Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge convergence and organization innovation: the moderating role of relational embeddedness

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Knowledge convergence is an important means of innovation. The study aims to explore how knowledge convergence influences innovation performance at an organizational level. Furthermore, we address the moderating role of network relational embeddedness on the innovation deriving from knowledge convergence. Our empirical analyses adopting negative binomial regression models employ patent counts and patent citations from the nanotechnology field. The findings reveal that the scientific intensity in the convergence between scientific knowledge and technological knowledge has an inverted U-shaped influence on innovation performance and that this association is flattened in organizations with high network relational diversity. Also, we find that the technological scope in convergence of technological knowledge self has an inverted U-shaped influence on innovation performance and that this association is steepened in organizations with high network relational strength. Our findings add understandings of knowledge convergence on organization innovation and also have important practical and political implications.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. (2004). Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 887–907.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, S. K., Porter, A. L., Youtie, J., & Shapira, P. (2013). Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: An updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs. Scientometrics, 95, 351–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Athreye, S., & Keeble, D. (2000). Technological convergence, globalisation and ownership in the UK computer industry. Technovation, 20, 227–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belderbos, R., Cassiman, B., Faems, D., Leten, B., & Van Looy, B. (2014). Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners. Research Policy, 43, 841–852.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, H. (1994). The relationship between science and technology. Research Policy, 23, 477–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardinal, L. B., Alessandri, T. M., & Turner, S. F. (2001). Knowledge codifiability, resources, and science-based innovation. Journal of knowledge management, 5, 195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnabuci, G., & Operti, E. (2013). Where do firms’ recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganizational networks, knowledge, and firms’ ability to innovate through technological recombination. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 1591–1613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B., Veugelers, R., & Zuniga, P. (2008). In search of performance effects of (in) direct industry science links. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17, 611–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caviggioli, F. (2016). Technology fusion: Identification and analysis of the drivers of technology convergence using patent data. Technovation, 55, 22–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J.-R., Kan, K., & Tung, I. H. (2016). Scientific linkages and firm productivity: Panel data evidence from Taiwanese electronics firms. Research Policy, 45, 1449–1459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran, C.-S., & Leker, J. (2011). Patent indicators for monitoring convergence-examples from NFF and ICT. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78, 256–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demirkan, I., Deeds, D. L., & Demirkan, S. (2013). Exploring the role of network characteristics, knowledge quality, and inertia on the evolution of scientific networks. Journal of Management, 39, 1462–1489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L. (2001). Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science, 47, 117–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2004). Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 909–928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C. (2002). Comparison Study on Industrial Innovation between China and Some European Countries. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 43(3/4), 30–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C., & Liu, N. (2015). Invention profiles and uneven growth in the field of emerging nano-energy. Energy Policy, 76, 146–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C., & Liu, N. (2016). Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy. Research Policy, 45, 97–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J. C., & Pang, L. X. (2018). Bidirectional relationship between network position and knowledge creation in Scientometrics. Scientommetrics, 115, 201–222.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Haans, R. F., Pieters, C., & He, Z. L. (2016). Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U-and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1177–1195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacklin, F., Battistini, B., & Von Krogh, G. (2013). Strategic choices in converging industries. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55, 65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hohberger, J. (2016). Diffusion of science-based inventions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 66–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, S., & Lee, S. (2015). What drives technology convergence? Exploring the influence of technological and resource allocation contexts. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 36, 78–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karvonen, M., & Kässi, T. (2013). Patent citations as a tool for analysing the early stages of convergence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80, 1094–1107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, W. S., Han, E. J., & Sohn, S. Y. (2015). Predicting the pattern of technology convergence using big-data technology on large-scale triadic patents. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 100, 317–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. G., Lee, J. H., Song, Y. I., et al. (2008). Technological convergence and open innovation in the mobile telecommunication industry. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 16(1), 45–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., Park, G., & Kang, J. (2016). The impact of convergence between science and technology on innovation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, N. (2017). Complex innovation network in nano-energy (pp. 1–226). Beijing: Economic Science Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, N., Mao, J. Q., & Yu, G. S. (2017). Exploration and prospect on technological convergence studies. Science Research Management, 38(12), 20–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, N., Wu, X. Y., & Mao, J. Q. (2019). The impact of inventors’ ego-networks dynamic on knowledge searching. Studies in Science of Science, 37(4), 689–700.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maine, E., Thomas, V. J., & Utterback, J. (2014). Radical innovation from the confluence of technologies: Innovation management strategies for the emerging nanobiotechnology industry. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 32(4–6), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcfadyen, M. A., & Cannella, A. A. (2004). Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 735–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcfadyen, M. A., Semadeni, M., & Cannella, A. A., Jr. (2009). Value of strong ties to disconnected others: Examining knowledge creation in biomedicine. Organization Science, 20, 552–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (2009). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nerkar, A., & Shane, S. (2003). When do start-ups that exploit patented academic knowledge survive? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1391–1410.

    Google Scholar 

  • No, H. J., & Park, Y. (2010). Trajectory patterns of technology fusion: Trend analysis and taxonomical grouping in nanobiotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77, 63–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petruzzelli, A. M., Rotolo, D., & Albino, V. (2015). Determinants of patent citations in biotechnology: An analysis of patent influence across the industrial and organizational boundaries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 91, 208–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roco, M. C., & Bainbridge, W. S. (2013). The new world of discovery, invention, and innovation: convergence of knowledge, technology, and society. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 15, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rojas, M. G. A., Solis, E. R. R., & Zhu, J. J. (2018). Innovation and network multiplexity: R&D and the concurrent effects of two collaboration networks in an emerging economy. Research Policy, 47(6), 1111–1124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, N. (1963). Technological change in the machine tool industry, 1840–1910. The Journal of Economic History, 23(4), 414–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rost, K. (2011). The strength of strong ties in the creation of innovation. Research Policy, 40, 588–604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, M. A., & Phelps, C. C. (2007). Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Management Science, 53, 1113–1126.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1961). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Translated by Redvers Opie: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1991). Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 125–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J. (2008). Distributed R&D, cross-regional knowledge integration and quality of innovative output. Research Policy, 37, 77–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5, 19–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 532–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vianen, B., Moed, H., & Van Raan, A. (1990). An exploration of the science base of recent technology. Research Policy, 19, 61–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Raesfeld, A., Geurts, P., Jansen, M., Boshuizen, J., & Luttge, R. (2012). Influence of partner diversity on collaborative public R&D project outcomes: A study of application and commercialization of nanotechnologies in the Netherlands. Technovation, 32, 227–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J. (2016). Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration. Research Policy, 45, 68–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., Rodan, S., Fruin, M., & Xu, X. (2014). Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 484–514.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is supported by the Grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71874176, 71702090, 71672103). The authors are very grateful for the valuable comments and suggestions from two anonymous reviewers and the Editor of the Journal, which significantly improved the quality of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business Administration, Shandong Technology and Business University, Yantai, 264005, China

    Na Liu & Jianqi Mao

  2. School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China

    Jiancheng Guan

Authors
  1. Na Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jianqi Mao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiancheng Guan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiancheng Guan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, N., Mao, J. & Guan, J. Knowledge convergence and organization innovation: the moderating role of relational embeddedness. Scientometrics 125, 1899–1921 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03684-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03684-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation