Collaboration Networks on Inventors and Firms

Part of the Evolutionary Economics and Social Complexity Science book series (EESCS, volume 21)




  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Barabási AL, Oltvai ZN. Network biology: understanding the cell’s functional organization. Nat Rev Genet. 2004;5:101–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bloom N, Reenen JV. Why do management practices differ across firms and countries? J Econ Perspect. 2010;24(1):203–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chesbrough HW. Open innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School; 2003.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Delmestri G, Montanari F, Usai A. Reputation and strength of ties in predicting commercial success and artistic merit of independents in the Italian feature film industry*. J Manag Stud. 2005;42(5):975–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dyer JH. Does governance matter? Keiretsu alliances and asset specificity as sources of Japanese competitive acdvantage. Organ Sci. 1996;7(6):649–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fleming L, Marx M. Managing creativity in small worlds. Calif Manag Rev. 2006;48:6–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fleming L, Sorenson O. Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data. Res Policy. 2001;30:1019–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fleming L, Mingo S, Chen D. Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Admin Sci Q. 2007;52:443–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grant RM. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J. 1996;17:109–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Griliches Z. R&D and productivity-the economic evidence. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guimera R, et al. Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance. Science 2005;308(5722):697–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hall BH, Jaffe AB. The NBER patent citations data file: lessons, insights and methodological tools. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8498; 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hicks D, et al. Research excellence and patented innovation. Sci Public Policy. 2000;27(5):310–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Inoue H, Liu Y. Revealing the intricate effect of collaboration on innovation. PLoS ONE 2015;10(3):e0121973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Inoue H, Yamaguchi E. Evaluation of the small business innovation research program in Japan. SAGE Open. 2017;7(1):1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Inoue H, Souma W, Tamada S. Spatial characteristics of joint application networks in Japanese patents. Phys A. 2007;383:152–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lai R, D’Amour A, Yu A, Sun Y, Fleming L. Disambiguation and Co-authorship Networks of the U.S. Patent Inventor Database (1975–2010); 2011.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Laursen K, Salter A. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strateg Manag J. 2006;27(2):131–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Newman MEJ. Assortative mixing in networks. Phys Rev Lett. 2002;89(20):208701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nonaka I, Lewin AY. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Org Sci. 1994;5(1):14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pastor-Satorras R, Vázques A, Vespignani A. Dynamical and correlation properties of the internet. Phys Rev Lett. 2001;87(25):258701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Perretti F, Negro G. Mixing genres and matching people: a study in innovation and team composition in Hollywood. J Organ Behav. 2007;586:563–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Porac JF, et al. Human capital heterogeneity collaborative relationships, and publication patterns in a multidisciplinary scientific alliance: a comparative case study of two scientific teams. Res Policy. 2004;33(4):661–678. ISSN: 0048-7333. Scholar
  26. 26.
    Porter ME. On competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Powell WW, Grodal S. The oxford handbook of innovation, chap. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006, p. 56–85.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ralston DA, et al. The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: a study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and China. J Int Bus Stud. 2007;1–19.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reagans R, Zuckerman E, McEvily B. How to make the team: social networks vs. demography as criteria for designing effective teams. Admin Sci Q. 2004;49(1):101–33.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Simonton DK. Scientific genius: a psychology of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1988.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Singh J, Fleming L. Lone inventors as sources of technological break-throughs: myth or reality? Manag Sci. 2010;56:41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Skilton PF, Dooley KJ. The effects of repeat collaboration on creative abrasion. Acad Manag Rev. 2010;35(1):118–34. ISSN: 0363-7425. Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tamada S, Kodama F, Gemba K. A study on science linkage of Japanese patents; an analysis on patents in the field of genetic technology by constructing a citation database. J Sci Policy Res Manag. 2002;17(3/4):222–30.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol. 1996;58:267–288.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Trajtenberg M. A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. Rand J Econ. 1990;21(1):172–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Admin Sci Q. 1997;42(1):35–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Uzzi B, Spiro J. Collaboration and creativity: the small world problem. Am J Sociol. 2005;111(2):447–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Venables WN, Ripley BD. Modern applied statistics with S. New York: Springer; 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Watts DJ, Strogatz SH. Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature. 1998;393:440–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Weisberg RW. Creativity: understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken: Wiley; 2006.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wessner CW, editor. An assessment of the SBIR program. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2008.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wuchty S, Jones BF, Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science. 2007;316(5827):1036–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zaheer A, Mcevily B, Perrone V. Does of trust matter? Exploring the effects interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Org Sci. 1998;9(2):141–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Simulation StudiesUniversity of HyogoKobeJapan

Personalised recommendations