Strong Ties, Weak Ties and the Management of Innovation: The Case of Danish and German SMEs

  • Susanne Gretzinger
  • Holger Hinz
  • Wenzel Matiaske
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)


Dynamic changes in the structure of value-added chains lead to an enhancement of innovations of SMEs (small and medium sized enterprises) and therewith to an impact of the national economies. In the European context the support of the innovation process of SMEs is a goal of the economic policy. In this context private and public consultancies should provide advice for the innovation management of SMEs. This is to some extent politically introduced but the offer of advisory service is seldom used. The integration of consultancies leads to weak relations in the cooperating innovation network and so the risk of losing the competitive edge increases. Based on a Danish–German dataset, this contribution addresses the question of which conditions initiate and impede the utilization of the consulting system from a business point of view. We found that both Danish and German SMEs utilize far more strong than weak ties when it comes to choosing cooperation partners, but at the same time the Danish SMEs manage to exploit the range of services offered by consultancies better.


Social Capital Innovation Process Innovation Network Relational View Contractual Agreement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Adm Sci Q 45:425–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich HE, Pfeffer J (1976) Environments of organizations. Annu Rev Sociol 2:79–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asheim BT (2004) SME innovation policy and the formation of regional networked innovation systems. In: Potter J (ed) Global knowledge flows and economic development. OECD, Paris, pp 19–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borrás S (2003) The innovation policy of the European Union. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  5. Brodbeck FC et al. (2000) Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries. J Occup Organ Psychol 73:1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burt RS (1992) Structural holes. The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Burt RS (1999) The network structure of social capital. Res Organ Behav 22:345–423Google Scholar
  8. Burt RS (2004) Structural holes and good ideas. Am J Sociol 110(2):349–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen MW, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1):128–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge/MAGoogle Scholar
  11. Cooke P, Wills D (1999) Small firms, social capital and the enhancement of business performance through innovation programmes. Small Bus Econ 13:219–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cornett AP, Freytag PV (2006) Virksomhedsinnovation i samspillet med andre aktører. In: Freytag PV, Evald MRE, Jensen KW (eds) Samspil på tværs af den offentlige og private sektor, Center for Entreprenørskab og Småvirksomhedsforskning, Syddansk Universitet, Engstien, pp 49–55Google Scholar
  13. Cornett AP, Sørensen NKI (2005) Systems of innovation and linkages in an interregional perspective: a comparative analysis of Northern Germany and Western Denmark. In: Johansson I (ed) Regions in competition and cooperation. University of Trollhättan, Udevalla, pp 229–251Google Scholar
  14. Cornett AP (2007) Regional public policies for innovation, transferral of knowledge and development. In: Regional knowledge management: promoting regional partnership of innovation, learning and development, Firenze, pp 13–34Google Scholar
  15. Dannenberg O, Thaysen JD (2005) Innovationsnetzwerke bei Klein- und Mittelunternehmen: Ein binationaler Vergleich. Discussion Paper, 8. Internationales Institut für Management, Universität FlensburgGoogle Scholar
  16. Drucker PF (1999) Knowledge-worker productivity: the biggest challenge. Calif Manag Rev 41(2):79–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duschek S (2004) Inter-firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Manag Rev 15:53–73Google Scholar
  18. Dyer HJ, Singh H (1998) The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad Manag Rev 23(4):660–679Google Scholar
  19. Ebers M (ed) (1997) The formation of inter-organizational networks. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Emerson RM (1962) Power dependence relations. Am Sociol Rev 27:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fliaster A, Spiess J (2007) Knowledge mobilization through social ties: the cost-benefit analysis. Schmalenbachs Bus Rev 60:99–117Google Scholar
  22. Foss NJ (1999) Networks, capabilities and competitive advantage. Scand J Manag 15:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Freiling J (2008) RBV and the road to the control of external organizations. Manag Rev 19(1/2): 33–52Google Scholar
  24. Granovetter MS (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol 78:1360–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Granovetter MS (1985) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Am J Sociol 91:481–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gretzinger S, Matiaske W (2000). Marktorientiertes human-resource-management in strategischen Netzwerken. In: Meyer J-A (ed) Jahrbuch der KMU-Forschung. Vahlen Verlag, München, pp 355–369Google Scholar
  27. Gretzinger S. (2008) Strategic outsourcing in the German engine building industry: an empirical study based on the resource dependence approach. Manag Rev 19:200–228Google Scholar
  28. Hagedoorn J (2006) Understanding the cross-level embeddedness of interfirm partnership formation. Acad Manag Rev 31(3):670–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hauschildt J, Schlaak TM (2001) Zur Messung des Innovationsgrades neuartiger Produkte. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft 71(2):161–182Google Scholar
  30. Katila R, Rosenberger JD, Eisenhardt KM (2008) Swimming with sharks: technology ventures, defense mechanisms and corporate relationships. Adm Sci Q 53:295–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaufmann A, Tödtling F (2003) Innovation patterns of SMEs. In: Asheim B, Isaksen A, Nauwelaers C, Tödtling F (eds) Regional innovation policy for small-medium enterprises. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham UK, pp 78–115Google Scholar
  32. Keeble D, Wilkonson F (1999) Collective learning and knowledge development in the evolution of regional clusters of high technology SMEs in Europe. Reg Stud 33(4):295–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kieser A (1997) List und Tücke in der Vertrauensorganization. Die Betriebswirtschaft 57: 597–599Google Scholar
  34. Kogut B (2000). The networks as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strateg Manag J 21:405–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Laforet S, Tann J (2006) Innovative characteristics of small manufacturing firms. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 13(3):363–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Latniak E, Rehfeld D (1994) Betriebliche Innovation und regionales Umfeld: Erfahrungen aus Nordrhein-Westfalen. Arbeit 3:238–253Google Scholar
  37. Li H, Atuahene-Gima K (2001) Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in china. Acad Manag J 44:1123–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Luhmann N (1973) Vertrauen. Ein Mechanismus zur Reduktion sozialer Komplexität, Vol 2. Aufl., StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  39. Matiaske W (1999) Soziales Kapital in Organisationen. Rainer Hampp Verlag, München und MeringGoogle Scholar
  40. Matiaske W (2010) Social capital in organizations. An exchange theory approach. Cambridge Scholar Publ, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  41. Nauwelaers C, Wintjes R (2003) Towards a new paradigm for innovation policies? In: Asheim B, Isaksen A, Nauwelaers C, Tödtling F (eds) Regional innovation policy for small-medium enterprises. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham UK, pp 193–222Google Scholar
  42. Nienhüser W (2008) Resource dependence theory: how well does it explain behavior of organizations? Manag Rev 19:9–32Google Scholar
  43. OECD STI (2008) Entrepreneurship review of Denmark. Tech. rep., Paris, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry (STI), OECDGoogle Scholar
  44. Perry-Smith JE, Shalley CE (2003) The social side of creativity: a static and dynamic social network perspective. Acad Manag Rev 28:89–106Google Scholar
  45. Pfeffer J, Salancik GR (1978) The external control of organizations. A resource dependence perspective. Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Poulfelt F, Payne A (1994) Management consultants: client and consultant perspectives. Scand J Manag 10(4):421–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Powell WW, Koput KW, Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Adm Sci Q 41:116–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Reinhard M (2001) Wissens- und Technologietransfer in Deutschland: Ein langer Weg zu mehr Effizienz. ifo Schnelldienst 54(4):14–17Google Scholar
  49. Royston P (2004) Multiple imputation of missing values. Stata J 4(3):227–241Google Scholar
  50. Schiemann M (2008) Unternehmen nach Größenklassen: Überblick über die KMU in der EU. Arbeitspapier 11, eurostatGoogle Scholar
  51. Schumpeter JA (2006) Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Duncker &. Humblot, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  52. Simon HA (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Q J Econ 69:99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sounder WE, Jenssen SA (1999) Management practices influencing new product success and failure in the United States and Scandinavia: a cross cultural comparative study. J Prod Innovat Manag 16:183–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stark D, Vedres B (2009) Opening closure: intercohesion and entrepreneurial dynamics in business groups. Tech. rep., 09/03, Köln, MPIfGGoogle Scholar
  55. Tödtling F, Kaufmann A (1998) Innovation systems in regions of Europe – a comparative perspective. Institute for urban and regional studies Paper presented to the 38th congress of the Eruopean Regional Science Association, University of Economics and Business Administration, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  56. Tödtling F, Kaufmann A (2002) How effective is innovation support for SMEs? An analysis of the region of Upper Austria. Technovation 22(2):147–159Google Scholar
  57. Tolstoy D (2009) Knowledge combination and knowledge creation in a foreign-market network. J Small Bus Manag 47(2):202–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Adm Sci Q 42:35–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Buuren S, Brand JPL, Broothuis-Oudshoorn K, Rubin DB (2006) Fully conditional specification in multivariate imputation. J Statist Comput Simul 76(12): 1049–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wernerfelt B (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg Manag J 5(2):171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Williamson OE (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, relational contracting. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  62. Xu Z (2008) Networking and innovation in SMEs: evidence from Guangdong province, China. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 15(4):788–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanne Gretzinger
  • Holger Hinz
  • Wenzel Matiaske
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Hamburg and German Institute of Economic Research (DIW), Socio-Economic Panel StudyHelmut-Schmidt-UniversityBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations