Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability

被引:428
作者
Yayavaram, Sai [1 ]
Ahuja, Gautam [2 ]
机构
[1] Natl Univ Singapore, Dept Business Policy, Singapore 117592, Singapore
[2] Univ Michigan, Ross Sch Business, Ann Arbor, MI 48108 USA
关键词
D O I
10.2189/asqu.53.2.333
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We use patent data from the worldwide semiconductor industry from 1984 to 1994 to study the effect of the structure of organizational knowledge bases, or the patterns of coupling between their elements of technical knowledge, on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability. We argue that organizational variations in coupling patterns between knowledge elements can be reflected in a spectrum of knowledge-base structures-varying from fully decomposable (the knowledge base is composed of distinct clusters of knowledge elements coupled together with no significant ties between clusters) through nearly decomposable (knowledge clusters are discernable but are connected through crosscluster couplings) to non-decomposable (no knowledge clusters emerge, as the couplings are pervasively distributed)-and that organizations may differ in the way they use their knowledge because of variations in their knowledge-base structure, rather than because of differences in the knowledge elements themselves. Results show that a nearly decomposable knowledge base increases the usefulness of the inventions generated from it, as measured by patent citations, and also the knowledge base's malleability or capacity for change.
引用
收藏
页码:333 / 362
页数:30
相关论文
共 62 条
[1]   Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study [J].
Ahuja, G ;
Katila, R .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2001, 22 (03) :197-220
[2]  
Allen T. J., 1977, Managing the Flow of Technology -Technological Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information within R
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2001, NBER WORKING PAPER S
[4]   Fact-free learning [J].
Aragones, E ;
Gilboa, I ;
Postlewaite, A ;
Schmeidler, D .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2005, 95 (05) :1355-1368
[5]  
Baldwin C, 2000, Design Rules: The Power of Modularity, DOI DOI 10.7551/MITPRESS/2366.001.0001
[6]  
Barabasi A.L., 2002, The formula: the universal laws of success
[7]   DYNAMIC COUNT DATA MODELS OF TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION [J].
BLUNDELL, R ;
GRIFFITH, R ;
VANREENEN, J .
ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 1995, 105 (429) :333-344
[8]   Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in [J].
Burgelman, RA .
ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, 2002, 47 (02) :325-357
[9]   When and how does business group affiliation promote firm innovation? A tale of two emerging economies [J].
Chang, Sea-Jin ;
Chung, Chi-Nien ;
Mahmood, Ishtiaq P. .
ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2006, 17 (05) :637-656
[10]  
Chang SJ, 1996, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V17, P587, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199610)17:8<587::AID-SMJ834>3.0.CO