Does Combinatorial Knowledge Lead to a Better Innovation Performance of Firms?

Abstract

The knowledge base concept in the past has often been applied in its "pure" form, i.e. it was assumed that there are dominant knowledge bases in particular sectors and firms, that shape the knowledge-and innovation process and related networks. For example, it has been argued that in the case of "analytical sectors" such as biotech codified knowledge generated by universities and R&D organisations are key for radical innovation, and that such knowledge is often transmitted by formal R&D cooperations and university-firm links. "Synthetic sectors" such as machinery on the other hand were assumed to innovate more incrementally by recombining existing knowledge that was often drawn from suppliers or service firms. Empirical literature partly has confirmed these basic patters, but also has demonstrated that more complex knowledge processes are underlying these overly schematic expectations. In addition, there have been arguments by Asheim, Boschma and Strambach, among others, more recently that combinations of different but related knowledge bases and -assets might be of high relevance for understanding innovation processes of firms in particular sectors and regions. This implies that innovation of firms e.g. in "analytical sectors"might benefit not just from new and basic knowledge generated by research, but also from recombining existing and applied knowledge or by drawing on symbolic knowledge assets. The same argument for the relevance of combinatorial knowledge bases applies for "synthetic" and "symbolic sectors", but in different forms. The paper investigages if the reliance on combinatorial knowledge bases leads to a better innovation performance and more radical forms of innovation than the use of more narrow knowledge assets. The paper investigates the relevance of combinatorial knowledge bases for innovation at first conceptually and based on respective literature. In the second part we analyse this question empirically by drawing on findings for the ICT sector in three regions

Tudásáramlás és tanulás egy hagyományos iparágban

“…Eredményeik alapján az derül ki, hogy azok a vállalatok, amelyek legalább két tudásbázis kombinációjára építenek, magasabb inno- vációs aktivitással rendelkeznek (Tödtling -Grillitsch, 2015;Zukauskaite -Moodysson, 2013). Az iparágak-ban azonban megadható egy domináns tudásbázis, amely ugyan idővel változhat (Plum -Hassink, 2011), de döntően hat az iparág térbeliségére és az innováci-ós hálózatok szerkezetére (Martin -Moodysson, 2011, 2013Liu et al, 2013).…”

“…Tehát az eltérő regionális innovációs rendszerek különböző innovációs teljesítményt eredményeznek (Gülcan et al, 2011). A térbeliséget tekintve Tödtling -Grillitsch (2015) arra is rávilágít, hogy több területi szintről szerzett tudás magasabb innovativitáshoz vezet. Az eredmények sokszínűsége az alkalmazott mód-szerekben is visszaköszön.…”

Entrepreneurial Education: The Effect of Entrepreneurial Political Skill on Social Network, Tacit Knowledge, and Innovation Capability

“…This will translate to increases in the returns for the novelty (Tödtling & Grillitsch, 2015). In turn, the innovative entrepreneurship invests more in research and development than the existing firm which relies on technology transfer.…”

“…However, the absorptive capacity and R&D are two of the aspects that exist in technology transfer and innovative entrepreneurship, respectively. They act as trade-offs for tacit knowledge that couples inventors to their innovations (Tödtling & Grillitsch, 2015). The innovator is reliant upon tacit knowledge as an aspect of the discovery process and the subsequent benefits of the innovation.…”

Regional innovation policies for new path development – beyond neo-liberal and traditional systemic views

“…Furthermore, knowledge is widely distributed across actors and contexts (Asheim, Moodysson, & Tödtling, 2011a;Tödtling, Asheim, & Boschma, 2013). It can thus be a challenging task to identify the relevant areas and sources of knowledge and to access and combine them in a useful way (Tödtling & Grillitsch, 2015). Finally, the detrimental effect of appropriability problems on innovation may have been overestimated.…”