Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multi-dimensional proximity and network stability: the moderating role of network cohesion

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous studies regarded network stability as an antecedent of innovation. However, there is little research on its antecedent factors. The paper explores and extends the prior research to analyze the influence of network cohesion on network stability within the framework of multi-dimensional proximity. We collected the unbalanced panel data in the information communication technology industry based on the Derwent Innovations Index databases. The research results show that geographic proximity and technological proximity have an invert-U relationship with network stability, and institutional proximity has positively related to network stability. Moreover, network cohesion positively moderates the impact of multi-dimensional proximity on network stability, and network cohesion has a significant effect on network stability.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldieri, L. (2011). Technological and geographical proximity effects on knowledge spillovers: evidence from the US patent citations. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(6), 597–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arikan, A. T. (2009). Interfirm Knowledge Exchanges and the Knowledge Creation Capability of Clusters. Academy of Management Review, 34(4), 658–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balland, P.-A., Belso-Martínez, J. A., & Morrison, A. (2016). The dynamics of technical and business knowledge networks in industrial clusters: Embeddedness, status, or proximity? Economic Geography, 92(1), 35–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure (Vol. 7). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bönte, W. (2008). Inter-firm trust in buyer–supplier relations: Are knowledge spillovers and geographical proximity relevant? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 67(3), 855–870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2009). Some notes on institutions in evolutionary economic geography. Economic Geography., 85, 151–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broekel, T. (2015). The Co-evolution of Proximities – A Network Level Study. Regional Studies, 49(6), 921–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broekel, T., & Boschma, R. (2011). Aviation, Space or Aerospace? Exploring the Knowledge Networks of Two Industries in The Netherlands. European Planning Studies, 19(7), 1205–1227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S., & Merluzzi, J. (2016). Network oscillation. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2(4), 368–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabral, L., & Pacheco-de-Almeida, G. (2019). Alliance formation and firm value. Management Science, 65(2), 879–895.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadeaux, J. (2015). The effects of stability, diversity, and density on relationship flexibility in an international retail supply network: A proposed theory and research hypotheses. In H. B. Thorelli (Ed.), Entrepreneurship in international marketing (vol. 25, pp. 307–320). Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantner, U., & Meder, A. (2007). Technological proximity and the choice of cooperation partner. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, 2(1), 45–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capone, F., & Zampi, V. (2019). Proximity and centrality in inter-organisational collaborations for innovation: a study on an aerospace cluster in Italy. Management Decision, 58(2), 239–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., & Xu, F. (2018). How technological proximity affect collaborative innovation? an empirical study of China’s Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region. Journal of Management Analytics, 5, 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiambaretto, P., & Fernandez, A. S. (2016). The evolution of coopetitive and collaborative alliances in an alliance portfolio: The air France case. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 75–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiara, C. (2010). Exploring the role of spatial relationships to transform knowledge in a business idea—Beyond a geographic proximity. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(6), 887–897.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnabuci, G., & Bruggeman, J. (2009). Knowledge specialization, knowledge brokerage and the uneven growth of technology domains. Social Forces, 88(2), 607–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbonara, N., & Giannoccaro, I. (2011). Interpreting the role of proximity on industrial district competitiveness using a complexity science-based view and systems dynamics simulation. Journal of Geographical Systems, 13(4), 415–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassi, L., & Plunket, A. (2014). Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox. The Annals of Regional Science, 53(2), 395–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faccin, K., & Balestrin, A. (2018). The dynamics of collaborative practices for knowledge creation in joint R&D projects. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 48, 28–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felzensztein, C., Gimmon, E., & Carter, S. (2010). Geographical co-location, social networks and inter-firm marketing co-operation: The case of the salmon industry. Long Range Planning, 43(5), 675–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernández, A., Ferrándiz, E., & León, M. D. (2016). Proximity dimensions and scientific collaboration among academic institutions in Europe: The closer, the better? Scientometrics, 106(3), 1073–1092.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L., & Waguespack, D. M. (2007). Brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open innovation communities. Organization Science, 18(2), 165–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch, M., & Kauffeld-Monz, M. (2008). The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: An application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks. The Annals of Regional Science, 44(1), 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gargiulo, M., & Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization science, 11(2), 183–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geldes, C., Felzensztein, C., Turkina, E., & Durand, A. (2015). How does proximity affect interfirm marketing cooperation? A study of an agribusiness cluster. Journal of Business Research, 68(2), 263–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giuliani, E. (2013). Network dynamics in regional clusters: Evidence from Chile. Research Policy, 42(8), 1406–1419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, V., & Wissel, C. (1997). Babel, or the ecological stability discussions: an inventory and analysis of terminology and a guide for avoiding confusion. Oecologia, 109(3), 323–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J., Zhang, J., & Yan, Y. (2017). A dynamic perspective on diversities and network change: Partner entry, exit and persistence. International Journal of Technology Management, 74(1–4), 221–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C., & Yan, Y. (2016). Technological proximity and recombinative innovation in the alternative energy field. Research Policy, 45(7), 1460–1473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., Sytch, M., & Tatarynowicz, A. (2012). The rise and fall of small worlds: Exploring the dynamics of social structure. Organization Science, 23(2), 449–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guler, I., & Nerkar, A. (2012). The impact of global and local cohesion on innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 33(5), 535–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heringa, P. W., Horlings, E., van der Zouwen, M., van den Besselaar, P., & van Vierssen, W. (2014). How do dimensions of proximity relate to the outcomes of collaboration? A survey of knowledge-intensive networks in the Dutch water sector. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 23(7), 689–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, J., Frenken, K., & Tijssen, R. J. W. (2010). Research collaboration at a distance: changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research Policy, 39(5), 662–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, W., & Su, Y.-S. (2013). The effect of institutional proximity in non-local university–industry collaborations: An analysis based on Chinese patent data. Research Policy, 42(2), 454–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggins, R., & Johnston, A. (2010). Knowledge flow and inter-firm networks: The influence of network resources, spatial proximity and firm size. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(5), 457–484.

  • Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., Olander, H., Blomqvist, K., & Panfilii, V. (2012). Orchestrating R&D networks: Absorptive capacity, network stability, and innovation appropriability. European Management Journal, 30(6), 552–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, X., Li, Y., & Gao, S. (2008). The stability of strategic alliances: Characteristics, factors and stages. Journal of International Management, 14(2), 173–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jifeng, Y. U., Gilbert, B. A., & Oviatt, B. M. (2011). Effects of alliances, time, and network cohesion on the initiation of foreign sales by new ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 32(4), 424–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilduff, M., Tsai, W., & Hanke, R. (2006). A paradigm too far? A dynamic stability reconsideration of the social network research program. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 1031–1048.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Muller, K. E., & Nizam, A. (1988). Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods (Vol. 601): Duxbury Press Belmont, CA.

  • Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(2), 71–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krackhardt, D. (1990). Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 342–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 312–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, P., & Zaheer, A. (2019). Ego-network stability and innovation in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 691–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagendijk, A., & Lorentzen, A. (2007). Proximity, knowledge and innovation in peripheral regions. On the intersection between geographical and organizational proximity. European Planning Studies, 15(4), 457–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazzeretti, L., & Capone, F. (2016). How proximity matters in innovation networks dynamics along the cluster evolution. A study of the high technology applied to cultural goods. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5855–5865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., Qu, S. Y., & Scherpereel, C. M. (2018). A technology alliance’s stability evolution based on a network structure analysis. Innovation Organization & Management, 20(3), 240–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. H., & Kim, Y. (2016). Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the triple helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 110, 93–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letaifa, S. B., & Rabeau, Y. (2013). Too close to collaborate? How geographic proximity could impede entrepreneurship and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 2071–2072.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marrocu, E., Paci, R., & Usai, S. (2013). Proximity, networking and knowledge production in Europe: What lessons for innovation policy? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1484–1498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2010). Social networks: Effects of social capital on firm innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), 258–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narasimhan, R., & Nair, A. (2005). The antecedent role of quality, information sharing and supply chain proximity on strategic alliance formation and performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 96(3), 301–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narula, R., & Santangelo, G. D. (2009). Location, collocation and R&D alliances in the European ICT industry. Research Policy, 38(2), 393–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petruzzelli, A. M., Albino, V., & Carbonara, N. (2009). External knowledge sources and proximity. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(5), 301–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritala, P., Huizingh, E., Almpanopoulou, A., & Wijbenga, P. (2017). Tensions in R&D networks: Implications for knowledge search and integration. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 120, 311–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, A. T., & Gilly, J.-P. (2000). On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional Studies, 34(2), 169–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, X., & Zhang, Q. (2019). Network inertia and inbound open innovation: is there a bidirectional relationship? Scientometrics, 122(4), 791–815.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, X., Zhang, Q., & Zheng, Z. (2019). The double-edged sword of external search in collaboration networks: Embeddedness in knowledge networks as moderators. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(10), 2135–2160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmo, M., & Rasmussen, E. (2016). How firms collaborate with public research organizations: The evolution of proximity dimensions in successful innovation projects. Journal of Business Research, 69(3), 1250–1259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Y., & Liu, K. (2016). Proximity effect, preferential attachment and path dependence in inter-regional network: A case of China’s technology transaction. Scientometrics, 108(1), 201–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tödtling, F. (1999). Innovation networks, collective learning, and industrial policy in regions of Europe. European Planning Studies, 7(6), 693–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torre, A. (2008). On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge transmission. Regional Studies, 42(6), 869–889.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tortoriello, M., Reagans, R., & Mcevily, B. (2016). Bridging the knowledge gap: The influence of strong ties, network cohesion, and network range on the transfer of knowledge between organizational units. Organization Science, 23(4), 1024–1039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villani, E., Rasmussen, E., & Grimaldi, R. (2017). How intermediary organizations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: A proximity approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 86–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wal, A. L. J. T. (2010). The dynamics of the inventor network in german biotechnology: Geographical proximity versus triadic closure. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2010(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wen, J., Qualls, W. J., & Zeng, D. (2020). To explore or exploit: The influence of inter-firm R&D network diversity and structural holes on innovation outcomes. Technovation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, S. (2014). Can a team have too much cohesion? The dark side to network density. European Management Journal, 32(5), 703–711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xavier Molina-Morales, F., Belso-Martínez, J. A., Más-Verdú, F., & Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2015). Formation and dissolution of inter-firm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters. Journal of Business Research, 68(7), 1557–1562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xing-Hua, D., & Zhi-Gang, G. (2013). Impact of multidimensional proximities on cross region technology innovation cooperation: Experical analysis based on Chinese coinvent patent data. Studies in Science of Science., 31(10), 26. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, L., Li, J., & Zhou, X. (2019). Exploring new knowledge through research collaboration: The moderation of the global and local cohesion of knowledge networks. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(3), 822–849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yayavaram, S., & Ahuja, G. (2008). Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-based malleability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 333–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan, Y., & Guan, J. (2018). Social capital, exploitative and exploratory innovations: The mediating roles of ego-network dynamics. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 126, 244–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan, Z., Qi, W., & Xiangjie, Z. (2016). Impact of network vicinity and geographical proximity to knowledge transfer performance. Science Research Management, 1, 128–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, A., & Bell, G. G. (2005). Benefiting from network position: firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 809–825.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, G., Duan, H., & Zhou, J. (2017). Network stability, connectivity and innovation output. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 339–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, G., Duan, H., & Wang, X. (2020). Obscure but important: Examining the indirect effects of alliance networks in exploratory and exploitative innovation paradigms. Scientometrics, 124(4), 1745–1764.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was supported by National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71871182, 71471146, 71501158), and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 3102018JCC013).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China

    Min Guo, Naiding Yang, Jingbei Wang & Yanlu Zhang

Authors
  1. Min Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naiding Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jingbei Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yanlu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naiding Yang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guo, M., Yang, N., Wang, J. et al. Multi-dimensional proximity and network stability: the moderating role of network cohesion. Scientometrics 126, 3471–3499 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03882-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03882-6

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation