of the organization, and realize the knowledge exchange between organizations so as to promote inner-organizational and inter-organizational knowledge creation. Most existing researches on open innovation focus on the enterprise or industry level, and they neglect the nature of innovation: knowledge creation and its process and mode under the model of open innovation. The development of such theories as cognitive economics, knowledge-based theory of enterprise, knowledge governance, and so on provide new theoretical tools and methods to the research of open innovation from the perspective of knowledge. The research can improve the development of knowledge creation theory and propose practical guidance to enterprises.
The thesis redefines open innovation using a variety of analytical methods from the perspective of knowledge, researches the definition of knowledge creation and its process and governance under the model of open innovation, and builds organizational foundation for open innovation. On the basis of the analysis, the thesis proposes some suggestions to promote the development of open innovation in our country through the international comparison of the practices of open innovation.
The thesis includes six chapters. Chapter I is an introduction. It discusses the background, significance, general review on the status and the research levels of open innovation, research methods, main idea, innovations and points to be further discussed. Chapter II reviews the researches of technological innovation. This chapter discusses the Schumpeterian innovation theory, the concept and classification of technological innovation and cognitive perspective of technological innovation. Chapter III analyzes the relationships between knowledge, learning and open innovation. This chapter mainly analyzes the nature of knowledge and its characteristics and classification, the relationship between knowledge, personal learning and organizational learning. On the basis of the research, the thesis analyzes the definition and characteristics of open innovation. Chapter IV analyzes the knowledge creation under the model of open innovation. This chapter discusses the existing model of knowledge creation, and then redefines the meaning of knowledge creation under the open innovation model, analyzes the process of the knowledge creation. At last, the chapter analyzes two kinds of knowledge creation: intra-organizational and inter-organizational knowledge creation. Chapter V discusses the problem of knowledge governance in the model of open innovation. This chapter defines the knowledge governance under the model open innovation as the governance of knowledge creation. The thesis builds a system of knowledge governance mechanisms that includes intra-organizational and inter-organizational knowledge governance mechanisms and tow kinds of action mechanisms. Chapter VI analyzes the organizational foundation of the open innovation. This chapter mainly focuses on the analysis the organizational foundation of open innovation and its organizational capability system. The chapter builds the organizational foundation that support open innovation model on the basis of analysis of the relationship between knowledge characteristics and organizational structure, and analyzes the balanced ability system including learning ability, absorptive capacity and integration ability. Chapter VII is the practice of open innovation and inspirations to our country. Taking 3M, IBM, P&G as examples, the chapter discusses the international practice of open innovation. The chapter also analyzes three enterprises' open innovation practices that include Lenovo, Haier, and Chunlan. On the basis of analysis, the chapter discusses the factors that hinder the implementation of open innovation in our country, and puts forward suggestions to promote the practice of open innovation in our country from both microscopic and macroscopic aspects.
The main innovations of this thesis include: Firstly, the thesis redefines open innovation. In the thesis, open innovation is defined as a new way of knowledge creation which comprehensively utilizes internal and external knowledge through individual learning, organizational learning and inter-organizational dynamic learning to achieve the effective integration of two kinds of knowledge. The definition stresses the importance of open cognitive model to knowledge creation, and points out that the model can reduce the cognitive costs of innovation and the synergistic effect of knowledge can be realized. Secondly, the thesis analyzes the model of knowledge creation in the open innovation model. We think there are two models of knowledge creation in the open innovation model which includes the model of intra-organizational knowledge creation and the model of inter-organizational knowledge creation. The two kinds of knowledge creation model jointly promote knowledge creation and technological innovation. Thirdly, the thesis analyzes the problem of knowledge governance in the model of open innovation. We think that knowledge governance is an organizational arrangement to stimulate, guide, regulate and control the knowledge creation behaviors. The knowledge governance mechanisms in the open innovation model are the effective integration of hard mechanisms (formal mechanisms) and the soft mechanisms (informal mechanisms). The governance structure which regulates intra-organizational knowledge creation is consensus-based hierarchy including such governance mechanisms as authority mechanism, incentive mechanism, routine mechanism, community mechanisms and so on. The governance mechanisms governed inter-organizational knowledge creation include trade mechanism, trust mechanism, informal communication mechanism, and so on. Fourthly, the thesis analyzes the organizational basis of open innovation model and its construction. We think that the organizational basis of open innovation model should have such properties as flexible, networking and virtualization. The relationship between organization and environmental conditions should achieve a dynamic fitness. The organizational border and knowledge border should maintain dynamic consistency. The organization should have a balanced ability system which includes learning ability, absorptive capacity and knowledge integration ability.
引文
[1]柏林科学技术研究院.文化VS技术创新:德美日创新经济的文化比较与策略建议.吴金希等译.北京:知识产权出版社,2006
[2]彼得·圣吉.第五项修炼——学习型组织的艺术与实物.郭进隆译.上海:上海三联书店,2004
[3]波普尔.客观知识——一个进化论的研究.舒炜光等译.上海:上海译文出版社,1987
[4]常盤文克.创新之道:日本制造业的创新文化.董旻静译.北京:知识产权出版社,2007
[5]陈劲,陈钰芬.开放创新体系与企业技术创新资源配置.科研管理,2006(3):1-8
[6]陈其荣.技术创新的哲学视野.复旦学报,2000(1):14-20
[7]陈莞,谢富纪.开放式自主创新与其支撑体系互动机制研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2007(3):58-61
[8]戴维·A·加文.建立学习型组织.载彼得·F·德鲁克等著.知识管理.杨开蜂译.北京:中国人民人学出版社,1999
[9]党兴华,李莉,汤喜建.企业技术创新合作中的组织认知模式问题研究.科技管理研究,2006(12):97-100
[10]道格拉斯·诺思.理解经济变迁过程.钟正生,邢华等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008
[11]德鲁克.创新与企业家精神.彭志华译.北京:企业管理出版社,1989
[12]邓汉慧,张子刚.西蒙的有限理性研究综述.中国地质大学学报(社会科学版).2004(6):38-41
[13]方统法.组织设计的知识基础论.上海:复旦大学出版社,2004
[14]冯鹏志.论技术创新行动的环境变量与特征——一种社会学的分析视角.自然辨证法通讯,1997(4):8-9
[15]傅家骥等.技术创新:中国企业发展之路.北京:企业管理出版社,1992
[16]戈黎华.知识创造与创新型企业:[博士学位论文].天津:南开大学,2009
[17]龚伟同.IBM重新定义创新.商务周刊,2006(5):74-77
[18]桂婕,朱东华,武杨.开放式创新中的知识利用研究.商业时代,2008(4):51-52
[19]哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序.邓正来译.上海:三联书店,2003
[20]哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序.贾湛等译.北京经济学院出版社,1989
[21]哈耶克.知识在社会中的运用.载保罗·S.麦耶斯编.知识管理与组织设计.蒋惠工等译.珠海:珠海出版社,1998
[22]哈耶克.自由秩序原理.邓正来译.北京:三联书店,1997
[23]亨利·明茨伯格.明茨伯格论管理.闾佳译.北京:机械工业出版社,2007:86-90
[24]亨利·切萨布鲁夫.开放式创新——进行技术创新并从中赢利的新规则.金马译.北京:清华大学出版社,2005
[25]后锐,张毕西.企业开放式创新:概念、模型及其风险规避.科技进步与对策,2006(3):140-142
[26]胡承浩,金明浩.论开放式创新模式下的企业知识产权战略.科技与法律,2008(2):49-53
[27]黄凯南,程臻宇.认知理性与个体主义方法论的发展.经济研究,2008(7):142-155,160
[28]霍尔茨纳.知识社会学.傅正元,蒋琦译.武汉:湖北人民出版社,1984
[29]霍奇逊.现代制度主义经济宣言.向以斌等译.北京:北京大学出版社,1993
[30]经济合作与发展组织.以知识为基础的经济.北京:机械工业出版社,1997
[31]景玉琴.分野与融合:建构理性与演进理性.江汉论坛,2006(12):5-9
[32]莱昂内尔·罗宾斯.经济科学的性质和意义.朱泱译.北京:商务印书馆,2007
[33]李维安.探求知识管理的制度基础:知识治理.南开管理评论,2007(3):1
[34]李颖.企业联盟内组织间知识共享研究——基于知识治理的视角:[博士学位论文].天津:南开大学,2007
[35]李兆友.技术创新论——哲学视角下的技术创新.沈阳:辽宁人民出版社,2004
[36]李志军.我国自主创新的现状、问题及成因.中国科技投资.2007(5):47-49
[37]理查德·H.霍尔.组织:结构、过程及结果.张友星等译.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2003
[38]理查德·斯格特.组织理论:理性、自然和开放系统.黄洋等译.北京:华夏出版社,2001
[39]刘元芳.开放式自主创新的企业发展模式.发展研究,2008(6):39-40
[40]柳卸林.技术创新经济学.北京:中国经济出版社,1993
[41]罗珉.组织管理学.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2003
[42]罗纳德·伯特.结构洞:竞争的社会结构.任敏等译.上海:格致出版社,上海人民出版社,2008
[43]罗伊·鲍尔,埃米里奥·考拉,维克多·唐.银湖计划——IBM的转型与创新.陈红斌等译.北京:华夏出版社.1999
