Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Huggins, Robert; Johnston, Andrew (2010)
Publisher: Taylor and Francis
Languages: English
Types: Article
The objective of this paper is to analyze the characteristics and nature of the networks firms utilize to access knowledge and facilitate innovation. The paper draws on the notion of network resources, distinguishing two types: social capital – consisting of the social relations and networks held by individuals; and network capital – consisting of the strategic and calculative relations and networks held by firms. The methodological approach consists of a quantitative analysis of data from a survey of firms operating in knowledge-intensive sectors of activity. The key findings include: social capital investment is more prevalent among firms frequently interacting with actors from within their own region; social capital investment is related to the size of firms; firm size plays a role in knowledge network patterns; and network dynamism is an important source of innovation. Overall, firms investing more in the development of their inter-firm and other external knowledge networks enjoy higher levels of innovation. It is suggested that an over-reliance on social capital forms of network resource investment may hinder the capability of firms to manage their knowledge networks. It is concluded that the link between a dynamic inter-firm network environment and innovation provides an alternative thesis to that advocating the advantage of network stability.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Borgatti, S.P. and Foster, P.C. 2003 The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology, Journal of Management, 29: 991-1013.
    • Boschma, R.A. and Frenken, K. 2006 Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography, Journal of Economic Geography, 6: 273-302.
    • Boschma, R. A. 2004 Competitiveness of regions from an evolutionary perspective, Regional Studies, 38: 1001-1014.
    • Boschma, R. A. 2005 Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment, Regional Studies, 39: 61-74.
    • Bourdieu, P. 1986 The forms of capital, in Richardson J.G. (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (New York: Greenwood) pp. 241-258.
    • Bowey, J.L. and Easton, G. 2007 Entrepreneurial social capital unplugged: An activity-based analysis, International Small Business Journal, 25: 273-306.
    • Brökel, T. and Binder, M. 2007 The regional dimension of knowledge transfers: A behavioral approach, Industry and Innovation, 14 151-175.
    • Burt, R.S. 1992 Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
    • Capello, R. and Faggian, A. 2005 Collective learning and relational capital in local innovation processes, Regional Studies, 39: 75-87.
    • Charles, D. 2003 Universities and territorial development: Reshaping the regional role of UK universities, Local Economy, 18: 7-20.
    • Fleming, L., King, C. and Juda, A. I. 2007 Small worlds and regional innovation, Organization Science, 18: 938-954.
    • Freel, M.S. 2000 Do small innovating firms outperform non-innovators? Small Business Economics, 14: 195-210.
    • Fritsch, M. 2002 Measuring the quality of regional innovation systems: A knowledge production function approach, International Regional Science Review, 25: 86-101.
    • Gargiulo, M. and Benassi, M. 2000 Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital, Organization Science, 11: 183- 196.
    • Garnsey, E. and Heffernan, P. 2005 High-technology clustering through spin-out and attraction: The Cambridge case, Regional Studies, 39, 1127-1144.
    • Gertler, M.S. and Levitte, Y.M. 2005 Local nodes in global networks: The geography of knowledge flows in biotechnology, Industry and Innovation, 12: 487-507.
    • Giuliani, E. 2007 The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: Evidence from the wine industry, Journal of Economic Geography, 7: 139-168.
    • Glückler, J. 2007 Economic geography and the evolution of networks, Journal of Economic Geography: 7, 619-634.
    • Goerzen, A. 2005 Managing alliance networks: Emerging practices of multinational corporations, Academy of Management Executive, 19: 94-107.
    • Goerzen, A. and Beamish, P.W. 2005 The effect of alliance network diversity on multinational enterprise performance, Strategic Management Journal, 26: 333-354.
    • Grabher, G. and Ibert, O. 2006 Bad company? The ambiguity of personal knowledge networks, Journal of Economic Geography, 6: 251-271.
    • Granovetter, M. 1973 The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78: 1360-1380.
    • Grant, R. and Baden-Fuller, C. 2004 A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances, Journal of Management Studies, 41: 61-84.
    • Gulati, R. 1999 Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation, Strategic Management Journal, 20: 397- 420.
    • Gulati, R. 2007 Managing Network Resources: Alliances, Affiliations, and Other Relational Assets (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
    • Sammarra, A. and Biggiero, L. 2008 Heterogeneity and specificity of inter-firm knowledge flows in innovation networks, Journal of Management Studies, 45: 800- 829.
    • Seely Brown, J. and Duguid, P. 2001 Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective, Organization Science, 12: 198-213.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article