IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v127y2022i9d10.1007_s11192-022-04306-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choosing the right collaboration partner for innovation: a framework based on topic analysis and link prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Yan Qi

    (Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/Peking Union Medical College (CAMS&PUMC))

  • Xin Zhang

    (Chinese Academy of Sciences)

  • Zhengyin Hu

    (Chinese Academy of Sciences)

  • Bin Xiang

    (Chinese Academy of Sciences)

  • Ran Zhang

    (Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/Peking Union Medical College (CAMS&PUMC))

  • Shu Fang

    (Chinese Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

Selecting the right collaboration partner is one of the most important contributors to success in collaborative innovation. Accordingly, numerous methods for selecting an appropriate partner have been developed to guide would-be collaborators in their search. Most rely on bibliographic information, which may be easier for that data is readily available and relatively normalized. However, with the benefit of today’s text mining and fusion techniques, it is possible to mine the content of papers and patents so as to result in far more nuanced and advantageous choices. In this article, we explore how to select partners for collaborative innovation by combining the characteristics of the authors of paper and patent documents as well as their content. Drawing on existing research, we developed a systematic framework that relies on topic analysis and link prediction. With a corpus of papers and patents assembled, the framework extracts correlated scientific and technological topics followed by a list of author institutions and a list of patentees. These organisations are parsed and evaluated using two indicators of innovation—capability and openness—to result in two separate ranked lists. Two integrated collaboration networks that include both author institutions and patentees are then built, and a link prediction method identifies missing links with a high likelihood of fruitful cooperation. A case study on hepatitis C virus research shows that the ranking procedure and the link prediction method can be used either together or separately to effectively identify collaborative innovation partners. Our results provide significant quantitative evidence for policymakers who are looking to foster cooperation between research institutions and/or high-tech enterprises. Our research may also serve as the basis for further in-depth research on collaborative innovation, R&D cooperation, and link prediction theories and methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Yan Qi & Xin Zhang & Zhengyin Hu & Bin Xiang & Ran Zhang & Shu Fang, 2022. "Choosing the right collaboration partner for innovation: a framework based on topic analysis and link prediction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5519-5550, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04306-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-022-04306-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-022-04306-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-022-04306-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meyer, Martin, 2000. "Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 409-434, March.
    2. Elia, Stefano & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Piscitello, Lucia, 2019. "The impact of cultural diversity on innovation performance of MNC subsidiaries in strategic alliances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 204-213.
    3. Marianna Makri & Michael A. Hitt & Peter J. Lane, 2010. "Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 602-628, June.
    4. Rajalo, Sigrid & Vadi, Maaja, 2021. "Collaboration potential between low-capacity SMEs and academic researchers determined by symmetry of motivation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Shuo Xu & Dongsheng Zhai & Feifei Wang & Xin An & Hongshen Pang & Yirong Sun, 2019. "A novel method for topic linkages between scientific publications and patents," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(9), pages 1026-1042, September.
    6. Michael Hitt & M. Tina Dacin & Edward Levitas & Jean-Luc Arregle & Anca Borza, 2000. "Partner Selection in Emerging and Developed Market Contexts : Resource-Based and Organizational Learning Perspectives," Post-Print hal-02276706, HAL.
    7. David Liben‐Nowell & Jon Kleinberg, 2007. "The link‐prediction problem for social networks," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(7), pages 1019-1031, May.
    8. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    9. Sujit Bhattacharya & Hildrun Kretschmer & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Characterizing intellectual spaces between science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 369-390, October.
    10. Carpenter, Mark P. & Narin, Francis, 1983. "Validation study: Patent citations as indicators of science and foreign dependence," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 180-185.
    11. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
    12. Africa Ariño & Mikhail Abramov & Irina Skorobogatykh & Irina Rykounina & Joaquim Vilà, 1997. "Partner Selection and Trust Building in West European–Russian Joint Ventures," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 19-37, March.
    13. Prashant Kale & Harbir Singh & Howard Perlmutter, 2000. "Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 217-237, March.