[44]马克斯·H·博伊索特.知识资产:在信息经济中赢得竞争优势.张群群,陈北译.上海:上海世纪出版集团,2005
[45]马克斯·H·布瓦索.信息空间:认识组织、制度和文化的一种框架.王寅通译.上海:上海译文出版社,2000
[46]迈克尔·波兰尼.个人知识——迈向后批判哲学.许泽民译.贵州:贵州人民出版社,2000
[47]玫·笛德等.创新管理:技术变革、市场变革和组织变革的整合.金马工作室译,北京:清华大学出版社,2004
[48]纳尔逊,温特.经济变迁的演化理论.胡世凯译.北京:商务印书馆,1997
[49]尼尔·保尔森,托·赫尼斯编.组织边界管理多元化观点.佟博等译.北京:经济管理 出版社,2005
[50]尼考拉斯·莱斯切尔.认识经济论:知识理论的经济问题.王晓秦译.江西:江西教育出版社,1999
[51]欧内斯特·岗德林.创新沃土:美国3M公司创新机制.陈雪松等译.北京:华夏出版社,2001
[52]彭纪生.中国技术协同创新论.北京:中国经济出版社,2000
[53]齐建国.技术创新——国家系统的改革与重组.北京:社会科学文献出版社,1995
[54]齐中熙.联想——以创新引领未来.发明与创新,2006(8):17-18
[55]青木昌彦.比较制度分析.周黎安译.上海:上海远东出版社,2001
[56]任寒青,徐震,陈衍泰.企业转型中组织学习与开放式创新战略的研究.科技进步与对策,2006(10):72-75
[57]萨缪尔森.经济学.北京:中国发展出版社,1992
[58]森谷正规.日本的技术——以最少的耗费取得最好的成就.徐鸣,陈慧琴等译.上海:上海翻译出版社公司,1985
[59]沈小峰,胡岗,蒋璐编著.耗散结构论.上海:上海人民出版社,1987
[60]唐炎华,石金涛.国外知识转移研究综述.情报科学,2006(1):153-160
[61]陶建幸.春兰:用全球的大脑为自主创新服务.中国民营科技与经济,2006(6):12-14
[62]汪丁丁.制度分析基础讲义.上海:世纪出版集团,2005
[63]汪丁丁.自由人的自由联合:汪丁丁论网络经济.厦门:鹭江出版社,2000
[64]王健友.知识治理研究——企业的知识本质与组织机理分析:[博士学位论文].天津:南开大学,2007
[65]王岚,王凯.基于认知模式的企业集群知识转移研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2008(2):119-122,132
[66]王圆圆,周明.企业开放式创新中的利益相关者管理.市场研究,2008(4):49-52
[67]威廉森.治理机制.王健等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001
[68]维托德·瓦斯尼基著.知识、创新和经济:一种演化论的探索.第1版.仲继银,胡春译.南昌:江西教育出版社,1999
[69]沃纳·伯克.组织变革:理论和实践.燕清联合组织翻译.北京:中国劳动社会保障出版社,2005
[70]吴先华,郭际.技术创新的悖论与开放式创新.科技与管理,2007(1):127-129
[71]西蒙.管理行为——管理组织决策过程的研究.杨砾等译.北京:北京经济学院出版社,1988
[72]许庆瑞.研究、发展与技术创新管理.北京:高等教育出版社,2000
[73]亚当·斯密.国氏财富的性质和原因的研究.郭大力,王亚南译.北京:商务印书馆,1972
[74]杨静武.开放式创新模式下的技术创新能力研究.财经理论与实践,2007a(2):98-102
[75]杨静武.企业吸收能力与开放式创新.企业管理,2007b(04):98-100
[76]杨丽.模块化、开放式创新与技术多层演进——基于美国计算机产业的技术演进分析.山东社会科学,2008(3):85-88
[77]杨武,申长江.开放式创新理论及企业实践.管理现代化,2005(5):4-6
[78]杨武.基于开放式创新的知识产权管理理论研究.科学学研究,2006(2):311-314
[79]野中郁次郎,胜见明.创新的本质.北京:知识产权出版社,2006
[80]野中郁次郎,竹内宏高.创造知识的企业:日美企业持续创新的动力.李萌,高飞译.北京:知识产权出版社,2006
[81]尹艳林.我国企业自主创新的现状、问题与对策.中国科技投资,2006(3):20-23
[82]于凤霞,温承革.学习型组织——西方学者研究综述.山西财经大学学报,2003(4):83-84
[83]约瑟夫·熊彼特.经济发展理论.何畏等译.北京:商务印书馆,1990
[84]约瑟夫·熊彼特.资本主义、社会主义和民主.吴良健译.北京:商务印书馆,1999
[85]詹森,麦克林.专用知识、通用知识以及组织结构.载保罗·S.麦耶斯编.知识管理与组织设计.蒋惠工等译.珠海:珠海出版社,1998
[86]湛垦华,沈小峰等编.普利高津与耗散结构理论.西安:陕西科学技术出版社,1982
[87]张培富,李艳红.技术创新过程的自组织进化.科学管理研究,2000(6):1-4
[88]张庆普,单伟.企业知识转化过程中的知识整合.经济理论与经济管理,2004(6):47-51
[89]赵金楼,刘国岩.创新型大企业的内涵、模型与开放式创新.科技管理研究,2008(4):219-220,223
[90]赵修卫.组织学习与知识整合.科研管理,2003(3):52-57
[91]郑小平,刘立京,蒋美英.企业开放式创新的产权欲望研究.科学管理研究,2007(3):42-45
[92]郑小平,刘立京,蒋美英.企业开放式创新理论的研究述评.中国科技论坛,2007(6):40-44
[93]邹东涛.理性扩张:春兰的发展道路.北京:人民出版社,2004
[1]Abernathy,W.and Clark,K.B.Innovation:mapping the winds of creative destruction.Research Policy,1985(14):8
[2]Afuah,A.How much do your co-opetitors' capabilities matter in the face of technological change? Strategic Management Journal.2000,21(3):387-404
[3]Ahmadjian,C.L.Inter-organizational knowledge creation:Knowledge and network.In:Takeuchi,H.and Nonaka,I.Hitotsubashi on Knowledge Management.John Wiley &Sons(Asia) Pte Ltd,2004:227-246
[4]Alavi,M.and Leidner,D.E.Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:conceptual foundations and research issues.MIS Quarterly,2001,25(1):107-136
[5]Almeida,P.and Kogut,B.Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks.Management Science,1999,45(7):905-917
[6]Andreu,R.and Sieber S.Knowledge integration across organizations:how different types of knowledge suggest different 'integration trajectories'.Knowledge and Process Management, 12(3): 153-160
[7] Antonelli, C. The business governance of localized knowledge: an information economics approach for the economics of knowledge. Industry and Innovation, 2006,13(3): 227-261.
[8] Antonelli, C. The governance of localized knowledge. Momigliano Working Paper, 2005, No. 02/2005
[9] Argyris, C. Double loop learning. Harvard Business Review, 1977: 115-125
[10] Argyris, C. and Schon, D. Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1978: 9-10
[11] Arora, A., Fosfuri, A., and Gambardella, A. markets for technology and their implications for corporate strategy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2001,10(2): 419-451
[12] Arthur, B. Competing technologies: an overview, in: Dosi, G, C. Freeman, R., Nelson, Silverberg, G, and Soete, L.(eds.). Technical changeand economic theory. London: Pinter. 1988: 590-607
[13] Asanuma, B. Manufacturer-Supplier relationships in Japan and the concept of relation-specific skill. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 1989(3): 1-30
[14] Bamford, J., Gomes-Casseres, B., and Robinson, M. Mastering alliance strategy: a comprehensive guide to design management and organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass John Wiley, 2003
[15] Benner, M. J. and Tushman, M. L. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 2003(2): 238-256
[16] Walliser, B. Instrumental rationality and cognitive rationality. Theory and Decision, 1989(27): 7-36
[17] Russell, B. The Problems of philosophy, The United States of America, 1959: 109
[18] Birkinshaw, J., Nobel, R., and Ridderstr(?)le, J. Knowledge as a contingency variable: do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure? Organization Science, 2002, 13(3): 274-289
[19] Boer, D.M., Frans. A.J., Van, D.B. and Volberda, H. W. Management organizational knowledge integration in the emerging multimediu complex. Journal of Management Studies, 1999, 36(6): 379-398
[20] Boisot, M. H. Is your firm a creative destroyer? Competitive learning and knowledge flows in the technological strategies of firms. Research Policy, 1995, 24: 489-506
[21] Borgatti, S. P., and Cross, R. A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 2003(49): 432-445
[22] Borger, M. Knowledge sharing and knowledge protection in R&D collaboration: [dissertation]. Eindhoven University of Technology, Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology, 2004
[23] Boyd, B. Corporate linkages and organizational environment: a test of the resource dependence model. Strategic Management Journal, 1990,11(6): 419-430
[24] Brandenburger, A. M. and Nalebuff, B. J. Co-opetition. New York: Doubleday, 1996
[25] Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation. In: Cohen, M. and Sproull, L. S. (Eds), Organizational Learning. London: Sage, 1996
[26] Carlile, P. R. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 2002,13(4): 442-455
[27] Cassiman, B. and Veugelers, R. R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review, 2002, 92(4): 1169-1184
[28] Castilla, E.J., Hwang, H., Granovetter, E., Granovetter, M. Social networks in Silicon Valley,in: Lee, C.M., Miller, W., Hancock, M.G, and Rowen, H.(eds.), The Silicon Valley edge. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000: 218-247
[29] Chaminade, C. and Edquist, C. From theory to practice: the use of the systems of innovation approach in innovation policy, in: Hage, J. and M. Meeus. Innovation, Science and Institutional Change: A Research Handbook, Oxford, 2006
[30] Chong Ju Choi, Cheng, P., Hilton, B., and Russell, E. Knowledge governance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2005, 9(6): 67-75
[31] Christensen, C. The innovator's dilemma.Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1997.
[32] Christensen, J. F. Wither core competency for the large corporation in an open innovation world? in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and J. West (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006
[33] Clark, A., and Karmiloff-Smith, A. The cognizer's innards. Mind and Language, 1994, 8(4): 540-547
[34] Cohen, S.S. and Fields, G Social capital and capital gains: an examination of social capital in Silicon Valley, in: Kenney, M.(eds.), Understanding Silicon Valley: Anatomy of an Entrepreneurial Region, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000: 190-217
[35] Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990(35): 128-152
[36] Cohendet, P. and Llerena, P. Routines and incentives: the role of communities in the firm. Industrial and corporate change, 2003,12(2): 271-297
[37] Collins, J. and Porras, J.I. Built to last: successful habits of visionary companies. Harper Business, New York, 1994: 90-212
[38] Conner, K. R. and Prahalad, C. K. A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism. Organization Science, 1996, 7(5): 477-501
[39] Cooper, R.G Your NPD portfolio may be harmful to your business's health. PDMA Visions, 2005(29): 22-26
[40] Crossan M. M, Lane, H.W., and White, R.E. An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 1999,24(3): 522-537
[41] Dahlander, L. and Gann D. 2007. Appropriability, proximity, routines and innovation: How open is open innovation?, Paper presented at the Druid Summer Conference 2007, 34.
