IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i7p717-d590055.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Does Tie Strength Dispersion within Inter-Organizational Networks Affect Agricultural Technological Innovation? Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Long Cheng

    (School of Economics and Management, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Shiyuan Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Xuming Lou

    (School of Economics and Management, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Jie Huang

    (School of Management, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Fangping Rao

    (School of Public Administration, Nanjing University of Finance & Economics, Nanjing 210023, China)

  • Rui Bai

    (School of Economics and Management, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an 710061, China)

Abstract

Agricultural technology is key to ensuring food security. Innovation in agricultural technology plays a vital role in increasing national food production. Collaborative innovation has become an essential form of technological innovation in the new era. Although there has been a large body of literature exploring the influencing factors on technological innovation, how tie strength dispersion within inter-organizational networks affects agricultural technological innovation has not been systematically studied. In this research, we use a cooperative network to investigate how relational divisive faultlines caused by the uneven distribution of the strength of inter-organizational relationships affects agricultural technological innovation through the subgroup structure, and the moderating role of position embeddedness. This article uses the Derwent Innovations Index to select agricultural technology joint patent applications from 2000 to 2018 to build a cooperation network, and uses multiple linear regression to conduct an empirical analysis. The empirical results show that the relational divisive faultlines have a positive effect on the subgroup structure. There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the subgroup structure and agricultural technological innovation. The initial stage of subgroup formation can transmit the information between the subgroups in time and promote the efficiency of agricultural technological innovation. However, as the degree of subgroup cohesion increases, the phenomenon of “in-group” and “out-of-group” will be formed, which will inhibit information exchange, having a negative impact on agricultural technological innovation. In addition, positional embeddedness has a significant positive moderating effect between relational divisive faultlines and agricultural technological innovation. This research provides a theoretical basis for understanding how the overall network relationship strength distribution affects technological innovation by exploring the micro-process of the structural changes of the cooperation network. Moreover, it has specific guiding significance for the organization to participation in a cooperation network to improve the efficiency of agricultural technological innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Long Cheng & Shiyuan Zhang & Xuming Lou & Jie Huang & Fangping Rao & Rui Bai, 2021. "How Does Tie Strength Dispersion within Inter-Organizational Networks Affect Agricultural Technological Innovation? Evidence from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:7:p:717-:d:590055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/7/717/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/7/717/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michelle Rogan, 2014. "Too Close for Comfort? The Effect of Embeddedness and Competitive Overlap on Client Relationship Retention Following an Acquisition," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 185-203, February.
    2. Kyle J. Mayer & Nicholas S. Argyres, 2004. "Learning to Contract: Evidence from the Personal Computer Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 394-410, August.
    3. Africa Ariño & José de la Torre, 1998. "Learning from Failure: Towards an Evolutionary Model of Collaborative Ventures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 306-325, June.
    4. Sherry M.B. Thatcher & Karen A. Jehn & Elaine Zanutto, 2003. "Cracks in Diversity Research: The Effects of Diversity Faultlines on Conflict and Performance," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 217-241, May.
    5. Ranjay Gulati & Maxim Sytch & Adam Tatarynowicz, 2012. "The Rise and Fall of Small Worlds: Exploring the Dynamics of Social Structure," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 449-471, April.
    6. Muammer Ozer & Wen Zhang, 2015. "The effects of geographic and network ties on exploitative and exploratory product innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(7), pages 1105-1114, July.
    7. Jeffrey J. Reuer & Nandini Lahiri, 2014. "Searching for Alliance Partners: Effects of Geographic Distance on the Formation of R&D Collaborations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 283-298, February.
    8. Maurizio Zollo & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Harbir Singh, 2002. "Interorganizational Routines and Performance in Strategic Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(6), pages 701-713, December.
    9. Thomas J. Chemmanur & Elena Loutskina & Xuan Tian, 2014. "Corporate Venture Capital, Value Creation, and Innovation," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(8), pages 2434-2473.
    10. Xuan Tian & Tracy Yue Wang, 2014. "Tolerance for Failure and Corporate Innovation," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(1), pages 211-255, January.
    11. Andrew V. Shipilov & Stan Xiao Li & Henrich R. Greve, 2011. "The Prince and the Pauper: Search and Brokerage in the Initiation of Status-Heterophilous Ties," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1418-1434, December.
    12. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    13. Jill E. Perry-Smith & Christina E. Shalley, 2014. "A Social Composition View of Team Creativity: The Role of Member Nationality-Heterogeneous Ties Outside of the Team," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1434-1452, October.
    14. Ralph A. Heidl & H. Kevin Steensma & Corey Phelps, 2014. "Divisive Faultlines and the Unplanned Dissolutions of Multipartner Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1351-1371, October.
    15. Haibin Yang & Zhiang (John) Lin & Ya (Lisa) Lin, 2010. "A multilevel framework of firm boundaries: firm characteristics, dyadic differences, and network attributes," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 237-261, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Koo, JaSeung & Yamanoi, Junichi & Sakano, Tomoaki, 2020. "Acquisition announcements and stock market valuations of acquiring firms’ alliance partners: A transaction cost perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 129-140.
    2. David H. Weng & Yi Tang, 2024. "How do Status Differentials Affect the Unplanned Dissolution of Alliances?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 1590-1617, June.
    3. Ali Shamsollahi & Danielle A. Chmielewski-Raimondo & Simon J. Bell & Reza Kachouie, 2021. "Buyer–supplier relationship dynamics: a systematic review," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 418-436, March.
    4. Ribuga Kang & Akbar Zaheer, 2018. "Determinants of alliance partner choice: Network distance, managerial incentives, and board monitoring," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2745-2769, October.
    5. Fabrice Lumineau & Joanne E. Oxley, 2012. "Let's Work It Out (or We'll See You in Court): Litigation and Private Dispute Resolution in Vertical Exchange Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 820-834, June.
    6. Ralph A. Heidl & H. Kevin Steensma & Corey Phelps, 2014. "Divisive Faultlines and the Unplanned Dissolutions of Multipartner Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1351-1371, October.
    7. Dovev Lavie & Randi Lunnan & Binh Minh T. Truong, 2022. "How does a partner's acquisition affect the value of the firm's alliance with that partner?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1897-1926, September.
    8. Maxim Sytch & Franz Wohlgezogen & Edward J. Zajac, 2018. "Collaborative by Design? How Matrix Organizations See/Do Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1130-1148, December.
    9. Jaeho Kim & Andy Wu, 2019. "Extending the role of headquarters beyond the firm boundary: entrepreneurial alliance innovation," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, December.
    10. Janet E. L. Bercovitz & Beverly B. Tyler, 2014. "Who I Am and How I Contract: The Effect of Contractors’ Roles on the Evolution of Contract Structure in University–Industry Research Agreements," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1840-1859, December.
    11. Reuer, Jeffrey J. & Zollo, Maurizio, 2005. "Termination outcomes of research alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 101-115, February.
    12. Kudic, Muhamed & Pyka, Andreas & Günther, Jutta, 2012. "Determinants of Evolutionary Change Processes in Innovation Networks – Empirical Evidence from the German Laser Industry," IWH Discussion Papers 7/2012, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    13. Ferretti, Marco & Guerini, Massimiliano & Panetti, Eva & Parmentola, Adele, 2022. "The partner next door? The effect of micro-geographical proximity on intra-cluster inter-organizational relationships," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    14. Nguyen, Justin Hung & Qiu, Buhui, 2022. "Right-to-Work laws and corporate innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Henri C. Dekker & Alexandra Van den Abbeele, 2010. "Organizational Learning and Interfirm Control: The Effects of Partner Search and Prior Exchange Experiences," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1233-1250, December.
    16. Chen, Jie & Leung, Woon Sau & Evans, Kevin P., 2016. "Are employee-friendly workplaces conducive to innovation?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 61-79.
    17. Byun, Seong, 2022. "The role of intrinsic incentives and corporate culture in motivating innovation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    18. Moshirian, Fariborz & Tian, Xuan & Zhang, Bohui & Zhang, Wenrui, 2021. "Stock market liberalization and innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(3), pages 985-1014.
    19. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    20. Akbar Zaheer & Exequiel Hernandez & Sanjay Banerjee, 2010. "Prior Alliances with Targets and Acquisition Performance in Knowledge-Intensive Industries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1072-1091, October.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:7:p:717-:d:590055. 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.