Organizations Non-Gratae? The Impact of Unethical Corporate Behavior on Interorganizational Networks

Sullivan, Bilian Ni; Haunschild, Pamela R.; Page, Karen

doi:10.2139/ssrn.743509

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 94 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We use the average value of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants to a firm’s ego network partners as a measure of partner firms’ success. This measure is consistent with the economics perspective of quality (Rindova et al, 2005; Sullivan et al, 2007). NIH grants are an especially appropriate measure of “quality” because methods for reviewing and financing research proposals are often praised as the gold standard.…”

Section: The Research Context and The Datasupporting

confidence: 84%

“…We posit that partner quality is one of the important determinants of the attributes of the partners in a focal firm's collaborative network. High-quality network partners benefit the focal firm not only by bringing in high-quality resources (Sullivan, Haunschild, & Page, 2007) but also by acting as a signal of firm quality to potential investors (Stuart, Hoang, & Hybels, 1999). Therefore, firms are generally motivated to bring in such high-quality partners in their collaborative networks.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Network Partners and The Relational Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From a sociological perspective, a measure of partner quality requires broad collective knowledge and recognition (Rindova et al, 2010). As such, from a sociological view, Rindova et al (2005) and Sullivan et al (2007) include media rankings and Fortune ’s most admired companies rankings, respectively, as a measure of partner quality. In a similar fashion, we use the total number of the firm’s partners’ high-ranked publications (HRPub), excluding the focal firm.…”

Section: The Research Context and The Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Network Characteristics and Patenting in Biotechnology, 1990-2006

Demirkan

2011

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, the authors focus on specifically which types of networks and what types of relationships matter most for the focal firm's innovative performance in biotechnology patenting. They suggest that certain network characteristics, such as quality and the source of knowledge, and the quality of relationships among actors may have a profound effect on the knowledge exchange and hence the number of patents granted to the firm. The authors focus on the research coauthorship networks of 381 firms in the U.S. biotechnology industry over a span of 17 years, from 1990 to 2006. In the biotechnology industry, firms depend heavily on the social network of academic scientists for the exchange and production of knowledge, with firm-level patenting closely linked to it. Their findings largely support the hypotheses, suggesting the necessity to consider the characteristics of the actors and the qualitative nature of the relationships in the network while assessing the role of the firm's networks on its patenting.

show abstract

Section: The Research Context and The Datasupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Characteristics Of Network Partners and The Relational Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Research Context and The Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Network Characteristics and Patenting in Biotechnology, 1990-2006

Demirkan

2011

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This cognitive search model may also be used by focal firms as an efficient guide for future experiential search, by identifying potentially valuable knowledge elements and recombinations, detecting elements and combinations to avoid, and providing insight into the organizational routines that led to the creation of the innovation (Sorenson et al., ). Moreover, there is the sociological argument that central firms enjoy high‐quality status in the ‘whole’ alliance network (Powell et al., ; Burt, ) and high‐status (central) partners benefit a focal firm not only by bringing in high‐quality resources (Sullivan et al., ) and by being better informed about what is going on in the network (Gnyawali and Madhavan, ), but also, by acting as a signal of legitimacy and firm quality (Stuart, ). Thus, focal firms may depend heavily on an alliance ego–network comprised of central, high‐status partners that signal high quality and offer efficiency in exploratory innovation.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a firm's and their partners' alliance ego–network structure on its innovation output in an era of ferment

Karamanos

2015

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A technological discontinuity can disrupt an existing technological regime and it has a profound effect on firms' economic activities and outcomes. The period between the discontinuity and the establishment of the new regime is defined as an era of ferment, which can unleash significant innovation opportunities while creating great uncertainty in the business environment. Although it is well-known that firms often use alliances both to respond to uncertainty and facilitate innovation, little is known about the alliance behavior of firms during an era of ferment and how it can affect their exploratory and exploitative innovation output. The article tests this relationship using as large panel sample of alliances during the era of ferment in the biotechnology industry and the exploitative and exploratory innovation output of biotechnology firms during that time. The results suggest that managers in charge of innovation and alliance formation should proactively optimize the design their firms' ego-network structure as follows: First, alliance ego-network centrality supports exploitative innovation because a central firm coherently and reliably performs experiential search to source complementary knowledge through 'pipeline' alliances to the 'whole' network. Moreover, very high centrality offers little additional gains in coherence and reliability of knowledge received from the network because it restricts access to novel information beyond the focal firm's ego-network neighborhood. Second, ego-network structural holes support exploratory innovation because they provide efficient access through cognitive search to non-redundant flows of information and knowledge, offering ample opportunities for knowledge recombinations. Third, a focal firm's partners' centrality positively affects its exploratory innovation because the focal firm can learn by observing and cognitively evaluating the behavior and associated innovation outcomes of their central partners.

show abstract

“…While many studies have focused on the effects of network change (e.g. Baum et al, 2004; Sullivan et al, 2007), researchers have also begun to realize that networks and network effects on firms are persistent (Kim et al, 2006) and so susceptible to imprinting processes. For example, Marquis (2003) showed that the inter-corporate network structures of companies founded in cities established during the industrial revolution were imprinted and that new network members imitated the existing pattern such that the imprint was maintained.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Persistently learning: How small-world network imprints affect subsequent firm learning

Sullivan

Tang

Marquis

2014

Strategic Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We integrate and extend organizational imprinting and organizational learning theories in a study of how firms' small-world networks at founding have enduring effects on firm learning. We show that firms embedded in networks having denser clustering and shorter path lengths at founding are subsequently more inclined toward exploratory learning. We also demonstrate that subsequent network positions (closeness centrality and structural holes) strengthen the initial small world network imprinting effect. Results based on a sample of US venture capital firms from 1995 to 2003 largely support our hypotheses. Contributions to imprinting theory, the organizational learning literature, and inter-firm network studies are discussed.

show abstract

Organizations Non-Gratae? The Impact of Unethical Corporate Behavior on Interorganizational Networks

Cited by 10 publications

References 94 publications

Network Characteristics and Patenting in Biotechnology, 1990-2006

Network Characteristics and Patenting in Biotechnology, 1990-2006

Effects of a firm's and their partners' alliance ego–network structure on its innovation output in an era of ferment

Persistently learning: How small-world network imprints affect subsequent firm learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About