[42] Damanpour, F. A review of innovation research in economics, sociology and technology managementOmega. 1997,25(1): 15-28
[43] Damanpour, F. Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal. 1991, 34(3): 557
[44] David, P. A. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 1985,75(2): 332-337
[45] De Moor and Smits, M.T. An indicator wizard for the knowledge governance framework. Progress Report of the MERIT Project, Tilburg University, 2005
[46] De Wit, Jan, Dankbaar, Ben and Vissers, Geert. Open Innovation: the new way of knowledge transfer? Journal of Business Chemistry, 2007.4(1): 11-19
[47] Demsetz, H. The theory of the firm revisited. In: O. E. Williamson and S. G Winter (eds.), The nature of the firm. Oxford University Press, New York, 1991: 159-178
[48] DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields, American Sociological Review, 1983, 48(2): 147-160
[49] Dittrich, K., Duysters, G., AP de Man. Strategic repositioning by means of alliance networks: The case of IBM. Research Policy, 2007(36): 1496-1511
[50] Dodgson, M. and Bessant, J. Effective innovation policy: a new approach London: International Thomson Business Press, 1996: 123
[51] Dodgson, M., Gann, David and Salter, Ammon. The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: the case of Procter & Gamble. R&D Management; 2006, 36(3): 333-346
[52] Dosi, G. Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of economic literature, 1988,26(3): 1120-1171
[53] Dosi, G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 1982(11): 147-162
[54] Dosi, G., Marengo, L., and Fagiolo, G. Learning in evolutionary environments, in: Dopfer, K. (eds.), The evolutionary foundations of economics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005: 255-338
[55] Doz, Y. L. The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal, 1996(17): 55-83
[56] Dushnitsky, G. Limitations to inter-organizational knowledge acquisition: the paradox of corporate venture capital. In: Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (CD), 2004: 1543-8643
[57] Dyer, J.H. and Nobeoka, K. Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21): 345-367
[58] Dyer, J.H. and Singh, H. The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of management review, 1998, 23(4): 660-679
[59] Easterby-Smith, M., Burgoyne, J. and Araujo, L. Organizational learning and the learning organization. London: Sage, 1999
[60] Edquist, C., Hommen, L., Johnson, B., Lemola, T., Malerba, E, Reiss, T, Smith, K. The ISE policy statement-the innovation policy implications of the 'innovations systems and european integration'. Research project funded by the TSER programme (DG XII). Linkoping University, Linkoping, 1998
[61] Eriksson, I. and Dickson, G. Knowledge sharing in high technology companies. AMCIS 2000 Proceedings
[62] Fabrizio, K.R. The use of university research in firm innovation, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and J. West, (eds), Open Innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006: 134-160
[63] Foss, N. J. Selective intervention and internal hybrids: interpreting and learning from the rise and decline of the Oticon Spaghetti organization. Organization Science, 2003(14): 331-349
[64] Foss, N.J. The emerging knowledge governance approach: challenges and characteristics. Durid Working Paper, No. 06-10, Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics, 2006
[65] Foss, N.J., Husted, K., Michailova, S., and Pedersen, T. Governing knowledge processes: theoretical foundations and research opportunities. CKG Working Paper No. 1/2003
[66] Foster, J. Competitive selection, self-organization and Joseph Schumpeter. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2000,10(3): 311-328
[67] Freeman, C. and Scoete, L. The economics of industrial innovation. London and Washington, 1997
[68] Freeman, C. The economics of industrial innovation. The MIT press, 1982
[69] Fujimoto, Takahiro. The evolution of a manufacturing system at Toyota. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999
[70] Gallini, N. T. The economics of patents: lessons from recent US patent reform. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2002, 16(2): 131-154
[71] Gambardella A, Giarratana M. Innovation for products, innovation for licensing: patents and downstream assets in the software security industry, 2006
[72] Garvin, D. A. building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, 1993(71): 78-91
[73] Gassmann, O. and Enkel, E. Towards a theory of open innovation: three core process achetypes, R&D Management Conference, 2006
[74] Gassmann, O. Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management. 2006, 36(3): 223-228
[75] Gigerenzer, G. The adaptive toolbox. In: Gerd Gigerenzer and Reinhard Selten (eds.). Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, 2001. 37-50
[76] Goh, S.C. Improving organizational learning capability: lessons from two studies. The learning organization, 2003, 10(4): 216-227
[77] Grandori A. and Neri, M. The fairness properties of networks', in Grandori, A.(ed.), Interfirm networks: organization and industrial competitiveness. London: Routledge, 1999
[78] Grandori, A. Governance structures, coordination mechanisms and cognitive models. Journal of Management and Governance, 1997(1): 29-42
[79] Grandori, A. Knowledge governance mechanisms and the theory of the firm. Presented to the Max Plank Institute - Link conference "Cognition, Evolution and the Theory of the firm",2000
[80] Grandori, A. Neither Hierarchy nor identity: knowledge governance mechanisms and the theory of the firm. Journal of Management and Governance, 2001(5): 381-399
[81] Grant R.M. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 1996(17):109-122
[82] Grant, R.M. and Baden-Fuller, C. A knowledge-based theory of inter-firm collaboration. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 1995.17-21
[83] Gupta, A.K., and Govindarajan, V. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 2000a, 21(4): 473-496.
[84] Gupta, A., K. and Govindarajan, V. Knowledge management social dimension: Lesson from Nucor Steel. Sloan Management Review, 2000b(42): 77-80
[85] Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G., and Shalley, C.E. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal, 2006,49(4): 693-706
[86] Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. The core competence of the corporation, Harvard Business Review, 1990, 68(3): 79-91
[87] Hamel, G. Competition for competence and interorganizational learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 1991(12): 83-103
[88] Han van der Meer. Open innovation-the Dutch treat: challenges in thinking in business models. Creativity & Innovation Management. 2007, 16(2): 192-202
[89] Hannan, M.T. Inertia, density and the structure of organizational populations: entries in European automobile industries, 1886-1981. Organization Studies, 1997,18(2): 193-228
[90] Hansen, M.T. Knowledge networks: explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 2002(13): 232-248
[91] Hansen, M.T. The Search-Transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44(1): 82-111
[92] Hansen, M.T., Podolny, J.M., and Pfeffer, J. So many ties, so little time: a task contingency perspective on corporate social capital.Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 2001, 13 (3): 232-248
[93] Hayek, F.A. Scientism and the study of society. Economica, 1942(35): 267-291
[94] Hayek, F.A. The results of human action but not of human design, in: Hayek. Studies in philosophy, politics and economics, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967
[95] Hayek, F.A. The sensory order. An inquiry into the foundations of theoretical psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1952
[96] Hayek, F.A. The fatal conceit: the errors of socialism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988
[97] Hedlund, G. A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 2007,15(S2): 73-90
[98] Henderson, R. and Clark, K.B. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990,35(1): 12
[99] Henderson, R.M. The failure of established firms in the face of technical change. Doctoral Thesis on Business Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA,1988, 31
[100] Hernes, T. Enabling and constraining properties of organizational boundaries, in: Paulsen, N. and Hernes, T. Managing boundaries in organizations: multiple perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, 2003: 35-54
[101] Holmqvist, M. Learning in imaginary organizations: creating interorganizational knowledge. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 1999,12(5): 419-438
[102] Holmqvist, M and Larsson, R. Interlevel Learning Dynamics: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration Within and Between Organizations. Lund Institute of Economic Research Working Paper Series, 2004.
[103] Holmstrom, B. The Firm as a subeconomy. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1999(15): 74-102
[104] Huber, G.P. Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organizational Science, 1991, 2(1), 88-115
[105] Huston, L. and Sakkab, N. Implementing open innovation. Research Technology Management. 2007, 50(2): 21-25
[106] Inkpen, A.C. Creating knowledge through collaboration. California Management Review, 1996, 39(1): 123-140
[107] Inkpen, A. C. and Dinur, A. knowledge management processes and international joint ventures. Organization Science, 1998, 9 (4): 454-468
[108] Johnson, B. and Gregersen, B. System of innovation and economic integration. Journal of Industry Studies, 1994(2): 1-18
[109] Kahneman, D, and Tversky, A. choices, values and frames, New York: Cambrige University Press and the Russell Sage Foundation, 2000
[110] Kahneman, D. Maps of bounded rationality: a perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. Prize Lecture, 2002:450-451
[111] Katila, R. and Ahuja, G. Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 2002(45): 1183-1194
[112] Keil, T. External corporate venturing: strategic renewal in rapidly changing industries. WestPort, CT: Quorum Books, 2002
[113] Kemp, R., Rip, A., and Schot, J.W. Constructing transition paths through the management of niches, in: Garud, R., and Karnoe, P. (eds.), Path dependence and creation. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 2001: 269-299
[114] Klaes, M. and Esther-Mirjam Sent. A conceptual history of the emergence of bounded rationality. History of Political Economy, 37(1): 27-59
[115] Kofrnan, F. Lecture slides. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Sloan School of Management, 1992
[116] Kogut, B. and Zander, U. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 1992, 3(3): 383-397
[117] Kostova, Tatiana. Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 1999,24(2): 308-324
[118] Lam, A. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: problems of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 1997, 18(6): 973-996
[119] Lane, P. J. and Lubatkin, M. Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 1998(19): 461-477
[120] Langlois, R.N. Rule-following, expertise, and rationality: a new behavioral economics? in: Dennis, K. Rationality in economics: alternative perspectives, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998
[121] Laursen, K. and Salter, A. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms, Strategic Management Review, 2006(27): 131-150
[122] Leonard, D, and Sensiper, S. The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review, 1998.40 (3):112-132
[123] Levinthal, D.A. Organizational adaptation and environmental selection-interrelated processes of change. Organization Science, 1991, 2(1): 140-145
[124] Levitt, B. and March, J.G Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 1988(14): 319-340
[125] Lichtenthaler, U. and Ernst, H. Opening up the innovation process: the role of technology aggressiveness. R&D Management, 2009, 39(1): 38-54
[126] Lichtenthaler, U. Integrated roadmaps for open innovation. Research Technology Management, 2008, 51(3): 45-49
[127] Liebeskind, J. P., Oliver, A. L., Zucker, L., and Brewer, M. Social networks, learning, and flexibility: sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Studies, 1996(7): 428-441
[128] Loasby, B. J. Knowledge, institutions, and evolution in economics. Routledge, London, 1999
[129] Loasby, B.J. Decision premises, decision cycles and decomposition. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2000,9(4): 709-731
[130] Luria, AR. The working brain: an introduction to neuropsychology. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, Ltd, 1973
[131] Lynch, R. P. Business alliance guide. New York: John Wiley, 1993
[132] Madsen, T.L., Mosakowski, E., and Zaheer, S. The dynamics of knowledge floes: human capital mobility, knowledge retention and change. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2002,6(2): 164-175
[133] Mahnke, V. and Pedersen, T. Knowledge governance and value creation, in: Mahnke, V. and Pedersen, T.(eds.). Knowledge flows, governance and the multinational enterprise. London: Palgrave Macmillan: 3-17
[134] Mansfield, E. The economics of technological change. New York, W.W.Norton and Company, 1971
[135] Mantzavinos, C., North, D. C., and Shariq S. Learning, Institutions, and economic performance. Perspectives on Politics, 2004,2(1): 75-84
[136] March, J. G. Continuity and change in theories of organizational action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996(41): 278-287
[137] March, J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 1991,2(1): 71-87
[138] March, J. G. Rationality, foolishness, and adaptive intelligence. Strategic Management Journal, 2006(27): 201-214
[139] Martens, B. The cognitive mechanics of economic development and institutional change. Routledge, 2004
[140] Mascitelli, R. Contribution of tacit knowledge to technological innovation. Journal of Production Innovation Management, 2000(6): 179-195
[141] Matusik, S. and Hill, C.W.L. The utilization of contingent work, knowledge creation and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998,23(4): 680-697
[142] Maula, M. V. J., Keil, T., and Salmenkaita, J. P. Open innovation in systemic innovation contexts, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., and West, J. (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.
[143] McCain, R.A. A framework for cognitive economics. London: Praeger, 1992
[144] McLoughlin, I. Creative technological change: the shaping of technology and organizations. Routledge, 1999
[145] Metcalfe, S. Evolutionary approachs to population thinking and the problem of growth and development, in: Dopfer, K.(eds.). Evolutionary economics: program and scopes. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher, 2001:161
[146] Miller D. A preliminary typology of organizational learning: synthesizing the literature. J Manage 1996,22(3): 485 -505
[147] Miller, K.D., Meng Zhao, and Roger, J. C. Additional interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to March's exploration-exploitation model. Academy of Management Journal, 2006(49): 709-722
[148] Mueser, R. Indentifying technical innovations. IEEE Transactions on Engineer-Management, 1985, EM-32(4)
[149] Murray, F. Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring Tissue engineering. Research Policy, 2002, 31(8-9): 1389-1403
[150] Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998,23: 242-266
[151] Nelson, R. and Winter, S. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Harvard Press, 1982
[152] Nelson, R. Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change. Journal of Economic Literature, 1995(33): 48-90
[153] Nevis, E.C., DiBella, A.J, and Gould, J.M. Understanding organizations as learning systems. Sloan Management Review, 1995(Winter): 73-85
[154] Newell, A. unified theories of cognition, Cambridge (Mass): Harward University Press, 1990
[155] Nightingale, P. A cognitive model of innovation. Research Policy, 1998(27): 689-709
[156] Nonaka I. Toward middle-up-down management: accelerating information creation. Sloan Management Review, 1988,29(3): 9-18
[157] Nonaka, I. Dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation, Organization Science, 1994, 5(1):14-37
[158] Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., and Konno, N. SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 2000. (33): 5-34
[159] Nonaka.I. et.al. Organizational knowledge creation theory: evolutionary paths and future advances, Organization Studies, 2006, 27(8): 1179-1208
[160] Nooteboom, B. Collaboration, trust and the structure of relationships, in: Nooteboom, B. and Stam, E(eds.). Micro-foundations for innovation policy, WRR Study: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2008
[161] Nooteboom, B. Innovation and diffusion in small firms: theory and evidence, Small Business Economics, 1994,6 (5): 327-347
[162] Nooteboom, B. Inter-firm alliances: analysis and design. Routledge, London, 1999
[163] Nooteboom, B. Inter-firm collaboration, learning and networks: an integrated approach. Routledge, 2004
[164] Nooteboom, B. Learning and innovation in organizations and economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000
[165] Nooteboom, B. Towards a dynamic theory of transactions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1992(2): 281-299
[166] Nooteboom, B., Berger, H., and Noorderhaven, N.G Effects of trust and governance on relational risk. Academy of Management Journal, 1997,40(2): 308-338
[167] Nooteboom, B., Haverbeke, W.V., Duysters, G, Gilsing, V., and Ad van den Oord. Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 2007(36): 1016-1034
[168] North. D.C. Economic performance through time. The American Economic Review, 1994, 84(3): 359-368
[169] North. D.C. Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton University Press, 2005
[170] O'Conner, G.C. Open, radical innovation: toward an integrated model in large established firms, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J. (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.
[171] OECD. Globalization and open innovation, OECD: Paris, 2008.
[172] Olk, P. A Knowledge-Based perspective on the transformation of individual-level relationships into interorganizational structures: the case of R&D consortia. European Management Journal, 1998,16(1): 39-49
[173] O'Reilly, C.A, and Tushman, M.L. The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review. 2004,82(4):74-81
[174] Peltokorpi, V. and Tsuyuki, E. Knowledge governance in a Japanese project-based organization. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 2006(4): 36-45
[175] Perkmann, M. and Walsh, K. University-industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews. 2007, 9(4): 259-280
[176] Perkmann, M., and Walsh, K. Relationship-based university-industry links and open innovation: towards a research agenda, AIM Working Paper No. 041-July-2006
[177] Perrow, C. Complex organizations: a critical essay, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986
[178] Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G The external control of organizations, a resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1978
[179] Polanyi, M. The tacit dimension. Kegan Paul, Routledge, London, 1967
[180] Popper, M. and Lipshitz, R. Organizational learning mechanisms: a structural and cultural approach to organizational learning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1998, 43(2): 161-179
[181] Poppo, L. and Zenger, T. Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements. Strategic Management Journal, 2002,23(8): 707-725
[182] Porter, M.E. Competitive advantage. New York: The Free Press, 1985
[183] Postrel, S and Rumelt, R.P. Incentives, routines, and self-command. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1992,1(3): 397425
[184] Postrel, S. Islands of shared knowledge: specialization and mutual understanding in problem-solving teams. Organization Science, 2002,13(3): 303-320
[185] Powell, W., K. Koput and L. Smith-Doerr. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996(41): 116-145
[186] Pozzali, A., and Viale, R. Cognition, types of "tacit knowledge" and technology transfer, in: Topol, R., and Walliser, B. Cognitive economics: new trends. Elsevier, 2007
[187] Raffaelli, T. Alfred Marshall's early philosophical writings. Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology: Archival Supplement, n.4,1994,53-159
[188] Raffaelli, T. Marshall's evolutionary economics, London: Routledge, 2002
[189] Raisinghani, M., Knowledge management: a cognitive perspective on business and education, American Business Review, 2000,18(2): 105-112
[190] Ranson, S., Hinings, B., and Greenwood, R. The structuring of organizational structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1980,25(1): 1-17
[191] Redding, S. Path dependence, endogenous innovation, and growth. International Economic Review, 2002,43(4): 1215-1248
[192] Reinhard, S. What is bounded rationality? in: Gigerenzer, G. and Selten R.(eds.). Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, 2001: 13-36
[193] Ringberg, T., and Reihlen, M. Towards a socio-cognitive approach to knowledge transfer. Journal of Management Studies, 2008,45(5): 912-935
[194] Rizzello, S. and Turvani, M. Institutions meet mind: the way out of an impasse. constitutional political economy, 2000(11): 165-180
[195] Rizzello, S. and Turvani, M. Subjective diversity and social learning: a cognitive perspective for understanding institutional behavior. Constitutional Political Economy, 2002, (13): 201-214
[196] Rizzello, S. Introduction: towards a cognitive evolutionary economics, in: Rizzello (eds.). Cognitive developments in economics. London: Routledge, 2003
[ 197] Rizzello, S. The economics of the mind, Edward Elgar: Aldershot, 1999
[198] Rosenberg, N. Exploring the black box: technology, economics, and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994
[199] Rowley, T., David, B., Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21): 36-386
[200] 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
[201] Santos, F. M. and Eisenhardt, K. M. Organizational boundaries and the theories of organization. Organization Science, 2005,16(5): 491-508
[202] Senge P. Sharing knowledge: the leader's role is key to a learning culture. Executive Excellence, 1997,4(11): 17-18
[203] Senge, P. M. The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday, 1990
[204] Shukla, M. Competing through knowledge: building a learning organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997
[205] Siggelkow, N. and Rivkin, J. W. When exploration backfires: unintended consequences of multilevel organizational search. Academy of management Journal, 2006(49): 779-795
[206] Simcoe, T.S. Open standards and intellectual property rights, In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., and West, J. (eds), Open Innovation: Research a new paradigm, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006:161-183
[207] Simon H.A. Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 1991, 2(1):125- 134
[208] Simon, H.A. Bounded rationality in social science: today and tomorrow, Mind & Society, 2000, 1(1): 25-40
[209] Simon, H.A. Reason in human affairs, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983.40
[210] Simon, H.A. Theories of decision making in economics and behavioral science, American Economic Review, 1959: 223-283
[211] Singley M.K. and Anderson, J. R. The transfer of cognitive skill. Harvard University Press, 1989: 66-69
[212] Sitkin S. B, Sutcliffe, K.M, and Schroeder, R.G Distinguishing control form learning in total quality management-A contingency perspective. Academy of Management Review,1994(19): 537-564
[213] Sitkin, S.B., Sutcliffe, K.M., and Schroeder, R.G Distinguishing control from learning in total quality management: a contingency perspective. Academy of Management Review, 1991, 19(3): 537-564
[214] Smith, K. Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise & Innovation Management Studies, 2000,1(1): 73-102
[215] Smith, V. L. Constructivist and ecological rationality in economics. The American Economic Review, 2003, 93(3): 465-508
[216] Stata, R. Organizational learning-the key to management innovation. Sloan Management Review, 1989 (Spring): 63-74
[217] Stemberg, R. J. Tacit agreements between authors and editors. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1985(8): 746-47
[218] Szulanski, G Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm, Strategic Management Journal, 1996( 17): 27-43
[219] Taylor, A. and Greve, H. R. Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovation teams. Academy of Management Journal, 2006(49): 723-740
[220] Teece, D. J. Competition, cooperation, and innovation: organizational arrangements for regimes of rapid technological progress. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1992(18): 1-25
[221] Teece, D.J. Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy, Research Policy, 1986(15): 285-305
[222] Thietart R A. and Forgues B. Chaos theory and organization. Organization Science, 1995,6(1): 19-31
[223] Tushman, M.L. and Anderson P. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1986(31): 443
[224] Tushman, M.L.and Nadler, D.A. Organizing for innovation. California Management Review, 1986,118(3): 75-77
[225] Tushman, M. L. and O'Reilly, C. Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review. 1996(38): 8-30
[226] Uzzi, B. and Gillespie, J.J. Inter-firm ties and the organization of the firm's capital structure in the middle financial market, in: Knoke, D. and Andrews, S (eds.) Research in the sociology of organizations, Vol. 16, Stamford, CT: JAI Press, 1999,107-126
[227] Uzzi, B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997,42(1): 35-67
[228] Uzzi, B., and Lancaster, R. 2003. Relational embeddedness and learning: the case of bank loan managers and their clients. Management Science, 2003(49): 383-399
[229] Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L. and Koenig, R. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 1976(4): 323
[230] Vanberg, V. Rational choice, rule-following and institutions: an evolutionary perspective, in: U. Maki et al. Rationality, institutions and economic methodology. London: Routledge, 1993,186
[231] Van den Bosch, F.A.J., Henk W. Volberda, and Michiel de Boer. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science, 1999,10(5): 551-568
[232] Vanhaverbeke W. and Cloodt, M. Open innovation in value networks, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J.(eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006
[233] Vanhaverbeke. The interorganizational context of open innovation, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J.(eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.
[234] Vanhaverbeke, W., Cloodt, M., and Vareska Van de Vrande. Connecting absorptive capacity and open innovation, 2008
[235] Verona G. A resource-based view of product development. Academy of Management Review, 1999(24): 132-142
[236] Von Hippel, E. Democratizing innovation, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2005
[237] Von Krogh, G. Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 1998, 40(3), 133-153
[238] Weick, K. E. and F. Westley. Organizational learning: affirming an oxymoron, In: S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (eds.), Handbook of organization studies. London: Sage.1996: 440-458
[239] Wen-smith, J. and Powell, W.W. Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: the effects of spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community. Organization Science, 2004(15): 5-21
[240] West, J. and Gallagher, S. Patterns of open innovation in open source software, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and J. West (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006
[241] West, J. Does appropriability enable or retard Open Innovation? in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W, and West, J. (eds), Open innovation: research a new paradigm, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006: 109-133
[242] Wijk, R.V., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., and Volberda, H.W. Knowledge and Networks, in M. Easterby-Smith and Lyles, M.A.(eds.). The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management. Blackwell, Oxford, 2003
[243] Yeung A. K., Ulrich, D.O., Nason, S.W. and Mary Ann Von Glinow. Organizational learning capability. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999
[244] Yin, R. Case study research: design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1988
[245] Zahra, S.A. and George, G. Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization and extension, Academy of Management Review, 2002,27(2), 185-203
[246] Zucker, L.G. Institutional theories of organization: culture and environment. Annual Review of Sociology, 1987(13): 443-464
[247] Zyngier, S., Burstein, F., and McKay, J. The role of knowledge management governance in the implementation of strategy. IEEE: Proceeding of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, 2006
[2]彼得·圣吉.第五项修炼——学习型组织的艺术与实物.郭进隆译.上海:上海三联书店,2004
[3]波普尔.客观知识——一个进化论的研究.舒炜光等译.上海:上海译文出版社,1987
[4]常盤文克.创新之道:日本制造业的创新文化.董旻静译.北京:知识产权出版社,2007
[5]陈劲,陈钰芬.开放创新体系与企业技术创新资源配置.科研管理,2006(3):1-8
[6]陈其荣.技术创新的哲学视野.复旦学报,2000(1):14-20
[7]陈莞,谢富纪.开放式自主创新与其支撑体系互动机制研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2007(3):58-61
[8]戴维·A·加文.建立学习型组织.载彼得·F·德鲁克等著.知识管理.杨开蜂译.北京:中国人民人学出版社,1999
[9]党兴华,李莉,汤喜建.企业技术创新合作中的组织认知模式问题研究.科技管理研究,2006(12):97-100
[10]道格拉斯·诺思.理解经济变迁过程.钟正生,邢华等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008
[11]德鲁克.创新与企业家精神.彭志华译.北京:企业管理出版社,1989
[12]邓汉慧,张子刚.西蒙的有限理性研究综述.中国地质大学学报(社会科学版).2004(6):38-41
[13]方统法.组织设计的知识基础论.上海:复旦大学出版社,2004
[14]冯鹏志.论技术创新行动的环境变量与特征——一种社会学的分析视角.自然辨证法通讯,1997(4):8-9
[15]傅家骥等.技术创新:中国企业发展之路.北京:企业管理出版社,1992
[16]戈黎华.知识创造与创新型企业:[博士学位论文].天津:南开大学,2009
[17]龚伟同.IBM重新定义创新.商务周刊,2006(5):74-77
[18]桂婕,朱东华,武杨.开放式创新中的知识利用研究.商业时代,2008(4):51-52
[19]哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序.邓正来译.上海:三联书店,2003
[20]哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序.贾湛等译.北京经济学院出版社,1989
[21]哈耶克.知识在社会中的运用.载保罗·S.麦耶斯编.知识管理与组织设计.蒋惠工等译.珠海:珠海出版社,1998
[22]哈耶克.自由秩序原理.邓正来译.北京:三联书店,1997
[23]亨利·明茨伯格.明茨伯格论管理.闾佳译.北京:机械工业出版社,2007:86-90
[24]亨利·切萨布鲁夫.开放式创新——进行技术创新并从中赢利的新规则.金马译.北京:清华大学出版社,2005
[25]后锐,张毕西.企业开放式创新:概念、模型及其风险规避.科技进步与对策,2006(3):140-142
[26]胡承浩,金明浩.论开放式创新模式下的企业知识产权战略.科技与法律,2008(2):49-53
[27]黄凯南,程臻宇.认知理性与个体主义方法论的发展.经济研究,2008(7):142-155,160
[28]霍尔茨纳.知识社会学.傅正元,蒋琦译.武汉:湖北人民出版社,1984
[29]霍奇逊.现代制度主义经济宣言.向以斌等译.北京:北京大学出版社,1993
[30]经济合作与发展组织.以知识为基础的经济.北京:机械工业出版社,1997
[31]景玉琴.分野与融合:建构理性与演进理性.江汉论坛,2006(12):5-9
[32]莱昂内尔·罗宾斯.经济科学的性质和意义.朱泱译.北京:商务印书馆,2007
[33]李维安.探求知识管理的制度基础:知识治理.南开管理评论,2007(3):1
[34]李颖.企业联盟内组织间知识共享研究——基于知识治理的视角:[博士学位论文].天津:南开大学,2007
[35]李兆友.技术创新论——哲学视角下的技术创新.沈阳:辽宁人民出版社,2004
[36]李志军.我国自主创新的现状、问题及成因.中国科技投资.2007(5):47-49
[37]理查德·H.霍尔.组织:结构、过程及结果.张友星等译.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2003
[38]理查德·斯格特.组织理论:理性、自然和开放系统.黄洋等译.北京:华夏出版社,2001
[39]刘元芳.开放式自主创新的企业发展模式.发展研究,2008(6):39-40
[40]柳卸林.技术创新经济学.北京:中国经济出版社,1993
[41]罗珉.组织管理学.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2003
[42]罗纳德·伯特.结构洞:竞争的社会结构.任敏等译.上海:格致出版社,上海人民出版社,2008
[43]罗伊·鲍尔,埃米里奥·考拉,维克多·唐.银湖计划——IBM的转型与创新.陈红斌等译.北京:华夏出版社.1999
[44]马克斯·H·博伊索特.知识资产:在信息经济中赢得竞争优势.张群群,陈北译.上海:上海世纪出版集团,2005
[45]马克斯·H·布瓦索.信息空间:认识组织、制度和文化的一种框架.王寅通译.上海:上海译文出版社,2000
[46]迈克尔·波兰尼.个人知识——迈向后批判哲学.许泽民译.贵州:贵州人民出版社,2000
[47]玫·笛德等.创新管理:技术变革、市场变革和组织变革的整合.金马工作室译,北京:清华大学出版社,2004
[48]纳尔逊,温特.经济变迁的演化理论.胡世凯译.北京:商务印书馆,1997
[49]尼尔·保尔森,托·赫尼斯编.组织边界管理多元化观点.佟博等译.北京:经济管理 出版社,2005
[50]尼考拉斯·莱斯切尔.认识经济论:知识理论的经济问题.王晓秦译.江西:江西教育出版社,1999
[51]欧内斯特·岗德林.创新沃土:美国3M公司创新机制.陈雪松等译.北京:华夏出版社,2001
[52]彭纪生.中国技术协同创新论.北京:中国经济出版社,2000
[53]齐建国.技术创新——国家系统的改革与重组.北京:社会科学文献出版社,1995
[54]齐中熙.联想——以创新引领未来.发明与创新,2006(8):17-18
[55]青木昌彦.比较制度分析.周黎安译.上海:上海远东出版社,2001
[56]任寒青,徐震,陈衍泰.企业转型中组织学习与开放式创新战略的研究.科技进步与对策,2006(10):72-75
[57]萨缪尔森.经济学.北京:中国发展出版社,1992
[58]森谷正规.日本的技术——以最少的耗费取得最好的成就.徐鸣,陈慧琴等译.上海:上海翻译出版社公司,1985
[59]沈小峰,胡岗,蒋璐编著.耗散结构论.上海:上海人民出版社,1987
[60]唐炎华,石金涛.国外知识转移研究综述.情报科学,2006(1):153-160
[61]陶建幸.春兰:用全球的大脑为自主创新服务.中国民营科技与经济,2006(6):12-14
[62]汪丁丁.制度分析基础讲义.上海:世纪出版集团,2005
[63]汪丁丁.自由人的自由联合:汪丁丁论网络经济.厦门:鹭江出版社,2000
[64]王健友.知识治理研究——企业的知识本质与组织机理分析:[博士学位论文].天津:南开大学,2007
[65]王岚,王凯.基于认知模式的企业集群知识转移研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2008(2):119-122,132
[66]王圆圆,周明.企业开放式创新中的利益相关者管理.市场研究,2008(4):49-52
[67]威廉森.治理机制.王健等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001
[68]维托德·瓦斯尼基著.知识、创新和经济:一种演化论的探索.第1版.仲继银,胡春译.南昌:江西教育出版社,1999
[69]沃纳·伯克.组织变革:理论和实践.燕清联合组织翻译.北京:中国劳动社会保障出版社,2005
[70]吴先华,郭际.技术创新的悖论与开放式创新.科技与管理,2007(1):127-129
[71]西蒙.管理行为——管理组织决策过程的研究.杨砾等译.北京:北京经济学院出版社,1988
[72]许庆瑞.研究、发展与技术创新管理.北京:高等教育出版社,2000
[73]亚当·斯密.国氏财富的性质和原因的研究.郭大力,王亚南译.北京:商务印书馆,1972
[74]杨静武.开放式创新模式下的技术创新能力研究.财经理论与实践,2007a(2):98-102
[75]杨静武.企业吸收能力与开放式创新.企业管理,2007b(04):98-100
[76]杨丽.模块化、开放式创新与技术多层演进——基于美国计算机产业的技术演进分析.山东社会科学,2008(3):85-88
[77]杨武,申长江.开放式创新理论及企业实践.管理现代化,2005(5):4-6
[78]杨武.基于开放式创新的知识产权管理理论研究.科学学研究,2006(2):311-314
[79]野中郁次郎,胜见明.创新的本质.北京:知识产权出版社,2006
[80]野中郁次郎,竹内宏高.创造知识的企业:日美企业持续创新的动力.李萌,高飞译.北京:知识产权出版社,2006
[81]尹艳林.我国企业自主创新的现状、问题与对策.中国科技投资,2006(3):20-23
[82]于凤霞,温承革.学习型组织——西方学者研究综述.山西财经大学学报,2003(4):83-84
[83]约瑟夫·熊彼特.经济发展理论.何畏等译.北京:商务印书馆,1990
[84]约瑟夫·熊彼特.资本主义、社会主义和民主.吴良健译.北京:商务印书馆,1999
[85]詹森,麦克林.专用知识、通用知识以及组织结构.载保罗·S.麦耶斯编.知识管理与组织设计.蒋惠工等译.珠海:珠海出版社,1998
[86]湛垦华,沈小峰等编.普利高津与耗散结构理论.西安:陕西科学技术出版社,1982
[87]张培富,李艳红.技术创新过程的自组织进化.科学管理研究,2000(6):1-4
[88]张庆普,单伟.企业知识转化过程中的知识整合.经济理论与经济管理,2004(6):47-51
[89]赵金楼,刘国岩.创新型大企业的内涵、模型与开放式创新.科技管理研究,2008(4):219-220,223
[90]赵修卫.组织学习与知识整合.科研管理,2003(3):52-57
[91]郑小平,刘立京,蒋美英.企业开放式创新的产权欲望研究.科学管理研究,2007(3):42-45
[92]郑小平,刘立京,蒋美英.企业开放式创新理论的研究述评.中国科技论坛,2007(6):40-44
[93]邹东涛.理性扩张:春兰的发展道路.北京:人民出版社,2004
[1]Abernathy,W.and Clark,K.B.Innovation:mapping the winds of creative destruction.Research Policy,1985(14):8
[2]Afuah,A.How much do your co-opetitors' capabilities matter in the face of technological change? Strategic Management Journal.2000,21(3):387-404
[3]Ahmadjian,C.L.Inter-organizational knowledge creation:Knowledge and network.In:Takeuchi,H.and Nonaka,I.Hitotsubashi on Knowledge Management.John Wiley &Sons(Asia) Pte Ltd,2004:227-246
[4]Alavi,M.and Leidner,D.E.Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:conceptual foundations and research issues.MIS Quarterly,2001,25(1):107-136
[5]Almeida,P.and Kogut,B.Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks.Management Science,1999,45(7):905-917
[6]Andreu,R.and Sieber S.Knowledge integration across organizations:how different types of knowledge suggest different 'integration trajectories'.Knowledge and Process Management, 12(3): 153-160
[7] Antonelli, C. The business governance of localized knowledge: an information economics approach for the economics of knowledge. Industry and Innovation, 2006,13(3): 227-261.
[8] Antonelli, C. The governance of localized knowledge. Momigliano Working Paper, 2005, No. 02/2005
[9] Argyris, C. Double loop learning. Harvard Business Review, 1977: 115-125
[10] Argyris, C. and Schon, D. Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1978: 9-10
[11] Arora, A., Fosfuri, A., and Gambardella, A. markets for technology and their implications for corporate strategy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2001,10(2): 419-451
[12] Arthur, B. Competing technologies: an overview, in: Dosi, G, C. Freeman, R., Nelson, Silverberg, G, and Soete, L.(eds.). Technical changeand economic theory. London: Pinter. 1988: 590-607
[13] Asanuma, B. Manufacturer-Supplier relationships in Japan and the concept of relation-specific skill. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 1989(3): 1-30
[14] Bamford, J., Gomes-Casseres, B., and Robinson, M. Mastering alliance strategy: a comprehensive guide to design management and organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass John Wiley, 2003
[15] Benner, M. J. and Tushman, M. L. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 2003(2): 238-256
[16] Walliser, B. Instrumental rationality and cognitive rationality. Theory and Decision, 1989(27): 7-36
[17] Russell, B. The Problems of philosophy, The United States of America, 1959: 109
[18] Birkinshaw, J., Nobel, R., and Ridderstr(?)le, J. Knowledge as a contingency variable: do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure? Organization Science, 2002, 13(3): 274-289
[19] Boer, D.M., Frans. A.J., Van, D.B. and Volberda, H. W. Management organizational knowledge integration in the emerging multimediu complex. Journal of Management Studies, 1999, 36(6): 379-398
[20] Boisot, M. H. Is your firm a creative destroyer? Competitive learning and knowledge flows in the technological strategies of firms. Research Policy, 1995, 24: 489-506
[21] Borgatti, S. P., and Cross, R. A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 2003(49): 432-445
[22] Borger, M. Knowledge sharing and knowledge protection in R&D collaboration: [dissertation]. Eindhoven University of Technology, Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology, 2004
[23] Boyd, B. Corporate linkages and organizational environment: a test of the resource dependence model. Strategic Management Journal, 1990,11(6): 419-430
[24] Brandenburger, A. M. and Nalebuff, B. J. Co-opetition. New York: Doubleday, 1996
[25] Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation. In: Cohen, M. and Sproull, L. S. (Eds), Organizational Learning. London: Sage, 1996
[26] Carlile, P. R. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 2002,13(4): 442-455
[27] Cassiman, B. and Veugelers, R. R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review, 2002, 92(4): 1169-1184
[28] Castilla, E.J., Hwang, H., Granovetter, E., Granovetter, M. Social networks in Silicon Valley,in: Lee, C.M., Miller, W., Hancock, M.G, and Rowen, H.(eds.), The Silicon Valley edge. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000: 218-247
[29] Chaminade, C. and Edquist, C. From theory to practice: the use of the systems of innovation approach in innovation policy, in: Hage, J. and M. Meeus. Innovation, Science and Institutional Change: A Research Handbook, Oxford, 2006
[30] Chong Ju Choi, Cheng, P., Hilton, B., and Russell, E. Knowledge governance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2005, 9(6): 67-75
[31] Christensen, C. The innovator's dilemma.Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1997.
[32] Christensen, J. F. Wither core competency for the large corporation in an open innovation world? in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and J. West (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006
[33] Clark, A., and Karmiloff-Smith, A. The cognizer's innards. Mind and Language, 1994, 8(4): 540-547
[34] Cohen, S.S. and Fields, G Social capital and capital gains: an examination of social capital in Silicon Valley, in: Kenney, M.(eds.), Understanding Silicon Valley: Anatomy of an Entrepreneurial Region, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000: 190-217
[35] Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990(35): 128-152
[36] Cohendet, P. and Llerena, P. Routines and incentives: the role of communities in the firm. Industrial and corporate change, 2003,12(2): 271-297
[37] Collins, J. and Porras, J.I. Built to last: successful habits of visionary companies. Harper Business, New York, 1994: 90-212
[38] Conner, K. R. and Prahalad, C. K. A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism. Organization Science, 1996, 7(5): 477-501
[39] Cooper, R.G Your NPD portfolio may be harmful to your business's health. PDMA Visions, 2005(29): 22-26
[40] Crossan M. M, Lane, H.W., and White, R.E. An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 1999,24(3): 522-537
[41] Dahlander, L. and Gann D. 2007. Appropriability, proximity, routines and innovation: How open is open innovation?, Paper presented at the Druid Summer Conference 2007, 34.
[42] Damanpour, F. A review of innovation research in economics, sociology and technology managementOmega. 1997,25(1): 15-28
[43] Damanpour, F. Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal. 1991, 34(3): 557
[44] David, P. A. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 1985,75(2): 332-337
[45] De Moor and Smits, M.T. An indicator wizard for the knowledge governance framework. Progress Report of the MERIT Project, Tilburg University, 2005
[46] De Wit, Jan, Dankbaar, Ben and Vissers, Geert. Open Innovation: the new way of knowledge transfer? Journal of Business Chemistry, 2007.4(1): 11-19
[47] Demsetz, H. The theory of the firm revisited. In: O. E. Williamson and S. G Winter (eds.), The nature of the firm. Oxford University Press, New York, 1991: 159-178
[48] DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields, American Sociological Review, 1983, 48(2): 147-160
[49] Dittrich, K., Duysters, G., AP de Man. Strategic repositioning by means of alliance networks: The case of IBM. Research Policy, 2007(36): 1496-1511
[50] Dodgson, M. and Bessant, J. Effective innovation policy: a new approach London: International Thomson Business Press, 1996: 123
[51] Dodgson, M., Gann, David and Salter, Ammon. The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: the case of Procter & Gamble. R&D Management; 2006, 36(3): 333-346
[52] Dosi, G. Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of economic literature, 1988,26(3): 1120-1171
[53] Dosi, G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 1982(11): 147-162
[54] Dosi, G., Marengo, L., and Fagiolo, G. Learning in evolutionary environments, in: Dopfer, K. (eds.), The evolutionary foundations of economics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005: 255-338
[55] Doz, Y. L. The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal, 1996(17): 55-83
[56] Dushnitsky, G. Limitations to inter-organizational knowledge acquisition: the paradox of corporate venture capital. In: Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (CD), 2004: 1543-8643
[57] Dyer, J.H. and Nobeoka, K. Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21): 345-367
[58] Dyer, J.H. and Singh, H. The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of management review, 1998, 23(4): 660-679
[59] Easterby-Smith, M., Burgoyne, J. and Araujo, L. Organizational learning and the learning organization. London: Sage, 1999
[60] Edquist, C., Hommen, L., Johnson, B., Lemola, T., Malerba, E, Reiss, T, Smith, K. The ISE policy statement-the innovation policy implications of the 'innovations systems and european integration'. Research project funded by the TSER programme (DG XII). Linkoping University, Linkoping, 1998
[61] Eriksson, I. and Dickson, G. Knowledge sharing in high technology companies. AMCIS 2000 Proceedings
[62] Fabrizio, K.R. The use of university research in firm innovation, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and J. West, (eds), Open Innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006: 134-160
[63] Foss, N. J. Selective intervention and internal hybrids: interpreting and learning from the rise and decline of the Oticon Spaghetti organization. Organization Science, 2003(14): 331-349
[64] Foss, N.J. The emerging knowledge governance approach: challenges and characteristics. Durid Working Paper, No. 06-10, Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics, 2006
[65] Foss, N.J., Husted, K., Michailova, S., and Pedersen, T. Governing knowledge processes: theoretical foundations and research opportunities. CKG Working Paper No. 1/2003
[66] Foster, J. Competitive selection, self-organization and Joseph Schumpeter. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2000,10(3): 311-328
[67] Freeman, C. and Scoete, L. The economics of industrial innovation. London and Washington, 1997
[68] Freeman, C. The economics of industrial innovation. The MIT press, 1982
[69] Fujimoto, Takahiro. The evolution of a manufacturing system at Toyota. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999
[70] Gallini, N. T. The economics of patents: lessons from recent US patent reform. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2002, 16(2): 131-154
[71] Gambardella A, Giarratana M. Innovation for products, innovation for licensing: patents and downstream assets in the software security industry, 2006
[72] Garvin, D. A. building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, 1993(71): 78-91
[73] Gassmann, O. and Enkel, E. Towards a theory of open innovation: three core process achetypes, R&D Management Conference, 2006
[74] Gassmann, O. Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management. 2006, 36(3): 223-228
[75] Gigerenzer, G. The adaptive toolbox. In: Gerd Gigerenzer and Reinhard Selten (eds.). Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, 2001. 37-50
[76] Goh, S.C. Improving organizational learning capability: lessons from two studies. The learning organization, 2003, 10(4): 216-227
[77] Grandori A. and Neri, M. The fairness properties of networks', in Grandori, A.(ed.), Interfirm networks: organization and industrial competitiveness. London: Routledge, 1999
[78] Grandori, A. Governance structures, coordination mechanisms and cognitive models. Journal of Management and Governance, 1997(1): 29-42
[79] Grandori, A. Knowledge governance mechanisms and the theory of the firm. Presented to the Max Plank Institute - Link conference "Cognition, Evolution and the Theory of the firm",2000
[80] Grandori, A. Neither Hierarchy nor identity: knowledge governance mechanisms and the theory of the firm. Journal of Management and Governance, 2001(5): 381-399
[81] Grant R.M. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 1996(17):109-122
[82] Grant, R.M. and Baden-Fuller, C. A knowledge-based theory of inter-firm collaboration. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 1995.17-21
[83] Gupta, A.K., and Govindarajan, V. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 2000a, 21(4): 473-496.
