Journal of Technology Innovation (기술혁신연구)

Korea Society for Innovation Managemetn & Economics (기술경영경제학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Status and Role of Technological Knowledge Exchange Network in Regional Cluster: Performance Differences in Structural Equivalent Groups

지역 클러스터 내 기술지식 교류 네트워크의 지위와 역할: 구조적 등위성 집단의 성과 차이

  • 안재광 (금오공과대학교 ICT융합특성화연구센터) ;
  • 김진한 (금오공과대학교 경영학과)
  • Received : 2019.04.22
  • Accepted : 2019.08.19
  • Published : 2019.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study empirically conduct structural equivalence analysis based on social network analysis in picking up on overall structural characteristics of technological knowledge exchange in a regional cluster. Previous conceptual studies so far have argued that performance differences among structurally equivalent groups exist. However, because little research has been done to empirically investigate this conceptual hypothesis, this study is conducted as complementary to fill this void. For analysis, we utilize two-mode network data consisted of 2,550 firms by investigating 53 technological knowledge exchange-related associations within Gumi national industrial cluster. The results show that some structurally equivalent groups can be defined appropriately and its role can be conditioned by firms' salient characteristics attached to each structural equivalent groups. In addition, it is presented through the present study that performance difference in structural equivalent groups can be distinct by some selected performance indicators. Finally, this study suggests the need to advance the study of performance differences in structurally equivalent groups in the future.

본 연구는 지역 클러스터 내에 존재하는 기술지식 교류 네트워크의 전반적인 구조적 특징을 파악하기 위해 사회네트워크 분석에 토대한 구조적 등위성 분석을 실증적으로 수행한다. 지금까지 기존 연구들은 구조적으로 등위적인 집단들 간에 성과차이가 존재하는 것으로 개념적으로 주장하였다. 그러나, 이에 대한 실증연구가 거의 없어 본 연구가 이를 보완하기 위해 수행되었다. 분석을 위해 구미국가산업단지 내에서 53개의 기술지식 교류 관련 협회 등을 조사하여 2550개 기업의 2-mode 네트워크 데이터를 활용하였다. 분석결과, 구조적 등위 집단들이 규정되고 중요한 기업들의 속성에 기초하여 네트워크 기존기업(established firms), 중개 기업(broker firms), 신생기업(emerging firms), 고립 기업(isolationist firms)으로 4개의 역할이 결정될 수 있었다. 또한, 블록 1에서 불록 4로 구분된 각각의 구조적 등위 집단들 즉, 역할들 간의 성과(매출액), 급진적 혁신성향, 기술혁신역량 차이에 대한 검증에서는 역할마다 검증결과가 차별적일 수 있음이 본 연구를 통해 제시되었다. 마지막으로 본 연구는 구조적으로 등위적인 집단들 간의 성과차이에 대한 연구를 발전시킬 필요성을 제안한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김요한, 심승진 (2007), "제조업의 가치사슬 네트워크 분석과 클러스터정책에 대한 시사점 , 기술혁신연구, 제15권 제1호, pp. 203-233.
  2. 박은영, 고분이, 조근태 (2018), "소셜네트워크분석을 이용한 자동차 기업 융합특허의 동태적 변화 분석", 기술혁신연구, 제26권 제3호, pp. 1-36. https://doi.org/10.14386/SIME.2018.26.3.1
  3. 안재광, 김진한. (2014). "한국 산업 클러스터에서 기업 간 네트워크 구조와 지역 혁신역량의 역할". 한국생산관리학회지, 제25권 제1호, pp. 23-45.
  4. Aharonson, B.S., J.A. Baum and M.P. Feldman (2007), "Desperately seeking spillovers? Increasing returns, industrial organization and the location of new entrants in geographic and technological space.", Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (1), pp. 89-130. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtl034
  5. Alba. R.D. (1973), "A Graph Theoretic Definition of a Sociomctric Clique", Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 3 (1), pp. 113-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.1973.9989826
  6. Amit, R. and P. Shoemaker (1993), "Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent", Strategic Management Journal, 14 (1), pp. 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140105
  7. Anderson, H., V. Havila, P. Andersen and A. Halinen (1998), "Position and Role Conceptualizing Dynamics in Business Networks", Scandinavian Journal of Management, 14 (3), pp. 167-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5221(97)00037-7
  8. Anderson, J. and S. Jay (1984), "Physician Utilization of Computers: A Network Analysis of the Diffusion Process", Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 6 (3/4), pp. 21-35. https://doi.org/10.1300/J075v06n03_02
  9. Audretsch, D.B. (1995), "Firm profitability, growth, and innovation", Review of Industrial Organization, 10 (5), pp. 579-588. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01026883
  10. Berten, H. and R. van Rossem (2011), "Mechanisms of peer influence among adolescents: cohesion versus structural equivalence", Sociological Perspectives, 54 (2), pp. 183-204. https://doi.org/10.1525/sop.2011.54.2.183
  11. Boorman, S.A. and H.C. White (1976), "Social structure from multiple networks. Ii. Role structures", American Journal of Sociology, 81 (6), pp. 1384-1446. https://doi.org/10.1086/226228
  12. Breschi, S. and F. Malerba (2001), "The geography of innovation and economic clustering: some introductory notes", Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (4), pp. 817-833. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.4.817
  13. Burgelman, R.A., C.M. Christensen and S.C. Wheelright (2009), Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  14. Burt, R. S. and G. Janicik (1996), Social contagion and social structure. In D. Iacobucci (Ed.), Networks in marketing (pp. 32-49), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  15. Burt, R.S. (1976), " Positions in networks", Social Forces, 55 (1), pp. 93-122. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/55.1.93
  16. Burt, R.S. (1987), "Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence", American Journal of Sociology, 92 (6), pp. 1287-1335. https://doi.org/10.1086/228667
  17. Burt, R.S. (1992), Structural holes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  18. Burt, R.S. (1978), "Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence as a Basis for Network Subgroups", Sociological Methods & Research, 7 (2), pp. 189-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/004912417800700205
  19. Burt, R.S. and T. Uchiyama (1989), "The Conditional Significance of Communication for Interpersonal Influence." pp. 67-87 in The Small World, edited by M. Kochen. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.",.
  20. Burt. R.S. (1982), Towards a Structural Theory of Action, New York: Academic Press.
  21. Chen, J., Z. Zhu and H.Y. Xie (2004), "Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study", Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (1), pp. 195-212. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930410513003
  22. Chisea, V., P. Coughlan and C.A. Voss (1996), "Development of a Technological Innovation Audit", Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13 (2), pp. 105-136.. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1320105
  23. Christensen, C.M. (1997), The Innovators Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. .
  24. Christensen, J.F. (1995), "Asset Profile for Technological Innovation", Research Policy, 24 (5), pp. 727-745. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(94)00794-8
  25. Churchill, G.A. (1991), Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations, Fort Worth. TX: Dryden Press.
  26. Cohen, S.S., and G. Fields (1999), "Social capital and capital gains in Silicon Valley", California management review, 41 (2), pp. 108-130. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165989
  27. Coleman, J., E. Katz and H. Menzel (1957), "The Diffusion of an Innovation Among Physicians", Sociometry, 20 (4), pp. 253-270 . https://doi.org/10.2307/2785979
  28. Coleman, J.S. (1988), "Social capital in the creation of human capital", American Journal of Sociology, 94 , pp. S95-S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
  29. DiMaggio, P.J. (1986), "Structural analysis of organizational fields: A blockmodel approach.", Research in Organizational Behavior, 8 , pp. 335-370.
  30. Doreian, P., V. Batagelj and A. Ferligoj (2004), "Generalized blockmodeling of two-mode network data.", Social networks, 26 (1), pp. 29-53.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2004.01.002
  31. Eisingerich, A.B., S.J. Bell and P. Tracey (2010), "How can clusters sustain performance? The role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty", Research Policy, 39 (2), pp. 239-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.12.007
  32. Fritsch, M., and M. Kauffeld-Monz (2010), "The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks", Annals of Regional Science, 44 (1), pp. 21-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-008-0245-8
  33. Galaskiewicz, f. and R. Burt (1991), " Interorganization Contagion in Corporate Philanthropy", Administrative Science Quarterly, 36 (1), pp. 88-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393431
  34. Granovetter, M.S. (1973), The Strength of Weak Ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78 (6), pp. 1360-1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
  35. Granovetter, M.S. (1985), "Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness", American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), pp. 481-510. https://doi.org/10.1086/228311
  36. Hannan, M.T., and J. Freeman (1989), Organizational Ecology, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
  37. Hour, S. and L. Kan (2014), "Structural and regular equivalence of community detection in social networks", In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining,, pp. 808-813.
  38. Inkpen, A.C. and E.W.K. Tsang (2005), "Social Capital Network and Knowledge Transfer", Academy of Management Review, 30 (1), pp. 146-165. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2005.15281445
  39. Kuwashima, Y. (2018), "Structural Equivalence Explains Contagion: A Case of Cosmetics", Annals of Business Administrative Science, 17 (1), pp. 23-30 . https://doi.org/10.7880/abas.0170920a
  40. Lorrain, F. and H.C. White (1971), "Structural Equivalence of Individuals in Social Networks", The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1 (1), pp. 49-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.1971.9989788
  41. Marsden, P.V. and N.E. Friedkin (1993), " Network Studies of Social Influence", Sociological Methods & Research, 22 (1), pp. 127-151 . https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124193022001006
  42. Nadel S.F. (1957), The Theory of Social Structure, London: Cohen and West .
  43. Nahapiet, J. and S. Ghoshal (1998), "Social Capital, Intellectual Capital and the Organizational Advantage", The Academy of Management Review, 23 (2), pp. 242-266.. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1998.533225
  44. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York.
