the network society networks & circulation of knowledge 06-10-2009 mila davids
TRANSCRIPT
The network societyThe network society
Networks & circulation of knowledgeNetworks & circulation of knowledge06-10-200906-10-2009Mila DavidsMila Davids
Networks & circulation of Networks & circulation of knowledgeknowledge
Arjan van Rooij Arjan van Rooij
Rudi Bekkers Rudi Bekkers
Why networks & circulation of Why networks & circulation of knowledge?knowledge?
Relationships with other ‘The network society’ Relationships with other ‘The network society’ lectures? lectures? Contribution to understanding of technological Contribution to understanding of technological changechange
Overview lectures focusing ‘circulation of Overview lectures focusing ‘circulation of knowledge’ knowledge’
Case study Case study
Earlier lectures:Earlier lectures:
Why networks & innovation?Why networks & innovation?
Classic innovation studies focus mainly on characteristics of Classic innovation studies focus mainly on characteristics of individuals or firms to explain innovationindividuals or firms to explain innovation– e.g. firm size and innovativeness e.g. firm size and innovativeness
However, innovation, is However, innovation, is inherently socialinherently social in nature in nature – e.g. firms have relations with other firms and consequently e.g. firms have relations with other firms and consequently
access to additional external resourcesaccess to additional external resources
Hence, networks of social relations between actors Hence, networks of social relations between actors – (individuals and organizations) may be important factors in (individuals and organizations) may be important factors in
explaining innovation explaining innovation – and innovation may change networks of social relations as welland innovation may change networks of social relations as well
Innovativeness & learningInnovativeness & learning
Resource based view of the firmResource based view of the firm– Edith Penrose (1959)Edith Penrose (1959)
– 1980s 1980s capabilities: historically determined; firm specific; capabilities: historically determined; firm specific; difficult to imitate difficult to imitate
Inovativeness & learning Inovativeness & learning
The knowledge base view of the firmThe knowledge base view of the firm– Conner & Prahalad, Grant, Kogut & ZanderConner & Prahalad, Grant, Kogut & Zander
Dynamic capability perspectiveDynamic capability perspective– Teece, Pisano, ShuenTeece, Pisano, Shuen
Organizational learning & routinesOrganizational learning & routines– Nelson & Winter Nelson & Winter – NonakaNonaka
Networks & circulation of Networks & circulation of knowledge knowledge
Knowledge (& transfer)Knowledge (& transfer)– Explicit knowledge / information Explicit knowledge / information <-><-> Tacit knowledge / know-howTacit knowledge / know-how– General knowledgeGeneral knowledge <-><-> specific knowledgespecific knowledge
– Innovation & capability development: Various kind of knowledgeInnovation & capability development: Various kind of knowledge
Knowledge transferKnowledge transfer– Documents, publications, patents, licencesDocuments, publications, patents, licences– Personal contactsPersonal contacts....
Knowledge sourcesKnowledge sources– UniversitiesUniversities -> lecture 13/10 & 17/11 -> lecture 13/10 & 17/11 – ConsumersConsumers– Suppliers Suppliers – competitorscompetitors....
Networks & circulation of Networks & circulation of knowledge knowledge
Knowledge flows viaKnowledge flows via-informal / personal relations-informal / personal relations-education-education-licensing-licensing-alliances-alliances-co-operation / co-design-co-operation / co-design....
NetworksNetworks– Specific relations: alliance networksSpecific relations: alliance networks– Sources: consumer network; supplier networkSources: consumer network; supplier network -> lecture 1/12-> lecture 1/12....
Focus on specific innovation - firm:Focus on specific innovation - firm:Various knowledge sharing networks; knowledge; knowledge flows, sources, carriersVarious knowledge sharing networks; knowledge; knowledge flows, sources, carriers
-> lecture 6/10, -> lecture 6/10, 1/12 1/12 & & 8/128/12
University – industry University – industry relationsrelations
International International knowledge flowsknowledge flows
Knowledge networks Knowledge networks and societal transitionand societal transition
Universities Arjan van Universities Arjan van Rooij (13-10)Rooij (13-10)
Ac Ind researchers Ac Ind researchers Rudi Bekkers (17-11)Rudi Bekkers (17-11)
Globalisation & Globalisation & Learning in networksLearning in networks
Contribution to Contribution to societal changesocietal change
CEO
Staff
Divisions
Master
Pupil
Guild
Second Industrial Revolution
Third Industrial Revolution
Master
Pupil
Master
Pupil
‘Stand alone’ model:- Economies of scale- Optimize assets
Networked model:Economies of skill: -access to knowledge-co-development-leverage knowledge-focus on core competences-learn and innovate
Why networks and alliance management?The knowledge economy is a network
economy
Organizational models are transforming from “stand alone” to “networked”
Case study: Case study: Philips & solid-state technologyPhilips & solid-state technology
1.1. constraints for networkingconstraints for networking
2.2. actual networkbuildingactual networkbuilding
internal knowledge buildinginternal knowledge building
expectationsexpectations
path-dependencypath-dependency
Patrick Dixon: future trends …Patrick Dixon: future trends …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99p-pWhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99p-pWW7ljIW7ljI
Case study: Case study: Philips & solid-state technologyPhilips & solid-state technology
1.1. constraints for networkingconstraints for networking
2.2. actual networkbuildingactual networkbuilding
internal knowledge buildinginternal knowledge building
expectationsexpectations
path-dependencypath-dependency
low
high
External knowledge
low highInternal knowledge
Importance in innovation process
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
1950s/1960s Silicon/IC
……????…????…
Why did Philips’ attitude towards external Why did Philips’ attitude towards external knowledge change?knowledge change?
Argument:Argument:
Expectations largely influenced Expectations largely influenced the searching for and acquiring the searching for and acquiring
of knowledgeof knowledge
They influenced Philips’ attitude They influenced Philips’ attitude
& company approached& company approached
Necessary ….Necessary ….
Knowledge base
Receptivity
External knowledge acquisition
Expectations
ExpectationsExpectations
1.1. future technological possibilities, with regard to future technological possibilities, with regard to the artefact, material or process the artefact, material or process
2.2. market expectations and market expectations and
3.3. ideas about broad technological trends. ideas about broad technological trends.
4. character of the licence agreement4. character of the licence agreement
(Van Lente)(Van Lente)
related to:
External knowledge acquisitionExternal knowledge acquisition
Knowledge base
Receptivity
External knowledgeacquisition
ExpectationsCoherence
Self-confidence
OverviewOverview
three periods:three periods:1. End 1940s – begin 1950s1. End 1940s – begin 1950s
Germanium transistorGermanium transistor
2. Mid 1950s2. Mid 1950sHigh frequency transistorHigh frequency transistor
3. End 1950s – begin 1960s3. End 1950s – begin 1960sSilicon / ICSilicon / IC
aspects:aspects:-external knowledge and internal knowledge -external knowledge and internal knowledge -expectations -expectations * receptivity & knowledge base* receptivity & knowledge base* self-confidence & coherence* self-confidence & coherence
End 1940s – begin 1950sEnd 1940s – begin 1950sGermanium transistor Germanium transistor
1930s semiconductors1930s semiconductors Selenium & copper oxide (selenium rectifiers)Selenium & copper oxide (selenium rectifiers)
Natlab researchNatlab researchafter WOII: American companiesafter WOII: American companies
Selenium, germanium & siliconSelenium, germanium & silicon Philis -> germanium (germanium rectifiers)Philis -> germanium (germanium rectifiers)
experienceexperience1948: Bell1948: Bell
Transistor effect (point contact transistor)Transistor effect (point contact transistor)publicationspublications
1952: Bell 1952: Bell layer transistor: double doping techniquelayer transistor: double doping technique
Bell symposium & licence agreementBell symposium & licence agreement Natlab versus production department: RCA (alloy junction)Natlab versus production department: RCA (alloy junction)
publicationspublications
External knowledge
low
high
low highInternal knowledge
Importance in innovation process
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
weak
strong
Receptivity
weak strongKnowledge base
Importance in ‘knowledge acquisition’
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
low
high
Self-confidence
low highcoherence
Importance of expectations determined by:
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
Mid 1950sMid 1950s High frequency transistorHigh frequency transistor
Mid 1950s: high frequency transistorsMid 1950s: high frequency transistorsPhilips: in-house development (POB transistors)Philips: in-house development (POB transistors)
own developmentown development Instead of Philco’s knowledge (surface base Instead of Philco’s knowledge (surface base
transistor / jet etching process)transistor / jet etching process)
Reasons:Reasons:- Technical Technical - Expected profitabilityExpected profitability- Future semiconductor companies : tube manufacturing Future semiconductor companies : tube manufacturing
capabilitiescapabilities
External knowledge
low
high
low highInternal knowledge
Importance in innovation process
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
weak
strong
Receptivity
weak strongKnowledge base
Importance in knowlege acquisition
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
low
high
Self-confidence
low highcoherence
Importance of expectations determined by:
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
End 1950s – begin 1960sEnd 1950s – begin 1960sSilicon / IC Silicon / IC
Philips: own capabilitiesPhilips: own capabilities End 1950s: Am. companies: siliconEnd 1950s: Am. companies: silicon Philips: germanium (silicon diodes)Philips: germanium (silicon diodes)
Passive attitude towards silicon transistorsPassive attitude towards silicon transistors POB transistor / market expectationsPOB transistor / market expectations Agreement with Texas InstrumentsAgreement with Texas Instruments
End 1950s: Am. Companies: ICsEnd 1950s: Am. Companies: ICs Focus on germanium / poor market prospectsFocus on germanium / poor market prospects IBM preference (thin film versus planar process)IBM preference (thin film versus planar process) Underestimation of TIUnderestimation of TI
Acquisition of Wembly lab (General Electric Company): not Acquisition of Wembly lab (General Electric Company): not sufficientsufficient
WestinghouseWestinghouse
External knowledge
low
high
low highInternal knowledge
Importance in innovation process
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
weak
strong
Receptivity
weak strongKnowledge base
Importance in knowledge acquisition
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
low
high
Self-confidence
low highcoherence
Importance of expectations determined by:
1950s/1960s Silicon/IC
1950s/1960s Silicon/IC
1950s/1960s Silicon/IC
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
mid 1950s- High frequency transistor
1940s/1950s Germanium/transistor
Concluding remarksConcluding remarksInteraction Interaction internal knowledge building and external internal knowledge building and external knowledge acquisitionknowledge acquisitionIn-house knowledge building importantIn-house knowledge building importantSuccess -> self-confidence + coherence => external Success -> self-confidence + coherence => external orientation orientation Importance market expectations (IBM) => germanium Importance market expectations (IBM) => germanium Expected market dominance former tube companies => TIExpected market dominance former tube companies => TIExpectations TI licence agreement => alertness & active Expectations TI licence agreement => alertness & active search search Path dependence : techniques & networkingPath dependence : techniques & networkingInstitutional context Institutional context
Thank you for your attention Thank you for your attention