    14. Jiho Kang & Junseok Lee & Dongsik Jang & Sangsung Park, 2019. "A Methodology of Partner Selection for Sustainable Industry-University Cooperation Based on LDA Topic Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, June.
    15. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    16. Xiaoling Sun & Kun Ding, 2018. "Identifying and tracking scientific and technological knowledge memes from citation networks of publications and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1735-1748, September.
    17. K.C. Garg & P. Padhi, 2001. "A study of collaboration in laser science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(2), pages 415-427, June.
    18. Michael Hitt & M. Tina Dacin & Edward Levitas & Jean-Luc Arregle & Anca Borza, 2000. "Partner Selection in Emerging and Developed Market Contexts : Resource-Based and Organizational Learning Perspectives," Post-Print hal-02312691, HAL.
    19. Stéphane Maraut & Catalina Martínez, 2014. "Identifying author–inventors from Spain: methods and a first insight into results," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 445-476, October.
    20. Selma Leticia Capinzaiki Ottonicar & Paloma Marin Arraiza & Fabiano Armellini, 2020. "Opening Science and Innovation: Opportunities for Emerging Economies," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 14(4), pages 95-111.
    21. Peter J. Lane & Michael Lubatkin, 1998. "Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning," Post-Print hal-02311860, HAL.
    22. Aija Leiponen & Constance E. Helfat, 2010. "Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 224-236, February.
    23. Arnold Verbeek & Koenraad Debackere & Marc Luwel & Petra Andries & Edwin Zimmermann & Filip Deleus, 2002. "Linking science to technology: Using bibliographic references in patents to build linkage schemes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 399-420, July.
    24. Cloodt, Myriam & Hagedoorn, John & Van Kranenburg, Hans, 2006. "Mergers and acquisitions: Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 642-654, June.
    25. Nielsen, Bo Bernhard, 2003. "An Empirical Investigation of the Drivers of International Strategic Alliance Formation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 301-322, June.
    26. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Thoma, Grid, 2007. "Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 813-831, July.
    27. Wen, Jiang & Kobayashi, Shinichi, 2001. "Exploring collaborative R&D network:: some new evidence in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1309-1319, October.
    28. Raf Guns & Ronald Rousseau, 2014. "Recommending research collaborations using link prediction and random forest classifiers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1461-1473, November.
    29. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May.
    30. Gnyawali, Devi R. & Park, Byung-Jin (Robert), 2011. "Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 650-663, June.
    31. Wei Chen & Hui Qu & Kuo Chi, 2021. "Partner Selection in China Interorganizational Patent Cooperation Network Based on Link Prediction Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    32. Frank T. Rothaermel, 2001. "Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 687-699, June.
    33. Arnold Verbeek & Koenraad Debackere & Marc Luwel, 2003. "Science cited in patents: A geographic "flow" analysis of bibliographic citation patterns in patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 241-263, October.
    34. Tao Zhou & Linyuan Lü & Yi-Cheng Zhang, 2009. "Predicting missing links via local information," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 71(4), pages 623-630, October.
    35. Alexiev, Alexander S. & Volberda, Henk W. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J., 2016. "Interorganizational collaboration and firm innovativeness: Unpacking the role of the organizational environment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 974-984.
    36. Yan, Erjia & Guns, Raf, 2014. "Predicting and recommending collaborations: An author-, institution-, and country-level analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 295-309.
    37. Dacin, M. Tina & Hitt, Michael A. & Levitas, Edward, 1997. "Selecting partners for successful international alliances: Examination of U.S. and Korean firms," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 3-16, April.
    38. Sascha Friesike & Bastian Widenmayer & Oliver Gassmann & Thomas Schildhauer, 2015. "Opening science: towards an agenda of open science in academia and industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 581-601, August.
    39. Song, Bomi & Seol, Hyeonju & Park, Yongtae, 2016. "A patent portfolio-based approach for assessing potential R&D partners: An application of the Shapley value," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 156-165.
    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. Li, Jing & Yu, Qian, 2024. "Scientists’ disciplinary characteristics and collaboration behaviour under the convergence paradigm: A multilevel network perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    2. Csizmadia, Péter & Kosztyán, Zsolt Tibor & Fehérvölgyi, Beáta & Hausz, Frigyes, 2024. "Intézményi koncentráció és az innovációs hálózatok vizsgálata [Institutional concentration and innovation networks]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1351-1380.
    3. Xiuxiu Li & Mingyang Wang & Xu Liu, 2024. "Predicting collaborative relationship among scholars by integrating scholars’ content-based and structure-based features," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3225-3244, June.