[84] Gupta, A., K. and Govindarajan, V. Knowledge management social dimension: Lesson from Nucor Steel. Sloan Management Review, 2000b(42): 77-80
[85] Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G., and Shalley, C.E. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal, 2006,49(4): 693-706
[86] Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. The core competence of the corporation, Harvard Business Review, 1990, 68(3): 79-91
[87] Hamel, G. Competition for competence and interorganizational learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 1991(12): 83-103
[88] Han van der Meer. Open innovation-the Dutch treat: challenges in thinking in business models. Creativity & Innovation Management. 2007, 16(2): 192-202
[89] Hannan, M.T. Inertia, density and the structure of organizational populations: entries in European automobile industries, 1886-1981. Organization Studies, 1997,18(2): 193-228
[90] Hansen, M.T. Knowledge networks: explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 2002(13): 232-248
[91] Hansen, M.T. The Search-Transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44(1): 82-111
[92] Hansen, M.T., Podolny, J.M., and Pfeffer, J. So many ties, so little time: a task contingency perspective on corporate social capital.Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 2001, 13 (3): 232-248
[93] Hayek, F.A. Scientism and the study of society. Economica, 1942(35): 267-291
[94] Hayek, F.A. The results of human action but not of human design, in: Hayek. Studies in philosophy, politics and economics, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967
[95] Hayek, F.A. The sensory order. An inquiry into the foundations of theoretical psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1952
[96] Hayek, F.A. The fatal conceit: the errors of socialism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988
[97] Hedlund, G. A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 2007,15(S2): 73-90
[98] Henderson, R. and Clark, K.B. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990,35(1): 12
[99] Henderson, R.M. The failure of established firms in the face of technical change. Doctoral Thesis on Business Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA,1988, 31
[100] Hernes, T. Enabling and constraining properties of organizational boundaries, in: Paulsen, N. and Hernes, T. Managing boundaries in organizations: multiple perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, 2003: 35-54
[101] Holmqvist, M. Learning in imaginary organizations: creating interorganizational knowledge. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 1999,12(5): 419-438
[102] Holmqvist, M and Larsson, R. Interlevel Learning Dynamics: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration Within and Between Organizations. Lund Institute of Economic Research Working Paper Series, 2004.
[103] Holmstrom, B. The Firm as a subeconomy. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1999(15): 74-102
[104] Huber, G.P. Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organizational Science, 1991, 2(1), 88-115
[105] Huston, L. and Sakkab, N. Implementing open innovation. Research Technology Management. 2007, 50(2): 21-25
[106] Inkpen, A.C. Creating knowledge through collaboration. California Management Review, 1996, 39(1): 123-140
[107] Inkpen, A. C. and Dinur, A. knowledge management processes and international joint ventures. Organization Science, 1998, 9 (4): 454-468
[108] Johnson, B. and Gregersen, B. System of innovation and economic integration. Journal of Industry Studies, 1994(2): 1-18
[109] Kahneman, D, and Tversky, A. choices, values and frames, New York: Cambrige University Press and the Russell Sage Foundation, 2000
[110] Kahneman, D. Maps of bounded rationality: a perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. Prize Lecture, 2002:450-451
[111] Katila, R. and Ahuja, G. Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 2002(45): 1183-1194
[112] Keil, T. External corporate venturing: strategic renewal in rapidly changing industries. WestPort, CT: Quorum Books, 2002
[113] Kemp, R., Rip, A., and Schot, J.W. Constructing transition paths through the management of niches, in: Garud, R., and Karnoe, P. (eds.), Path dependence and creation. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 2001: 269-299
[114] Klaes, M. and Esther-Mirjam Sent. A conceptual history of the emergence of bounded rationality. History of Political Economy, 37(1): 27-59
[115] Kofrnan, F. Lecture slides. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Sloan School of Management, 1992
[116] Kogut, B. and Zander, U. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 1992, 3(3): 383-397
[117] Kostova, Tatiana. Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 1999,24(2): 308-324
[118] Lam, A. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: problems of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 1997, 18(6): 973-996
[119] Lane, P. J. and Lubatkin, M. Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 1998(19): 461-477
[120] Langlois, R.N. Rule-following, expertise, and rationality: a new behavioral economics? in: Dennis, K. Rationality in economics: alternative perspectives, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998
[121] Laursen, K. and Salter, A. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms, Strategic Management Review, 2006(27): 131-150
[122] Leonard, D, and Sensiper, S. The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review, 1998.40 (3):112-132
[123] Levinthal, D.A. Organizational adaptation and environmental selection-interrelated processes of change. Organization Science, 1991, 2(1): 140-145
[124] Levitt, B. and March, J.G Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 1988(14): 319-340
[125] Lichtenthaler, U. and Ernst, H. Opening up the innovation process: the role of technology aggressiveness. R&D Management, 2009, 39(1): 38-54
[126] Lichtenthaler, U. Integrated roadmaps for open innovation. Research Technology Management, 2008, 51(3): 45-49
[127] Liebeskind, J. P., Oliver, A. L., Zucker, L., and Brewer, M. Social networks, learning, and flexibility: sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Studies, 1996(7): 428-441
[128] Loasby, B. J. Knowledge, institutions, and evolution in economics. Routledge, London, 1999
[129] Loasby, B.J. Decision premises, decision cycles and decomposition. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2000,9(4): 709-731
[130] Luria, AR. The working brain: an introduction to neuropsychology. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, Ltd, 1973
[131] Lynch, R. P. Business alliance guide. New York: John Wiley, 1993
[132] Madsen, T.L., Mosakowski, E., and Zaheer, S. The dynamics of knowledge floes: human capital mobility, knowledge retention and change. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2002,6(2): 164-175
[133] Mahnke, V. and Pedersen, T. Knowledge governance and value creation, in: Mahnke, V. and Pedersen, T.(eds.). Knowledge flows, governance and the multinational enterprise. London: Palgrave Macmillan: 3-17
[134] Mansfield, E. The economics of technological change. New York, W.W.Norton and Company, 1971
[135] Mantzavinos, C., North, D. C., and Shariq S. Learning, Institutions, and economic performance. Perspectives on Politics, 2004,2(1): 75-84
[136] March, J. G. Continuity and change in theories of organizational action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996(41): 278-287
[137] March, J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 1991,2(1): 71-87
[138] March, J. G. Rationality, foolishness, and adaptive intelligence. Strategic Management Journal, 2006(27): 201-214
[139] Martens, B. The cognitive mechanics of economic development and institutional change. Routledge, 2004
[140] Mascitelli, R. Contribution of tacit knowledge to technological innovation. Journal of Production Innovation Management, 2000(6): 179-195
[141] Matusik, S. and Hill, C.W.L. The utilization of contingent work, knowledge creation and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998,23(4): 680-697
[142] Maula, M. V. J., Keil, T., and Salmenkaita, J. P. Open innovation in systemic innovation contexts, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., and West, J. (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.
