Study on Network Routine of Governance Mechanisms Based on Cross-Level

Abstract

Abstract:

Technology innovation network routine is a key factor to keep network stabile. Meanwhile it was the core issue to promote network knowledge information acquirement. However, we know from the existing researches on network governance mechanism based on the network governance mechanism literatures, few of them pay attention to the interaction between the different governance mechanisms. Based on the core elements of governance mechanism from network level, dual level and enterprise level and using HLM analysis research methods at different levels in practice and structure mechanism, the authors try to find the relationship between structure mechanisms, learning mechanisms from top-level to bottom-level. Our finding are as follows:macro cultural practices of the network structure mechanism play a stronger intermediary role in the relationship of network layer and reciprocal standard; partner reputation plays a stronger intermediary role in the relationship of network-level routine and mutual trust; binary relation mechanism plays a similar mediating role in the relationship of working practices and binary learning mechanism. From the cross-level perspective, we find support for the members of technology network to choose different governance mechanisms at different level to make the network aim come true. Also the study would provide theoretical support to promote enterprise's sustainable innovation ability and competitive advantage.

Key words: across-level, network routine, governance mechanism, HLM analysis method

Xiao Yao, Dang Xinghua. Study on Network Routine of Governance Mechanisms Based on Cross-Level[J]. , 2018, 30(8): 90-101.

References

[1] Mort G. S., Weerawardena J. Networking Capability and International Entrepreneurship[J]. International Marketing Review, 2012,23(5):549-572
[2] Zollo M., Winter S. G. Deliberate Learning And the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities[J]. Organization Science, 2002,46(9):339-351
[3] Pentland R. Organizational Routines as Grammars of Action[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1994,39(2):484-510
[4] 宋晶,孙永磊. 合作创新网络能力的形成机理研究——影响因素探索和实证分析[J]. 管理评论, 2016,28(3):67-75
[5] 谢永平,孙永磊. 资源依赖、关系治理与技术创新网络企业核心影响力形成[J]. 管理评论, 2014,26(8):117-126
[6] Frank T. Building Dynamic Capabilities:Innovation Driven by Individual, Firm, and Network-Level Effects[J]. Organization Science, 2007,18(6):898-921
[7] Gurneeta V. Institutional Logics and Interorganizational Learning in Technological Arenas:Evidence from Standard-Setting Organizations in The Mobile Handset Industry[J]. Organization Science, 2015,26(3):830-846
[8] Marschoek A. How Much Do Your Co-opetitors' Capabilities Matter in The Face of Technological Change?[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010,21(4):387-404
[9] Abrahamson E., Fombrun C. J. Macrocultures:Determinants and Consequences[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2014,22(19):728-755
[10] Toegel G., Kilduff M., Anand N. Emotion Helping By Managers:An Emergent Understanding of Discrepant Role Expectations And Outcomes[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2012,56(4):334-357
[11] Pentland B. T., Feldman M. S. Organizational Routines as a Unit of Analysis[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2005,14(5):793-815
[12] Pentland B., Rueter S. Organizational Routines as Grammars of Action[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1994,39(5):484-510
[13] Manju R., Snow C. Causes of Failure in Network Organizations[J]. Management Review, 2014,34(4):53-72
[14] Marschoek B., Beck C. On the Robustness of LISREL (Maximum Likelihood Estimation) Against Small Sample Size and Nonnormality[J]. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 2012,43(5):985-1012
[15] Teeced J., Pisano G. The Dynamic Capabilities of Firm:An Introduction[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change,1994,32(3):537-555
[16] 孙永磊,党兴华. 网络惯例形成的影响因素探索及实证研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2014,32(2):267-275
[17] Becker M. Organizational Routines:A Review of The Literature[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2004,13(4):643-678
[18] Giller C., Matear S. The Termination of Inter-firm Relationships[J]. The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 2014,16(2):94-112
[19] Hamel G. Competition for Competence and Inter-partner Learning Within International Strategic Alliances[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2011,12(2):83-103(Summer Special Issue)
[20] Rider C. How Employees' Prior Affiliations Constrain Organizational Network Change:A Study of U.S. Venture Capital and Private Equity[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2012,57(3):453-483
[21] Antonio C. Network Governance:A Cross-level Study of Social Mechanisms, Knowledge Benefits, and Strategic Outcomes in Joint-design Alliances[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2014,40(6):978-993
[22] Moliterno L. Explicating Dynamic Capabilities:The Nature and Microfoundations of (sustainable) Enterprise Performance[J].Strategic Management Journal, 2007,34(28):1319-1350
[23] Ranjay G. Relationship Pluralism Within and Between Organizations[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014,57(2):449-459
[24] Capaldo A., Messeni P. A. In Search of Alliance-level Relational Capabilities:Balancing Innovation Value Creation and Appropriability in R&D Alliances[J]. The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 2011,11(27):273-286
[25] Blake E., Ashforth D. Identity in Organizations:Exploring Cross-Level Dynamics[J]. Organization Science, 2011,22(5):1144-1156
[26] Granovetter M., The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes[J]. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2014,19(1):33-50
[27] Tether B. S., Tajar A. Beyond Industry-University Links:Sourcing Knowledge for Innovation from Consultants, Private Research Organisations and the Public Science-base[J]. Research Policy, 2008,11(37):1079-1095
[28] Carton A., Cummings N. A Theory of Subgroups in Work Teams. Acad[J]. Management Review, 2014,37(3):441-470
[29] Uzzi B., Dore J. Knowledge Spillover in Corporate Financing Networks:Embeddedness and the Firm's Debt Performance[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010,23(7):595-618
[30] Dosi G., Teece D. Capturing Value from Knowledge Assets:The New Economy, Markets for Know-how and Intangible Assets[J]. California Management Review, 1998,40(3):55-79
[31] Gurneeta V. Bringing the Institutional Context Back In:A Cross-National Comparison of Alliance Partner Selection and Knowledge Acquisition[J]. Organization Science, 2013,24(2):319-338
[32] Baldwin T., Bedell M. The Social Fabric of a Team-based MBA Program:Network Effects on Student Satisfaction and Performance[J]. Academy of Management Journal. 2014,57(2):1369-1397
[33] Lumineau F., Malhotra D. Shadow of the Contract:How Contract Structure Shapes Interfirm Dispute Resolution[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2011,32(5):532-555
[34] Jones C., Hesterly W. S., Fladmoe-Lindquist K., et al. Professional Service Constellations:How Strategies and Capabilities Influence Collaborative Stability and Change[J]. Organization Science, 2010,10(9):396-410
[35] Larson A. Network Dyads in Entrepreneurial Settings:A Study of the Governance of Exchange Relationships[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2011,37(5):76-104
[36] Bechky D. Making Organizational Theory Work:Institutions, Occupations, and Negotiate d Orders[J]. Organization Science, 2011,22(5):1157-1167
[37] Liebeskind J., Oliver A., Zucker, L., et al. Social Networks, Learning and Flexibility:Sourcing Scientific Knowledge in New Biotechnology Firms[J]. Organization Science, 2012,11(7):428-433
[38] Ray R. Forgotten Third Parties:Analyzing the Contingent Association Between Unshared Third Parties, Knowledge Overlap, and Knowledge Transfer Relationships with Outsiders[J]. Organization Science, 2015,28(6):1351-1367
[39] Yu L., Ravichandran T. Alliance Experience, IT-Enabled Knowledge Integration, and Ex Ante Value Gains[J]. Organization Science, 2015,23(6):1455-1469
[40] Shipilov A. V., Li S. X. The Missing link:The Effect of Customers on the Formation of Relationships among Producers in the Multiplex Triads[J]. Organization Science, 2012,23(6):472-491