IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v10y2020i2p39-d318437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundary-Spanning Search for Knowledge, Knowledge Reconstruction and the Sustainable Innovation Ability of Agricultural Enterprises: A Chinese Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Kaifeng Duan

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Changcheng Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    Business School, Jinggangshan University, Ji’an 343009, China)

  • Junqiang Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Rui Zhang

    (Land Satellite Remote Sensing Application Center, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100048, China)

  • Yanwei Zhang

    (School of Tourism and Urban Management, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330032, China)

Abstract

Boundary-spanning search for knowledge is an effective way for enterprises to acquire heterogeneous knowledge, and is also an important pre-stage to realize effective knowledge reconstruction. Based on the boundary-spanning search for knowledge theory, this paper studies the relationship between boundary-spanning search for knowledge and the sustainable innovation ability of agricultural enterprises considering the influence of organizational knowledge reconstruction, from a Chinese perspective. A questionnaire survey on agricultural enterprises mainly from Southeast China is conducted, and the hierarchical regression analysis method is utilized to verify five research hypotheses. The results mainly show that (1) boundary-spanning search for technology knowledge (BSSTK) and boundary-spanning search for market knowledge (BSSMK) both have a significant positive impact on the sustainable innovation ability of an agricultural enterprise; (2) organizational knowledge reconstruction plays a partial intermediary role between boundary-spanning search for knowledge (including BSSTK and BSSMK) and the sustainable innovation ability of an agricultural enterprise. From the perspective of boundary-spanning search for knowledge, this paper provides theoretical support for the promotion of sustainable innovation of an agricultural enterprise, which contributes to improving the economic sustainability of agriculture to some extent.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaifeng Duan & Changcheng Zhang & Junqiang Li & Rui Zhang & Yanwei Zhang, 2020. "Boundary-Spanning Search for Knowledge, Knowledge Reconstruction and the Sustainable Innovation Ability of Agricultural Enterprises: A Chinese Perspective," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:10:y:2020:i:2:p:39-:d:318437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/10/2/39/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/10/2/39/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nesta, Lionel, 2008. "Knowledge and productivity in the world's largest manufacturing corporations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 886-902, September.
    2. Cristiano Antonelli & Francesco Crespi & Giuseppe Scellato, 2013. "Internal and external factors in innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 256-280, April.
    3. HUANG,Pan, 2018. "Strategic Deviance, Customer Concentration and Enterprise Value—A Case Study of Agricultural Listed Enterprises," Asian Agricultural Research, USA-China Science and Culture Media Corporation, vol. 10(04), April.
    4. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    5. Gianmario Verona & Davide Ravasi, 2003. "Unbundling dynamic capabilities: an exploratory study of continuous product innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(3), pages 577-606, June.
    6. Antonelli, Cristiano & Crespi, Francesco & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2012. "Inside innovation persistence: New evidence from Italian micro-data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 341-353.
    7. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    8. Alessia Sammarra & Lucio Biggiero, 2008. "Heterogeneity and Specificity of Inter‐Firm Knowledge Flows in Innovation Networks," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 800-829, June.
    9. Roper, Stephen & Hewitt-Dundas, Nola, 2008. "Innovation persistence: Survey and case-study evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 149-162, February.
    10. Jatinder S. Sidhu & Harry R. Commandeur & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "The Multifaceted Nature of Exploration and Exploitation: Value of Supply, Demand, and Spatial Search for Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 20-38, February.
    11. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    12. Chen-Ju Lin & Ci-Rong Li, 2013. "The Effect of Boundary-Spanning Search on Breakthrough Innovations of New Technology Ventures," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 93-113, February.
    13. Yam, Richard C.M. & Lo, William & Tang, Esther P.Y. & Lau, Antonio K.W., 2011. "Analysis of sources of innovation, technological innovation capabilities, and performance: An empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 391-402, April.
    14. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    15. Elena Huergo & Jordi Jaumandreu, 2004. "How Does Probability of Innovation Change with Firm Age?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3_4), pages 193-207, April.
    16. Oleksandr Karamushka & Svitlana Moroz & Diana Hrybova, 2018. "Information Component Of Innovative Support For Agricultural Enterprises Capital," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 4(4).
    17. Wei, Yinghong (Susan) & Atuahene-Gima, Kwaku, 2009. "The moderating role of reward systems in the relationship between market orientation and new product performance in China," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 89-96.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bo Li & Rita Yi Man Li & Thitinant Wareewanich, 2021. "Factors Influencing Large Real Estate Companies’ Competitiveness: A Sustainable Development Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Zhiwen Su & Mingyu Zhang & Jianjun Sun & Wenbing Wu, 2023. "Agribusiness diversification and technological innovation efficiency: A U‐shaped relationship," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 322-346, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cristiano Antonelli & Francesco Crespi & Giuseppe Scellato, 2018. "Productivity growth persistence: firm strategies, size and system properties," Chapters, in: The Evolutionary Complexity of Endogenous Innovation, chapter 8, pages 176-202, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Martin Woerter, 2014. "Competition and Persistence of R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(5-6), pages 469-489, September.
    3. Naciba Haned & Caroline Mothe & Thuc Uyen Nguyen-Thi, 2014. "Firm persistence in technological innovation: the relevance of organizational innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(5-6), pages 490-516, September.
    4. Hoppmann, Joern & Wu, Geng & Johnson, Jillian, 2021. "The impact of demand-pull and technology-push policies on firms’ knowledge search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    5. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    6. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    7. Hyojung Kim & Namgyoo Park & Jeonghwan Lee, 2014. "How does the second-order learning process moderate the relationship between innovation inputs and outputs of large Korean firms?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 69-103, March.
    8. Kerr, Clive & Phaal, Robert, 2018. "Directing the technology intelligence activity: An ‘information needs’ template for initiating the search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 265-276.
    9. Davide Antonioli & Sandro Montresor, 2021. "Innovation persistence in times of crisis: an analysis of Italian firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1739-1764, April.
    10. Mariotti, Francesca & Haider, Sajjad, 2020. "Managing institutional diversity and structural holes: Network configurations for recombinant innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    11. Angela Triguero & David Córcoles & Maria Cuerva, 2014. "Persistence of innovation and firm’s growth: evidence from a panel of SME and large Spanish manufacturing firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 787-804, December.
    12. Lee, Kyung Yul & Jung, Hyun Ju & Kwon, Youngsun, 2024. "Boundary-spanning technology search, product component reuse, and new product innovation: Evidence from the smartphone industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    13. Rammer, Christian & Schubert, Torben, 2016. "Concentration on the few? R&D and innovation in German firms 2001 to 2013," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-005, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Yolande E. Chan & James S. Denford & Joyce Y. Jin, 2016. "Competing Through Knowledge and Information Systems Strategies: A Study of Small and Medium-Sized Firms," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-37, September.
    15. Alessandra Colombelli & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "The persistence of firms' knowledge base: a quantile approach to Italian data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 585-610, October.
    16. Antonelli Cristiano & Crespi, Francesco & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2013. "Path Dependent Patterns of Persistence in Productivity Growth," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201310, University of Turin.
    17. Chung-Jen Chen & Bou-Wen Lin & Jun-You Lin & Yung-Chang Hsiao, 2020. "Learning-from-parents: exploitative knowledge acquisition and the innovation performance of joint venture," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 228-258, February.
    18. Michalis E. Papazoglou, 2023. "Favorable strategies for the success of entry into new technological areas: an entrepreneurial perspective," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 403-426, March.
    19. Colombelli Alessandra & Quatraro Francesco, 2012. "Persistence of innovation and knowledge structure: Evidence from a sample of Italian firms," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201205, University of Turin.
    20. Lampert, Curba Morris & Kim, Minyoung, 2019. "Going far to go further: Offshoring, exploration, and R&D performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 376-386.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:10:y:2020:i:2:p:39-:d:318437. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.