Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 102, Issue 3, pp 1895–1919 | Cite as

Dynamic evolution of collaborative networks: evidence from nano-energy research in China

  • Na Liu
  • Jiancheng Guan
Article

Abstract

In organizations, knowledge creation activities are embedded in collaborative networks and are influenced by their partners. Therefore, we examine how entire networks change over time in this study, as well as the reasoning behind the structures of ego networks based on unique scientific research discoveries published in the emerging cross-disciplinary field of nano-energy. These data were extracted from Science Citation Index Expanded. Specifically, we mainly focus on two dimensions of ego network changes: network growth and diversity. Results demonstrate the recent remarkable growth of inter-organizational collaborative networks in the nano-energy field and empirically prove that the subsequent growth and diversity of ego networks are caused by three coexisting driving forces (collaborative capacity, network status position and cohesion) that act collectively. Our study is conducted at the organizational level because we investigate the universities, research institutes and firms that participate in nano-energy scientific research and the collaborative networks formed through co-authorships among these institutions in knowledge creation processes. Moreover, our study has significant implications for the scientific research conducted by organizations in developing countries and emerging fields.

Keywords

Ego networks Network growth Network diversity Network dynamics Network evolution Nano-energy research 

References

  1. Ahuja, G., Soda, G., & Zaheer, A. (2012). The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks. Organization Science, 23(2), 434–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alivisatos, P., Cummings, P., De Yoreo, J., Fichthorn, K., Gates, B., Hwang, R., et al. (2005). Nanoscience research for energy needs. Alexandria, VA, USA: Report of the National Nanotechnology Initiative Grand Challenge Workshop.Google Scholar
  3. 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(1), 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barabási, A.-L. (2012). Network science: Luck or reason. Nature, 489(7417), 507–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170–1182.Google Scholar
  6. Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Centrality and network flow. Social Networks, 27(1), 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1168–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouty, I. (2000). Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource exchanges between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 50–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Broad, W. J. (1981). The publishing game: Getting more for less. Science, 211(4487), 1137–1139.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Buchmann, T., & Pyka, A. (2013). The evolution of innovation networks: The case of a German automotive network. FZID discussion papers, No. 70-2013. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:100-opus-8338.
  11. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cannella, A. A., & McFadyen, M. A. (2013). Changing the exchange the dynamics of knowledge worker ego networks. Journal of Management. doi: 10.1177/0149206313511114.
  13. Cattani, G., & Ferriani, S. (2008). A core/periphery perspective on individual creative performance: Social networks and cinematic achievements in the Hollywood film industry. Organization Science, 19(6), 824–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chandler, D., Haunschild, P. R., Rhee, M., & Beckman, C. M. (2013). The effects of firm reputation and status on interorganizational network structure. Strategic Organization, 11(3), 217–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Connelly, M. C., & Sekhar, J. A. (2012). US energy production activity and innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(1), 30–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Contractor, N. S., Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (2006). Testing multitheoretical, multilevel hypotheses about organizational networks: An analytic framework and empirical example. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 681–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cricelli, L., & Grimaldi, M. (2010). Knowledge-based inter-organizational collaborations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(3), 348–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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(6), 1462–1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eagle, N., Macy, M., & Claxton, R. (2010). Network diversity and economic development. Science, 328(5981), 1029–1031.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Ebbers, J. J., & Wijnberg, N. M. (2010). Disentangling the effects of reputation and network position on the evolution of alliance networks. Strategic Organization, 8(3), 255–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. EIA U. (2014). International energy outlook 2014. Washington, DC: United States Energy Information Administration. http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=CH
  22. Forti, E., Franzoni, C., & Sobrero, M. (2013). Bridges or isolates? Investigating the social networks of academic inventors. Research Policy, 42(8), 1378–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fromer, N. A., & Diallo, M. S. (2013). Nanotechnology and clean energy: Sustainable utilization and supply of critical materials. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 15(11), 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gans, J. S., & Murray, F. (2013). Credit history: The changing nature of scientific credit. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER working paper no. w19538). http://www.nber.org/papers/w19538
  26. Goerzen, A., & Beamish, P. W. (2005). The effect of alliance network diversity on multinational enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(4), 333–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gonzalez-Brambila, C. N., Veloso, F. M., & Krackhardt, D. (2013). The impact of network embeddedness on research output. Research Policy, 42(9), 1555–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Granados, F. J., & Knoke, D. (2013). Organizational status growth and structure: An alliance network analysis. Social Networks, 35(1), 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.Google Scholar
  30. Guan, J., & Liu, N. (2014). Measuring scientific research in emerging nano-energy field. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 16(4), 2356.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. Guan, J., & Zhao, Q. (2013). The impact of university–industry collaboration networks on innovation in nanobiopharmaceuticals. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(7), 1271–1286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439–1493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. IWEP. (2013). The Chinese academy of social sciences institute of world economics and politics, World Energy China Outlook 20132014. Beijing, China: Social Sciences Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. Jensen, M., & Roy, A. (2008). Staging exchange partner choices: When do status and reputation matter? Academy of Management Journal, 51(3), 495–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Koka, B. R., Madhavan, R., & Prescott, J. E. (2006). The evolution of interfirm networks: Environmental effects on patterns of network change. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 721–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lee, J. J. (2010). Heterogeneity, brokerage, and innovative performance: Endogenous formation of collaborative inventor networks. Organization Science, 21(4), 804–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lee, K., & Lee, S. (2013). Patterns of technological innovation and evolution in the energy sector: A patent-based approach. Energy Policy, 59, 415–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lee, S., Lee, H. J., & Yoon, B. (2012). Modeling and analyzing technology innovation in the energy sector: Patent-based HMM approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 63(3), 564–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Leung, R. C. (2013). Networks as sponges: International collaboration for developing nanomedicine in China. Research Policy, 42(1), 211–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Li, E. Y., Liao, C. H., & Yen, H. R. (2013). Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective. Research Policy, 42(9), 1515–1530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ma, N., & Guan, J. (2005). An exploratory study on collaboration profiles of Chinese publications in molecular biology. Scientometrics, 65(3), 343–355.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  44. Makadok, R. (2001). Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 387–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Menéndez-Manjón, A., Moldenhauer, K., Wagener, P., & Barcikowski, S. (2011). Nano-energy research trends: Bibliometrical analysis of nanotechnology research in the energy sector. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 13(9), 3911–3922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Miao, X. (2014). Science ethics: Young scientists speak. Science, 345(6192), 24–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Milanov, H., & Shepherd, D. A. (2013). The importance of the first relationship: The ongoing influence of initial network on future status. Strategic Management Journal, 34(6), 727–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 100–130.Google Scholar
  49. Phelps, C., Heidl, R., & Wadhwa, A. (2012). Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks a review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1115–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Podolny, J. M. (2001). Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. American Journal of Sociology, 107(1), 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Podolny, J. M. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Guerras-Martín, L. Á. (2010). Dynamics of the scientific community network within the strategic management field through the strategic management journal 1980–2009: The role of cooperation. Scientometrics, 85(3), 821–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rosenkopf, L., & Padula, G. (2008). Investigating the microstructure of network evolution: Alliance formation in the mobile communications industry. Organization Science, 19(5), 669–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sci2Team. (2009). Science of science (Sci2) tool. Bloomington: Indiana University and SciTech Strategies. http://sci2.cns.iu.edu
  55. Shannon, C. E. (2001). A mathematical theory of communication. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 5(1), 3–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Simcoe, T. S., & Waguespack, D. M. (2011). Status, quality, and attention: What’s in a (missing) name? Management Science, 57(2), 274–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. So, D. S., Kim, C. W., Chung, P. S., & Jhon, M. S. (2012). Nanotechnology policy in Korea for sustainable growth. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 14(6), 854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sosa, M. E. (2011). Where do creative interactions come from? The role of tie content and social networks. Organization Science, 22(1), 1–21.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  59. Stuart, T. E. (1998). Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(3), 668–698.Google Scholar
  60. Sun, Y.-T., & Liu, F.-C. (2013). Measuring international trade-related technology spillover: A composite approach of network analysis and information theory. Scientometrics, 94(3), 963–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tegart, G. (2009). Energy and nanotechnologies: Priority areas for Australia’s future. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(9), 1240–1246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.Google Scholar
  63. Wang, Z.-Z., & Zhu, J. J. (2014). Homophily versus preferential attachment: Evolutionary mechanisms of scientific collaboration networks. International Journal of Modern Physics C, 25(05), 40014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wasserman, S. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications (Vol. 8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Xie, F., & Levinson, D. (2007). Measuring the structure of road networks. Geographical analysis, 39(3), 336–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zaheer, A., & Soda, G. (2009). Network evolution: The origins of structural holes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementUniversity of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of ManagementFudan UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations