Dynamic evolution of collaborative networks: evidence from nano-energy research in China
- 735 Downloads
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.
KeywordsEgo networks Network growth Network diversity Network dynamics Network evolution Nano-energy research
- 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
- Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170–1182.Google Scholar
- 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.
- Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Cannella, A. A., & McFadyen, M. A. (2013). Changing the exchange the dynamics of knowledge worker ego networks. Journal of Management. doi: 10.1177/0149206313511114.
- EIA U. (2014). International energy outlook 2014. Washington, DC: United States Energy Information Administration. http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=CH
- 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
- Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.Google Scholar
- IWEP. (2013). The Chinese academy of social sciences institute of world economics and politics, World Energy China Outlook 2013–2014. Beijing, China: Social Sciences Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 100–130.Google Scholar
- Podolny, J. M. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Sci2Team. (2009). Science of science (Sci2) tool. Bloomington: Indiana University and SciTech Strategies. http://sci2.cns.iu.edu
- 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
- Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.Google Scholar