[143] McCain, R.A. A framework for cognitive economics. London: Praeger, 1992
[144] McLoughlin, I. Creative technological change: the shaping of technology and organizations. Routledge, 1999
[145] Metcalfe, S. Evolutionary approachs to population thinking and the problem of growth and development, in: Dopfer, K.(eds.). Evolutionary economics: program and scopes. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher, 2001:161
[146] Miller D. A preliminary typology of organizational learning: synthesizing the literature. J Manage 1996,22(3): 485 -505
[147] Miller, K.D., Meng Zhao, and Roger, J. C. Additional interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to March's exploration-exploitation model. Academy of Management Journal, 2006(49): 709-722
[148] Mueser, R. Indentifying technical innovations. IEEE Transactions on Engineer-Management, 1985, EM-32(4)
[149] Murray, F. Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring Tissue engineering. Research Policy, 2002, 31(8-9): 1389-1403
[150] Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998,23: 242-266
[151] Nelson, R. and Winter, S. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Harvard Press, 1982
[152] Nelson, R. Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change. Journal of Economic Literature, 1995(33): 48-90
[153] Nevis, E.C., DiBella, A.J, and Gould, J.M. Understanding organizations as learning systems. Sloan Management Review, 1995(Winter): 73-85
[154] Newell, A. unified theories of cognition, Cambridge (Mass): Harward University Press, 1990
[155] Nightingale, P. A cognitive model of innovation. Research Policy, 1998(27): 689-709
[156] Nonaka I. Toward middle-up-down management: accelerating information creation. Sloan Management Review, 1988,29(3): 9-18
[157] Nonaka, I. Dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation, Organization Science, 1994, 5(1):14-37
[158] Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., and Konno, N. SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 2000. (33): 5-34
[159] Nonaka.I. et.al. Organizational knowledge creation theory: evolutionary paths and future advances, Organization Studies, 2006, 27(8): 1179-1208
[160] Nooteboom, B. Collaboration, trust and the structure of relationships, in: Nooteboom, B. and Stam, E(eds.). Micro-foundations for innovation policy, WRR Study: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2008
[161] Nooteboom, B. Innovation and diffusion in small firms: theory and evidence, Small Business Economics, 1994,6 (5): 327-347
[162] Nooteboom, B. Inter-firm alliances: analysis and design. Routledge, London, 1999
[163] Nooteboom, B. Inter-firm collaboration, learning and networks: an integrated approach. Routledge, 2004
[164] Nooteboom, B. Learning and innovation in organizations and economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000
[165] Nooteboom, B. Towards a dynamic theory of transactions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1992(2): 281-299
[166] Nooteboom, B., Berger, H., and Noorderhaven, N.G Effects of trust and governance on relational risk. Academy of Management Journal, 1997,40(2): 308-338
[167] Nooteboom, B., Haverbeke, W.V., Duysters, G, Gilsing, V., and Ad van den Oord. Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 2007(36): 1016-1034
[168] North. D.C. Economic performance through time. The American Economic Review, 1994, 84(3): 359-368
[169] North. D.C. Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton University Press, 2005
[170] O'Conner, G.C. Open, radical innovation: toward an integrated model in large established firms, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J. (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.
[171] OECD. Globalization and open innovation, OECD: Paris, 2008.
[172] Olk, P. A Knowledge-Based perspective on the transformation of individual-level relationships into interorganizational structures: the case of R&D consortia. European Management Journal, 1998,16(1): 39-49
[173] O'Reilly, C.A, and Tushman, M.L. The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review. 2004,82(4):74-81
[174] Peltokorpi, V. and Tsuyuki, E. Knowledge governance in a Japanese project-based organization. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 2006(4): 36-45
[175] Perkmann, M. and Walsh, K. University-industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews. 2007, 9(4): 259-280
[176] Perkmann, M., and Walsh, K. Relationship-based university-industry links and open innovation: towards a research agenda, AIM Working Paper No. 041-July-2006
[177] Perrow, C. Complex organizations: a critical essay, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986
[178] Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G The external control of organizations, a resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1978
[179] Polanyi, M. The tacit dimension. Kegan Paul, Routledge, London, 1967
[180] Popper, M. and Lipshitz, R. Organizational learning mechanisms: a structural and cultural approach to organizational learning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1998, 43(2): 161-179
[181] Poppo, L. and Zenger, T. Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements. Strategic Management Journal, 2002,23(8): 707-725
[182] Porter, M.E. Competitive advantage. New York: The Free Press, 1985
[183] Postrel, S and Rumelt, R.P. Incentives, routines, and self-command. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1992,1(3): 397425
[184] Postrel, S. Islands of shared knowledge: specialization and mutual understanding in problem-solving teams. Organization Science, 2002,13(3): 303-320
[185] Powell, W., K. Koput and L. Smith-Doerr. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996(41): 116-145
[186] Pozzali, A., and Viale, R. Cognition, types of "tacit knowledge" and technology transfer, in: Topol, R., and Walliser, B. Cognitive economics: new trends. Elsevier, 2007
[187] Raffaelli, T. Alfred Marshall's early philosophical writings. Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology: Archival Supplement, n.4,1994,53-159
[188] Raffaelli, T. Marshall's evolutionary economics, London: Routledge, 2002
[189] Raisinghani, M., Knowledge management: a cognitive perspective on business and education, American Business Review, 2000,18(2): 105-112
[190] Ranson, S., Hinings, B., and Greenwood, R. The structuring of organizational structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1980,25(1): 1-17
[191] Redding, S. Path dependence, endogenous innovation, and growth. International Economic Review, 2002,43(4): 1215-1248
[192] Reinhard, S. What is bounded rationality? in: Gigerenzer, G. and Selten R.(eds.). Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, 2001: 13-36
[193] Ringberg, T., and Reihlen, M. Towards a socio-cognitive approach to knowledge transfer. Journal of Management Studies, 2008,45(5): 912-935
[194] Rizzello, S. and Turvani, M. Institutions meet mind: the way out of an impasse. constitutional political economy, 2000(11): 165-180
[195] Rizzello, S. and Turvani, M. Subjective diversity and social learning: a cognitive perspective for understanding institutional behavior. Constitutional Political Economy, 2002, (13): 201-214
[196] Rizzello, S. Introduction: towards a cognitive evolutionary economics, in: Rizzello (eds.). Cognitive developments in economics. London: Routledge, 2003
[ 197] Rizzello, S. The economics of the mind, Edward Elgar: Aldershot, 1999
[198] Rosenberg, N. Exploring the black box: technology, economics, and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994
[199] Rowley, T., David, B., Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21): 36-386
[200] 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
[201] Santos, F. M. and Eisenhardt, K. M. Organizational boundaries and the theories of organization. Organization Science, 2005,16(5): 491-508
[202] Senge P. Sharing knowledge: the leader's role is key to a learning culture. Executive Excellence, 1997,4(11): 17-18
[203] Senge, P. M. The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday, 1990
[204] Shukla, M. Competing through knowledge: building a learning organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997
[205] Siggelkow, N. and Rivkin, J. W. When exploration backfires: unintended consequences of multilevel organizational search. Academy of management Journal, 2006(49): 779-795
[206] Simcoe, T.S. Open standards and intellectual property rights, In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., and West, J. (eds), Open Innovation: Research a new paradigm, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006:161-183
[207] Simon H.A. Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 1991, 2(1):125- 134
[208] Simon, H.A. Bounded rationality in social science: today and tomorrow, Mind & Society, 2000, 1(1): 25-40
[209] Simon, H.A. Reason in human affairs, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983.40
[210] Simon, H.A. Theories of decision making in economics and behavioral science, American Economic Review, 1959: 223-283
[211] Singley M.K. and Anderson, J. R. The transfer of cognitive skill. Harvard University Press, 1989: 66-69
[212] Sitkin S. B, Sutcliffe, K.M, and Schroeder, R.G Distinguishing control form learning in total quality management-A contingency perspective. Academy of Management Review,1994(19): 537-564
[213] Sitkin, S.B., Sutcliffe, K.M., and Schroeder, R.G Distinguishing control from learning in total quality management: a contingency perspective. Academy of Management Review, 1991, 19(3): 537-564
[214] Smith, K. Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise & Innovation Management Studies, 2000,1(1): 73-102
[215] Smith, V. L. Constructivist and ecological rationality in economics. The American Economic Review, 2003, 93(3): 465-508
[216] Stata, R. Organizational learning-the key to management innovation. Sloan Management Review, 1989 (Spring): 63-74
[217] Stemberg, R. J. Tacit agreements between authors and editors. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1985(8): 746-47
[218] Szulanski, G Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm, Strategic Management Journal, 1996( 17): 27-43
[219] Taylor, A. and Greve, H. R. Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovation teams. Academy of Management Journal, 2006(49): 723-740
[220] Teece, D. J. Competition, cooperation, and innovation: organizational arrangements for regimes of rapid technological progress. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1992(18): 1-25
[221] Teece, D.J. Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy, Research Policy, 1986(15): 285-305
[222] Thietart R A. and Forgues B. Chaos theory and organization. Organization Science, 1995,6(1): 19-31
[223] Tushman, M.L. and Anderson P. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1986(31): 443
[224] Tushman, M.L.and Nadler, D.A. Organizing for innovation. California Management Review, 1986,118(3): 75-77
[225] Tushman, M. L. and O'Reilly, C. Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review. 1996(38): 8-30
[226] Uzzi, B. and Gillespie, J.J. Inter-firm ties and the organization of the firm's capital structure in the middle financial market, in: Knoke, D. and Andrews, S (eds.) Research in the sociology of organizations, Vol. 16, Stamford, CT: JAI Press, 1999,107-126
[227] Uzzi, B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997,42(1): 35-67
[228] Uzzi, B., and Lancaster, R. 2003. Relational embeddedness and learning: the case of bank loan managers and their clients. Management Science, 2003(49): 383-399
[229] Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L. and Koenig, R. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 1976(4): 323
[230] Vanberg, V. Rational choice, rule-following and institutions: an evolutionary perspective, in: U. Maki et al. Rationality, institutions and economic methodology. London: Routledge, 1993,186
[231] Van den Bosch, F.A.J., Henk W. Volberda, and Michiel de Boer. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science, 1999,10(5): 551-568
[232] Vanhaverbeke W. and Cloodt, M. Open innovation in value networks, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J.(eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006
[233] Vanhaverbeke. The interorganizational context of open innovation, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J.(eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006.
[234] Vanhaverbeke, W., Cloodt, M., and Vareska Van de Vrande. Connecting absorptive capacity and open innovation, 2008
[235] Verona G. A resource-based view of product development. Academy of Management Review, 1999(24): 132-142
[236] Von Hippel, E. Democratizing innovation, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2005
[237] Von Krogh, G. Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 1998, 40(3), 133-153
[238] Weick, K. E. and F. Westley. Organizational learning: affirming an oxymoron, In: S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (eds.), Handbook of organization studies. London: Sage.1996: 440-458
[239] Wen-smith, J. and Powell, W.W. Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: the effects of spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community. Organization Science, 2004(15): 5-21
[240] West, J. and Gallagher, S. Patterns of open innovation in open source software, in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and J. West (eds.), Open innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006
[241] West, J. Does appropriability enable or retard Open Innovation? in: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W, and West, J. (eds), Open innovation: research a new paradigm, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006: 109-133
[242] Wijk, R.V., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., and Volberda, H.W. Knowledge and Networks, in M. Easterby-Smith and Lyles, M.A.(eds.). The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management. Blackwell, Oxford, 2003
[243] Yeung A. K., Ulrich, D.O., Nason, S.W. and Mary Ann Von Glinow. Organizational learning capability. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999
[244] Yin, R. Case study research: design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1988
[245] Zahra, S.A. and George, G. Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization and extension, Academy of Management Review, 2002,27(2), 185-203
[246] Zucker, L.G. Institutional theories of organization: culture and environment. Annual Review of Sociology, 1987(13): 443-464
[247] Zyngier, S., Burstein, F., and McKay, J. The role of knowledge management governance in the implementation of strategy. IEEE: Proceeding of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, 2006
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |