A firm's innovativeness is driven by its ability to recombine existing technologies. Elaborating on this argument, we contend that there exist two distinct types of recombinant capabilities. First, firms may innovate through recombinant creation, i.e., by creating technological combinations new to the firm. Second, they may innovate through recombinant reuse; i.e., by reconfiguring combinations already known to the firm. We study what drives each type of capability by examining two factors: the degree of integration of a firm's intraorganizational network and the diversity of its knowledge base. We test our theoretical predictions using data on 126 semiconductor firms between 1984 and 2003. Our analyses indicate that factors that favor recombinant creation generally hinder recombinant reuse and vice versa; however, combining an integrated collaboration network and a diverse knowledge base may concurrently enhance both recombinant capabilities. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Extant organizational literature argues that straddling institutionalized categories begets an illegitimacy discount, leading organizations to reproduce established categorical boundaries. If gaining legitimacy requires compliance with this “categorical imperative,” why do we frequently observe categorical straddling even in uncontested and fully institutionalized categorical structures? To address this question, we propose that de novo (i.e., newly founded) and de alio (i.e., diversifying) organizations respond differently to the categorical imperative. Specifically, de novo organizations are more likely to enter and fit in high-contrast categories than in low-contrast ones, whereas the opposite is true for de alio entrants. To test these hypotheses, we follow technological entry dynamics within the semiconductor industry between 1976 and 2002. Using patent information, we examine how category contrast affects which technological categories de novo and de alio organizations enter, and the performance associated with those entry events. A comprehensive set of empirical analyses lend support to our hypotheses. Besides clarifying the link between the categorical imperative and structural reproduction, this study bears implications for entrepreneurship and strategy research on entry dynamics.

Complementing received research on the role of collaboration networks in fostering interorganizational learning and innovation, the authors focus on the importance of learning from other firms’ public knowledge. To this end they introduce the concept of spillover network—the network of “source” firms whose public knowledge a “recipient” firm is able to readily absorb and use as innovation input. Using patent-based data on a panel of semiconductor firms between 1976 and 2002, the authors demonstrate that firms’ innovative performance tends to be higher when their spillover network is either munificent or rich in structural holes. However, being exposed to a spillover network that is both munificent and rich in structural holes is generally counterproductive. Consistent with the insight that the value of external knowledge inputs depends on the firm-level resources with which it can be bundled, furthermore, the authors argue that the extent to which firms benefit from their spillover network hinges on specific intraorganizational factors—their scientific intensity and degree of downstream integration.

Please refer to published version for the most recent bibliographic citation information. If a published version is known of, the repository item page linked to above, will contain details on accessing it.