  45. OECD(2018),OSLO MANUAL 2018.
  46. Pallotti, F. and A. Lomi (2011), "Network influence and organizational performance: The effects of tie strength and structural equivalence", European Management Journal, 29 (5), pp. 389-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2011.02.005
  47. Pallotti, F., and A. Lomi (2011), "Network influence and organizational performance: The effects of tie strength and structural equivalence", European Management Journal, 29 (5), pp. 389-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2011.02.005
  48. Pizarro, N. (2007), "Structural identity and equivalence of individuals in Social Networks: beyond duality", International Sociology, 22 (6), pp. 767-792. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580907082260
  49. Porter, M.E. (1998), "Clusters and the new economics of competition", Harvard Business Review, pp. 77-90.
  50. Prell, C. (2012), Social Network Analysis: history, Theory, and Methodology, Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Inc.
  51. Robinson, D.K., A. Rip and V. Mangematin (2007), "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology", Research Policy, 36 (6), pp. 871-879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.02.003
  52. Rosenthal, S.S. and W.C. Strange (2003), "Geography, industrial organization, and agglomeration", Review of Economics and Statistics, 85 (2), pp. 377-393. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465303765299882
  53. Rugman, A.M. and J.R. D'Cruz, (2002), "The Canadian experience International Business: Critical Perspectives on Business and Management 4, pp. 237-258 (Rugman, Alan M., and Joseph R. D'cruz.(1993)."The"double diamond"model of international competitiveness: The Canadian experience." Management international review, 33 (2-1), pp.17-40.)".
  54. Scott, J. (1991), Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, Sage London.
  55. Scott, J. (2000), Social network analysis: A handbook, 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications.
  56. Scott, J. (2012), Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, Thousand Oaks California: SAGE Publications Inc.
  57. Souitaris, V. (2002), "Technological Trajectories as Moderators of Firm-Level Determinants of Innovation", Research Policy, 31 (6), pp. 877-898.. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00154-8
  58. Stuart, T. and O. Sorenson (2003), "The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms", Research Policy, 32 (2), pp. 229-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00098-7
  59. Stuck, J., T. Broekel and J.R. Diez (2016), "Network Structures in Regional Innovation Systems", European Planning Studies, 24 (3), pp. 423-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1074984
  60. Subramaniam, M. and M.A. Youndt (2005), "The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Types of Innovative Capabilities", The Academy of Management Journal, 48 (3), pp. 450-463. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.17407911
  61. Tallman, S., M. Jenkins, N. Henry and S. Pinch (2004), "Knowledge, clusters, and competitive advantage", Academy of Management Review, 29 (2), pp. 258-271. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159032
  62. Thorgren, S., J. Wincent and D. Ortqvist (2009), "Designing interorganizational networks for innovation: An empirical examination of network configuration, formation and governance", Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 26 (3), pp. 148-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2009.06.006
  63. Tsai, W. and S. Ghoshal (1998), "Social Capital and Value Creation the Role of Intrafirm Networks", The Academy of Management Journal, 41 (4), pp. 464-476. https://doi.org/10.2307/257085
  64. Uzzi, B. (1997), "Social structure and compelition in inter-firm networks: The paradox of embeddedness", Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, pp. 35-67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393808
  65. Uzzi, B. (1996), "The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: the network effect", American Sociological Review, 61 (4), pp. 674-698. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096399
  66. Wang, C.L. and P.K. Ahmed (2004), "The Development and Validation of the Organisational Innovativeness Construct Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis", European Journal of Innovation Management, 7 (4), pp. 303-313. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060410565056
  67. Wasserman, S. and K. Faust (1994), Social Network Analysis : Methods and Applications, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  68. White, H.C., S.A. Boorman and R.L. Breiger (1976), "Social structure from multiple networks: Blockmodels of roles and positions", American journal of sociology, 81 (4), pp. 730-780. https://doi.org/10.1086/226141
  69. Yam, R.C.M., W. Lo, E.P.Y. Tang and A.K.W. Lau (2011), "Analysis of Sources of Innovation Technological Innovation Capabilities and Performance: An Empirical Study of Hong Kong Manufacturing Industries", Research Policy, 40 (3), pp. 391-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.013