Networked by design: Can policy requirements influence organisations’ networking behaviour?

Rossi, Federica and Caloffi, Annalisa and Russo, Margherita (2015): Networked by design: Can policy requirements influence organisations’ networking behaviour? Forthcoming in: Technological Forecasting and Social Change (2016)

Abstract

An important, but under-researched, question in relation to policies funding networks of innovators is: what kind of innovation networks should be supported, if the policy objective is not just to sponsor successful innovation projects, but also to encourage the participants to form networks with desirable characteristics? Focusing on a set of policy programmes implemented by the regional government of Tuscany, in Italy, between 2002 and 2008, aimed at funding networks of collaborating organisations, we investigate whether the imposition of requirements on the composition of the networks that would be eligible for funding – in particular, the demand that networks should comply with minimum size and heterogeneity thresholds – influenced the participants’ networking behaviour in the context of successive policy interventions. Our results show that these requirements immediately affected the size and composition of the project networks that applied for funding, although not always in the intended direction. However, these effects did not extend to the successive periods, when those requirements were no longer in force. This suggests that the imposition of policy requirements, per se, is unlikely to induce persistent changes in organizations’ networking behaviour. Other approaches such as implementing outreach actions in order to encourage new organisations to participate in existing innovation networks and to form new ones, and additional measures designed to foster learning opportunities for the participants, might be more effective tools to influence the networking behaviour of participating organisations.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Innovation networks, innovation policy, policy requirements, networking behaviour, behavioural effects of policy
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O31 - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R5 - Regional Government Analysis

References

Arroyabe, M. F., Arranz, N., Fdez de Arroyabe, J.C., 2014. R&D partnerships: An exploratory approach to the role of structural variables in joint project performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, 623–634.

Ahuja, G., 2000. Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 425–455. Antonioli, D., Marzucchi, A., Montresor, S., 2014. Regional Innovation Policy and Innovative Behaviour: Looking for Additional Effects, European Planning Studies, 22(1), 64-83.

Arora, A., Gambardella, A., 1990. The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour, Research Policy, 23, 523-532.

Arroyabe, M.F., Arranz, N., Fdez de Arroyabe, J.C., 2015. R&D partnerships: an exploratory approach to the role of structural variables in joint project performance, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, 623–634.

Autio, E., Kanninen, S., Gustaffson, R., 2008. First- and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs, Research Policy, 37(1), 59-76.

Bach, L., Matt, M., 2002. Rationale for Science & Technology Policy, in: Georghiou, L., Rigby, J., Cameron, H. (Eds.), Assessing the Socio-Economic Impacts of the Framework Programme (ASIF). Report to European Commission DG Research, 93-145. Bach, L., Matt, M., 2005. From Economic Foundations to S&T Policy Tools: a Comparative Analysis of the Dominant Paradigms, in: Llerena, P., Matt, M. (Eds.), Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy: Theory and Practice. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.

Bellandi, M., Caloffi A., 2010. An analysis of regional policies promoting networks for innovation, in European Planning Studies, 18(1), 67-82.

Biggiero, L., Angelini, P.P., 2014. Hunting scale-free properties in R&D collaboration networks: Self-organization, power-law and policy issues in the European aerospace research area. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, ahead-of-print, doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2014.04.009.

Bizan, O. (2003). The determinants of success of R&D projects: evidence from American–Israeli research alliances. Research Policy, 32(9), 1619-1640.

Bougrain, F., Haudeville, B., 2002. Innovation, collaboration and SMEs internal research capacities. Research policy, 31(5), 735-747.

Branstetter, L., Sakakibara, M., 2002). When do research consortia work well and why? Evidence from Japanese panel data. American Economic Review, 92, 143–159.

Breschi, S., Cusmano, L., 2004. Unveiling the texture of a European Research Area: emergence of oligarchic networks under EU Framework Programmes. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(8), 747-772.

Breschi, S., Malerba, F., 2009. ERA and the role of networks, in Delanghe, H., Muldur, U., Soete, L. (Eds.) European Science and Technology Policy: Towards Integration or Fragmentation?, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

Buisseret, T.J., Cameron, H.M., Georghiou, L., 1995. What Difference Does It Make - Additionality in The Public Support Of R&D In Large Firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 10, 587-600.

Caloffi, A., Rossi, F., Russo, M., 2015. What Makes SMEs more Likely to Collaborate? Analysing the Role of Regional Innovation Policy. European Planning Studies, 23(7): 1245-1264.

Caloghirou, Y., Vonortas, N.S., Ioannides, S., 2004. European collaboration in research and innovation. Business strategy and public policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., 1997. In search of useful public policies: key lessons and issues for policy makers. In: Carlsson, B., (Ed.), Technological Systems and Industrial Dynamics, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Chávez, S.M., 2011. Behavioural additionality in the context of regional innovation policy in Spain. Innovation: Management, Poliy & Practice, 13(1), 95-110.

Chesbrough, H., 2003. The Era of Open Innovation, MIT Sloane Management Review, 44(3), 35-41.

Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Mustar, P., 2009. Behavioural additionality of R&D subsidies: A learning perspective. Research Policy, 38(10), 1517-1533.

Crespi, F., Quatraro, F., 2013. Introduction to the special section on: Systemic technology policies: Issues and instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1447-1449.

Cunningham, P., Ramlogan, R., 2012. The effects of innovation network policies, Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester.

Duso, T., Pennings, E., Seldeslachts, J., 2010. Learning dynamics in research alliances: A panel data analysis. Research Policy, 39(6), 776–789.

Fier, A., Aschhoff, B., Löhlein, H., 2006. Behavioural additionality of public R&D funding in Germany, in Government R&D funding and company behaviour. Measuring behavioural additionality, Paris: OECD Publishing.

Fonseca, J., 2002. Complexity and Innovation in Organizations, London: Routledge. Gargiulo, M., Benassi, M., 2000. Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization science, 11(2), 183-196.

Georghiou, L., 1998. Issues in the Evaluation of Innovation and Technology Policy. Evaluation 4, 37-51.

Gök, A., Edler, J., 2012. The Use of Behavioural Additionality Evaluation in Innovation Policy-Making. Research Evaluation, 21(4), 306-318.

Hagedoorn, J., Link, A.N., Vonortas, N.S., 2000. Research partnerships. Research Policy, 29 (4), 567–586.

Häusler, J.; Hohn, H.-W.; Lütz, S. (1994): Contingencies of innovative networks: A case study of successful R&D interfirm collaboration, Research Policy 23, S. 47-66.

Herfindahl, O., 1982. The Herfindahl Index: Another Measure of Concentration. Business Week, May 17.

Hyvarinen, J., Rautiainen, A.M., 2007. Measuring additionally and systemic impacts of public research and development funding - The case of TEKES, Finland. Research Evaluation 16, 205-215.

Kleinknecht, A. & Reijnen, J.O.N., 1991. More evidence on the undercounting of small firm R&D, Research Policy, 20(6), 579–587.

Lane, D.A., Maxfield, R., 1997. Foresight Complexity and Strategy, in: W.B. Arthur, S. Durlauf and D.A. Lane (eds.), The economy as an evolving complex system II. Redwood City, CA: Addison Wesley.

Malerba, F., 2009. Increase learning, breaks knowledge lock-ins and foster dynamic complementarities: evolutionary and system perspectives on technology policy in industrial dynamics. In: Foray, D. (Ed.). The new economics of technology policy. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Maurer, I., Ebers, M., 2006. Dynamics of social capital and their performance implications: Lessons from biotechnology start-ups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(2), 262-292.

Muscio, A., 2007. The impact of absorptive capacity on SMEs' collaboration. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16(8), 653-668.

Musiolik, J., Markard, J., Hekkert, M., 2012. Networks and network resources in technological innovation systems: Towards a conceptual framework for system building. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(6), 1032-1048.

Narula, R., 2004. R&D collaboration by SMEs: new opportunities and limitations in the face of globalisation. Technovation, 24(2), 153-161.

Nooteboom, B., 2004. Inter-firm collaboration, learning and networks. An integrated approach, London and New York: Routledge.

Powell W. W., Koput K. W., Smith-Doerr, L., 1996. Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.

Russo, M., Rossi, F., 2009. Cooperation Partnerships and Innovation. A Complex System Perspective to the Design, Management and Evaluation of an EU Regional Innovation Policy Programme, Evaluation, 15(1), 75–100.

Sakakibara, M. (1997). Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?. Research Policy, 26(4), 447-473.

Schoonmaker, M. G., Carayannis, E. G., 2010. Assessing the value of regional innovation networks. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1(1), 48-66.

Schwartz, M., Peglow, F., Fritsch, M., & Günther, J. (2010). What determines the innovative success of subsidized collaborative R&D projects? Project-level evidence from Germany (No. 2010, 7). IWH-Diskussionspapiere.

Tindemans, P., 2009. Post-war research, education and innovation policy-making in Europe, in Delanghe, H., Muldur, U., Soete, L. (Eds.) European Science and Technology Policy: Towards Integration or Fragmentation?, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

Von Hippel, E., 1988. Sources of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.