    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. Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2016. "The role of diversification profiles and dyadic characteristics in the formation of technological alliances: Differences between exploitation and exploration in a low-tech industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 517-532.
    2. Song, Bomi & Seol, Hyeonju & Park, Yongtae, 2016. "A patent portfolio-based approach for assessing potential R&D partners: An application of the Shapley value," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 156-165.
    3. Tom Broekel & Matthias Brachert, 2015. "The structure and evolution of inter-sectoral technological complementarity in R&D in Germany from 1990 to 2011," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 755-785, September.
    4. Belderbos, Rene & Gilsing, Victor & Jacob, Jojo, 2011. "Technology alliances in emerging economies: Persistence and interrelation in European firms' alliance formation," MERIT Working Papers 2011-026, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Huang, Lu & Chen, Xiang & Ni, Xingxing & Liu, Jiarun & Cao, Xiaoli & Wang, Changtian, 2021. "Tracking the dynamics of co-word networks for emerging topic identification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    6. Christian Fisch & Jörn Block & Philipp Sandner, 2019. "The impact of acquisitions on Chinese acquirers’ innovation performance: an empirical investigation of 1545 Chinese acquisitions," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 125-153, March.
    7. Lu Huang & Xiang Chen & Yi Zhang & Yihe Zhu & Suyi Li & Xingxing Ni, 2021. "Dynamic network analytics for recommending scientific collaborators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8789-8814, November.
    8. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    9. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Chen, Homin & Chen, Tain-Jy, 2002. "Asymmetric strategic alliances: A network view," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(12), pages 1007-1013, December.
    11. Scaringella, Laurent & Burtschell, François, 2017. "The challenges of radical innovation in Iran: Knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity highlights — Evidence from a joint venture in the construction sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 151-169.
    12. Stienstra, Miranda, 2020. "The determinants and performance implications of alliance partner acquisition," Other publications TiSEM 7fdee0c2-d4d2-4f5b-95e3-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Manuela Gussoni, 2009. "The determinants of inter-firms R&D cooperation and partner selection. A literature overview," Discussion Papers 2009/86, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    14. Steffen Runge & Christian Schwens & Matthias Schulz, 2022. "The invention performance implications of coopetition: How technological, geographical, and product market overlaps shape learning and competitive tension in R&D alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 266-294, February.
    15. Park, Byung Il & Ghauri, Pervez N., 2011. "Key factors affecting acquisition of technological capabilities from foreign acquiring firms by small and medium sized local firms," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 116-125, January.
    16. Yashuang Qi & Na Zhu & Yujia Zhai & Ying Ding, 2018. "The mutually beneficial relationship of patents and scientific literature: topic evolution in nanoscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 893-911, May.
    17. Noorderhaven, N.G. & Koen, C.I. & Beugelsdijk, S., 2002. "Organizational Culture and Network Embeddedness," Discussion Paper 2002-91, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Byung Park, 2010. "What matters to managerial knowledge acquisition in international joint ventures? High knowledge acquirers versus low knowledge acquirers," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 55-79, March.
    19. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hottenrott, Hanna, 2012. "Collaborative R&D as a strategy to attenuate financing constraints," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-049, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2008. "Measuring science–technology interaction using rare inventor–author names," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 173-182.

    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:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04306-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.