How do knowledge diversity and ego-network structures affect firms' sustainable innovation: evidence from alliance innovation networks of China's new energy industries

Abstract

Purpose Facing the global public health emergency (GPHE), the conflict of cultural differences and the imbalance of vital resources such as knowledge among different organizations are becoming more severe, which affects the enthusiasm and sustainability of firms' innovation heavily. It is an urgent problem to be solved for firms how to make use of internal knowledge and external power to help firms' sustainable innovation (FSI). Thus, the purpose of this study is to deeply analyze how firms' internal knowledge diversity (KD) and external ego-network structures [ego-network density (ED) and honest brokers (HB)] affect FSI, as well as how the ego-network structures (ED and HB) moderate the relationship between KD and FSI based on the perspective of the ego network. Design/methodology/approach Based on the data of the alliance innovation networks of China's new energy industries in 2009–2019, this study uses the social network analysis method and negative binomial regression model to explore the effect of KD and ego-network structures (ED and HB) on FSI, as well as the moderating effects of ego-network structures (ED and HB) on the relationship between KD and FSI based on the perspective of ego network. Findings This study finds that KD, ED and HB can boost FSI. Moreover, ED plays a negative moderating role in the relationship between KD and FSI. However, the negative moderating effect of HB on the relationship between KD and FSI is not significant. Research limitations/implications This study presents fresh empirical evidence and new insights for firms on how to make full use of firms' internal KD and external ego-network structures to facilitate FSI. Originality/value First, this study not only enriches the research on the consequences of KD but also expands our understanding of the knowledge-based view to some extent. Second, this study not only enriches the motivation research of the FSI based on the perspective of ego-network in the context of the GPHE but also expands the application scope of social network theory and sustainable innovation' theory in part. Third, this paper is a new attempt to apply social network theory and knowledge-based view at the same time.

With whom should I work? Partners’ network characteristics and innovation persistence

“…We began this paper with the intriguing purpose of exploring the relationship between partners' network characteristics, knowledge recombination, and innovation persistence. Extensive research has highlighted the pivotal role of collaboration networks in fostering technological innovation [ 11 , 32 , 36 ]. In response, scholars have begun to probe into the influence of focal innovators' different network characteristics on their innovation performance.…”

“…Secondly, this study contributes to the theories of the effects of knowledge recombination on innovation persistence. Previous research on recombination innovation has proposed that successful innovation is the product of broader recombination as well as novelty [ 11 , 16 , 42 , 51 ]. However, there is a lack of literature on understanding why the diversity and novelty of knowledge recombination influence innovation persistence.…”

“…From an external perspective, a firm's innovation persistence is linked to market environments, economic policy uncertainty, and government subsidies [ 7 , 8 ]. In contrast, the internal perspective has emphasized that innovation persistence may result from human capital, financial constraints, R&D investment, knowledge diversity, as well as innovation strategies such as firm digital transformation and business model diversification [ 6 , [9] , [10] , [11] , [12] ]. To date, however, existing studies often overemphasize the importance of external environments and firm-level characteristics without systematically examining the inventors' innovation persistence within the firm.…”

Guest editorial

“…Based on the secondary data of alliance innovation networks of China’s new energy industries, Zhao et al (2022) first explore the relationships of firms’ internal knowledge diversity and external ego-network structures (ego-network density and honest brokers) with their sustainable innovation and then examine the negative moderating effects of external ego-network structures on the knowledge diversity–sustainable innovation associations. The main merit of this article lies in the employment of a social network analysis method to address the possibility of innovation-related risks, which advances KM studies through an unconventional ego-network lens.…”

Research into the Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Technological Innovation in China’s Natural Gas Industry from the Perspective of Energy Transition

“…The core technology fields were mainly distributed among the fields of exploration and mining, chemicals, pollution control, new materials, and intelligent monitoring, which shows that China's natural gas technology innovation fields are gradually becoming consistent with the international leading directions [86]. (2) Innovation geography focuses on the distribution and evolution of innovation in different geographical units [128,129]; it has developed the rich research fields of innovation capability evaluation and analysis [130], innovation process analysis [131], innovation spatial connections [132], and innovation network structures [133]. It was valuable to match the technological innovation activities of the natural gas industry with different cities based on innovation geography.…”