企业创业社会网络嵌入与绩效关系研究
|
摘要
近年来,伴随着中国创业型经济的发展和国家创新创业战略的实施,企业间的创业合作现象日益增多,形成了以企业创业社会网络为主要形态的新型合作关系。在学术界,越来越多的学者开始关注嵌入于社会网络中的合作机制对企业创业行为的影响,日益重视社会网络和嵌入理论在创业研究中的应用,并且取得了显著的研究进展。然而,以往研究较少从关系嵌入的视角来分层考察嵌入于个体和组织创业社会网络中支持企业创业行为实现的主体间联结关系的主要特征与机制要素。本文试图运用关系嵌入的研究思路对创业社会网络嵌入的概念构思、结构模型与绩效关系,以及市场竞争环境的影响作用等问题进行深入的探索。
研究一是关于创业社会网络嵌入概念构思的访谈研究。本文运用关系嵌入的研究思路,对浙江省内32家不同阶段、不同所有制、不同经营规模企业的43位中高层管理人员进行了半结构化访谈,旨在了解与识别中国文化背景下创业社会网络嵌入的概念特质和典型事例。在半结构化访谈的基础上,本文对访谈素材进行材料筛选和内容分类,通过编码分析,初步提炼出创业社会网络嵌入的关键要素和理论构思。研究结果表明,中国文化背景下,个体创业社会网络嵌入包括情感承诺、人际信任、互惠交往三个要素,组织创业社会网络嵌入包括制度信任、信息共享、问题解决、和谐共赢四个要素。
在研究一基础上,研究二根据构思关联性、信息真实性、地域便利性原则,选择处于创业阶段的杭州格林蓝德信息技术有限公司作为案例研究对象,运用基于关键事件分析技术的案例研究方法,对组织创业社会网络嵌入的理论构思,及其与公司绩效的关系做进一步的探索性研究,为下步建构创业社会网络嵌入特征模型,验证创业社会网络嵌入与绩效关系提供必要的理论准备。通过深度访谈、查阅公司档案记录、资料分析、结构提炼等方法,对格林蓝德公司创业过程中的三个关键性合作事件从多特征多方法的思路进行了深度分析。研究发现,制度信任、信息共享、问题解决、和谐共赢四个要素是格林蓝德公司组织创业社会网络嵌入的构成维度,对公司的绩效有显著影响作用。此外,案例研究还发现,在创业实践中上述要素并不是单独发挥作用,而是存在协同交互作用。
研究三在研究一和研究二的基础上,结合以往研究和三次问卷试测的结果编制了创业社会网络嵌入测量问卷,在浙江省内205家创业企业中进行调查取样,分别对其中的118份和118份有效问卷进行了探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析。结果表明,包含情感承诺、人际信任和互惠交往的个体创业社会网络嵌入三维度模型最为稳定,包含制度信任、信息共享、问题解决与和谐共赢的组织创业社会网络嵌入四维度模型最为稳定,而且两个模型都具有较好的聚合效度和辨别效度。研究表明,个体创业社会网络嵌入在组织因素和行业因素上没有显著差异,但在个体工作年限上存在显著差异;组织创业社会网络嵌入的个别维度在组织因素上具有显著差异。
研究四在研究三验证的创业社会网络嵌入模型的基础上,对235份有效问卷运用相关分析、多元回归分析和结构方程建模技术等方法,检验了企业创业社会网络嵌入与绩效的关系,并考察了竞争强度变量和组织特征变量的影响作用。研究结果表明:(1)个体创业社会网络嵌入中,情感承诺和人际信任两个维度对成长绩效和合作绩效具有显著影响作用,互惠交往对合作绩效具有显著影响作用;(2)组织创业社会网络嵌入中,制度信任和信息共享对成长绩效具有显著影响作用,制度信任、问题解决、和谐共赢对合作绩效具有显著影响作用;(3)竞争强度变量与创业社会网络嵌入对绩效有显著的交互影响作用;(4)组织特征变量与创业社会网络嵌入对绩效有显著的交互影响作用。与此同时,本研究还运用结构方程建模技术考察了创业社会网络嵌入影响绩效的中介作用机制。研究结果显示:(1)组织创业社会网络嵌入要素是个体创业社会网络嵌入影响绩效的中介变量;(2)组织创业社会网络嵌入在情感承诺-绩效关系中起部分中介作用,在人际信任-绩效关系中起部分中介作用,在互惠交往-绩效关系中起部分中介作用;(3)在个体创业社会网络嵌入-绩效关系中,组织创业社会网络嵌入的完全中介模型优于部分中介模型。
最后,本文总结了研究的主要结论,探讨了本研究取得的理论进展和实践意义,指出了本研究的不足之处和有待进一步解决的问题。
In recent years, along with China's entrepreneurial economic development and national implementation of innovation and entrepreneurship strategy, entrepreneurial cooperation has become a growing phenomenon between firms, forming new cooperative relationship with its main form as entrepreneurial enterprises social network as. In academia, more and more scholars have begun to pay attention to social networks embedded in the mechanisms of cooperation in entrepreneurial enterprises behavior, attaching greater importance to social network embeddedness theory and its implications, and significant progress has been made in the research. However, from the perspective of relational embeddedness, few previous studies have focused on the main features and mechanisms of linking relationship between the main body in entrepreneurship supported by individuals and organizations. This dissertation attempts to, from the perspective of relational embeddedness, carry out an in-depth exploration of the concept, structure and performance embedded in entrepreneurial enterprises social network, as well as the impact of competitive environment in the market.
The first research is an interview research on the concepts and ideas embedded in entrepreneurial social network embeddedness. From the perspective of relational embeddedness, this dissertation carries out 43 semi-structured interviews of senior management personnel from 32 enterprises of different stages, different ownerships, and different scales of operations in Zhejiang Province, in order to understand and identify the characteristics and typical examples of entrepreneurial social network embeddedness in the context of Chinese culture. Based on the semi-structured interviews, this dissertation makes material selection and content classification, and extracts the key elements and ideas embedded in entrepreneurial social network through the coding analysis. The results show that, in the context of Chinese culture, individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness consists of three elements--affective commitment, interpersonal trust and reciprocity; while organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness consists of four elements-- institution trust, information sharing, joint problem solving and harmony for all winners.
Base on the first research, on the principle of geographical convenience, data analysis and structure extraction, this second research of the dissertation chooses Hangzhou Greenlander Information Technology Co., Ltd. at its start-up phase as a case study. It further explores the use of critical incident analysis technique, the theory of entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and its relationship with corporate performance, providing necessary theoretical preparation for establishing social network embedded in business models and verifying the relationship between entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and corporation performance. Through in-depth interviews, access to company records, data analysis and structure extraction, this dissertation carries out in-depth analysis on three key co-operations in Greenlander. It finds out that the four elements-- institution trust, information sharing, joint problem solving and harmony for all winners-- constitute individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness in Greenlander and have a significant impact on corporate performance. In addition, the case study also finds that instead of being four separate elements, the above four play interactive effects in business practice.
The third research, based on the previous researches and the results of three questionnaires, carries out entrepreneurial social network embeddedness questionnaire in 205 entrepreneurial firms in Zhejiang province, and carries out explorative factor analysis and confirmative factor analysis among 118 valid questionnaires respectively. The results show that the three-dimension model of individual organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and four-dimension model of organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness is the most stable, and both of the models have good convergent validities and discriminate validities. Research has shown that individual organizational entrepreneurial social network differs significantly in the length of work seniority, but differs little in organization and business factors; however, four-dimension model of organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness has a significant difference on organizational factors.
Based on the model of entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, the fourth research uses correlation analysis, multi-regression analysis, and structural equation model on 235 valid questionnaires, in order to examine the relationship between entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and business performance as well as the impact of competition intensity variable and organizational variable. The results show that: (1) in individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, affective commitment and personal trust have a significant impact on growth performance and cooperation performance; reciprocity has a significant impact on cooperation performance; (2) In organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, institution trust and information sharing have a significant impact on growth performance; institution trust, joint problem solving and harmony for all winners have a significant impact on cooperation performance; (3) Competition strength variable and entrepreneurial social network embeddedness have strong interactive effects; (4) Organizational variable and entrepreneurial social network embeddedness have strong interactive effects. At the same time, this research uses a structural equation model to study the mediation effect mechanism in entrepreneurial social network embeddedness. The results show that: (1) organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness is a meditative variable in corporate performance of individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness; (2) organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness has partial mediative effect on the relationship between affective commitment and corporate performance, between personal trust and corporate performance, and between reciprocity and corporate performance; (3) in the relationship between corporate performance and individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, full meditative model organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness plays a better role than partial meditative model.
The last part of this dissertation summarizes the main conclusions of this research, explores the theoretical progress and practical implication, as well as limitations and issues to be further solved.
研究一是关于创业社会网络嵌入概念构思的访谈研究。本文运用关系嵌入的研究思路,对浙江省内32家不同阶段、不同所有制、不同经营规模企业的43位中高层管理人员进行了半结构化访谈,旨在了解与识别中国文化背景下创业社会网络嵌入的概念特质和典型事例。在半结构化访谈的基础上,本文对访谈素材进行材料筛选和内容分类,通过编码分析,初步提炼出创业社会网络嵌入的关键要素和理论构思。研究结果表明,中国文化背景下,个体创业社会网络嵌入包括情感承诺、人际信任、互惠交往三个要素,组织创业社会网络嵌入包括制度信任、信息共享、问题解决、和谐共赢四个要素。
在研究一基础上,研究二根据构思关联性、信息真实性、地域便利性原则,选择处于创业阶段的杭州格林蓝德信息技术有限公司作为案例研究对象,运用基于关键事件分析技术的案例研究方法,对组织创业社会网络嵌入的理论构思,及其与公司绩效的关系做进一步的探索性研究,为下步建构创业社会网络嵌入特征模型,验证创业社会网络嵌入与绩效关系提供必要的理论准备。通过深度访谈、查阅公司档案记录、资料分析、结构提炼等方法,对格林蓝德公司创业过程中的三个关键性合作事件从多特征多方法的思路进行了深度分析。研究发现,制度信任、信息共享、问题解决、和谐共赢四个要素是格林蓝德公司组织创业社会网络嵌入的构成维度,对公司的绩效有显著影响作用。此外,案例研究还发现,在创业实践中上述要素并不是单独发挥作用,而是存在协同交互作用。
研究三在研究一和研究二的基础上,结合以往研究和三次问卷试测的结果编制了创业社会网络嵌入测量问卷,在浙江省内205家创业企业中进行调查取样,分别对其中的118份和118份有效问卷进行了探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析。结果表明,包含情感承诺、人际信任和互惠交往的个体创业社会网络嵌入三维度模型最为稳定,包含制度信任、信息共享、问题解决与和谐共赢的组织创业社会网络嵌入四维度模型最为稳定,而且两个模型都具有较好的聚合效度和辨别效度。研究表明,个体创业社会网络嵌入在组织因素和行业因素上没有显著差异,但在个体工作年限上存在显著差异;组织创业社会网络嵌入的个别维度在组织因素上具有显著差异。
研究四在研究三验证的创业社会网络嵌入模型的基础上,对235份有效问卷运用相关分析、多元回归分析和结构方程建模技术等方法,检验了企业创业社会网络嵌入与绩效的关系,并考察了竞争强度变量和组织特征变量的影响作用。研究结果表明:(1)个体创业社会网络嵌入中,情感承诺和人际信任两个维度对成长绩效和合作绩效具有显著影响作用,互惠交往对合作绩效具有显著影响作用;(2)组织创业社会网络嵌入中,制度信任和信息共享对成长绩效具有显著影响作用,制度信任、问题解决、和谐共赢对合作绩效具有显著影响作用;(3)竞争强度变量与创业社会网络嵌入对绩效有显著的交互影响作用;(4)组织特征变量与创业社会网络嵌入对绩效有显著的交互影响作用。与此同时,本研究还运用结构方程建模技术考察了创业社会网络嵌入影响绩效的中介作用机制。研究结果显示:(1)组织创业社会网络嵌入要素是个体创业社会网络嵌入影响绩效的中介变量;(2)组织创业社会网络嵌入在情感承诺-绩效关系中起部分中介作用,在人际信任-绩效关系中起部分中介作用,在互惠交往-绩效关系中起部分中介作用;(3)在个体创业社会网络嵌入-绩效关系中,组织创业社会网络嵌入的完全中介模型优于部分中介模型。
最后,本文总结了研究的主要结论,探讨了本研究取得的理论进展和实践意义,指出了本研究的不足之处和有待进一步解决的问题。
In recent years, along with China's entrepreneurial economic development and national implementation of innovation and entrepreneurship strategy, entrepreneurial cooperation has become a growing phenomenon between firms, forming new cooperative relationship with its main form as entrepreneurial enterprises social network as. In academia, more and more scholars have begun to pay attention to social networks embedded in the mechanisms of cooperation in entrepreneurial enterprises behavior, attaching greater importance to social network embeddedness theory and its implications, and significant progress has been made in the research. However, from the perspective of relational embeddedness, few previous studies have focused on the main features and mechanisms of linking relationship between the main body in entrepreneurship supported by individuals and organizations. This dissertation attempts to, from the perspective of relational embeddedness, carry out an in-depth exploration of the concept, structure and performance embedded in entrepreneurial enterprises social network, as well as the impact of competitive environment in the market.
The first research is an interview research on the concepts and ideas embedded in entrepreneurial social network embeddedness. From the perspective of relational embeddedness, this dissertation carries out 43 semi-structured interviews of senior management personnel from 32 enterprises of different stages, different ownerships, and different scales of operations in Zhejiang Province, in order to understand and identify the characteristics and typical examples of entrepreneurial social network embeddedness in the context of Chinese culture. Based on the semi-structured interviews, this dissertation makes material selection and content classification, and extracts the key elements and ideas embedded in entrepreneurial social network through the coding analysis. The results show that, in the context of Chinese culture, individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness consists of three elements--affective commitment, interpersonal trust and reciprocity; while organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness consists of four elements-- institution trust, information sharing, joint problem solving and harmony for all winners.
Base on the first research, on the principle of geographical convenience, data analysis and structure extraction, this second research of the dissertation chooses Hangzhou Greenlander Information Technology Co., Ltd. at its start-up phase as a case study. It further explores the use of critical incident analysis technique, the theory of entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and its relationship with corporate performance, providing necessary theoretical preparation for establishing social network embedded in business models and verifying the relationship between entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and corporation performance. Through in-depth interviews, access to company records, data analysis and structure extraction, this dissertation carries out in-depth analysis on three key co-operations in Greenlander. It finds out that the four elements-- institution trust, information sharing, joint problem solving and harmony for all winners-- constitute individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness in Greenlander and have a significant impact on corporate performance. In addition, the case study also finds that instead of being four separate elements, the above four play interactive effects in business practice.
The third research, based on the previous researches and the results of three questionnaires, carries out entrepreneurial social network embeddedness questionnaire in 205 entrepreneurial firms in Zhejiang province, and carries out explorative factor analysis and confirmative factor analysis among 118 valid questionnaires respectively. The results show that the three-dimension model of individual organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and four-dimension model of organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness is the most stable, and both of the models have good convergent validities and discriminate validities. Research has shown that individual organizational entrepreneurial social network differs significantly in the length of work seniority, but differs little in organization and business factors; however, four-dimension model of organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness has a significant difference on organizational factors.
Based on the model of entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, the fourth research uses correlation analysis, multi-regression analysis, and structural equation model on 235 valid questionnaires, in order to examine the relationship between entrepreneurial social network embeddedness and business performance as well as the impact of competition intensity variable and organizational variable. The results show that: (1) in individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, affective commitment and personal trust have a significant impact on growth performance and cooperation performance; reciprocity has a significant impact on cooperation performance; (2) In organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, institution trust and information sharing have a significant impact on growth performance; institution trust, joint problem solving and harmony for all winners have a significant impact on cooperation performance; (3) Competition strength variable and entrepreneurial social network embeddedness have strong interactive effects; (4) Organizational variable and entrepreneurial social network embeddedness have strong interactive effects. At the same time, this research uses a structural equation model to study the mediation effect mechanism in entrepreneurial social network embeddedness. The results show that: (1) organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness is a meditative variable in corporate performance of individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness; (2) organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness has partial mediative effect on the relationship between affective commitment and corporate performance, between personal trust and corporate performance, and between reciprocity and corporate performance; (3) in the relationship between corporate performance and individual entrepreneurial social network embeddedness, full meditative model organizational entrepreneurial social network embeddedness plays a better role than partial meditative model.
The last part of this dissertation summarizes the main conclusions of this research, explores the theoretical progress and practical implication, as well as limitations and issues to be further solved.
引文
[1] Ambler, T., Styles, C, & Wang, X. The effect of channel relationships and guanxi on performance of inter-province export ventures in the People's Republic of China. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 1999,16(1), 75-87.
[2] Anderson, J. C, & Narus, J. A. A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer Firm Working Partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 1990(54), 42-58.
[3] Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 2001(16), 495-527.
[4] Adler, P., & Kwon, S. Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept. Academy of Management Review, 2002,27(1), 17-40.
[5] Ahuja, G. Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2000(45), 424-455.
[6] Anderson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. The Strategic Impact of External Networks: Subsidiary Performance and Competence Development in the Multinational Corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 2002(23), 979-996.
[7] Aldrich, H. E., & Zimmer, E. R. Entrepreneurship through Social Network. In D. L. Sexton & R. W. Smilor (Eds.), The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1986, 3-23.
[8] Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51(6), 1173-1182.
[9] Bell, G. Clusters, Network, and Firm Innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 2005(26), 287-295.
[10] Bhide, A. The Origin and Evolution of New Business. Oxford University Press, 2000.
[11] Barnes, J. A. Class and Committees in a Norwegian Island Parish. Human Relations, 1954, 7(1), 39-58.
[12] Bruyat, C, & Julien, P. A. Defining the field of research in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 2002(16), 165-180.
[13] Burt, R. Networks Items and the General Social Survey, Social Networks, 6.
[14] Burt, R. Kings of Relations in American Discussion Netwoeks, Structure of Power and Constraint, edited by C. J. Calhoun, M. W. Mayer, & W. R. Scott. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
[15] Burt, R. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
[16] Burt, R. The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42(2), 339-365.
[17] Burt, R. The network structure of social capital. Sutton R I, Staw B M. Research in Organizational Behavior. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 2000.
[18] Bourdieu, Pierre, & Passeron, Jean-Claude: Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: SAGE, 1977.
[19] Bourdier, Pierre. Forms of Capital, In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. John G Richardson, New York: Greenwood Press, 1983.
[20] Blau, Peter, M., & Otis Dudley Duncan. The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley, 1967.
[21] Brass, D. J. Power in organizations: a social network perspective. Research of Political Sociology, 1992(4), 295-323.
[22] Brass, D. J. A social network perspective on human resources management. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 1995(13), 39-79.
[23] Barber, Bernard. The Logic and Limits of Trust: New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1983.
[24] Bos, W., & Tarnai, C. Content analysis in empirical social research. International Journal of Educational Research, 1999(31), 659-671.
[25] Brown, B. & Butle, J. E. Competitors as allies: a study of entrepreneurial networks in the U.S. wine industry. Journal of Small Business Management, 1995, 33(3), 57-66.
[26] Brass, D. J., & Marlene, E. Burkhardt. Centrality and Power in Organizations. In Nohria and Robert G Eccles(eds.) Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press, 1992.
[27] Cook, K. S., Emerson, R. M, & Gillmore, M. R. The Distribution of Power in Exchange Networks: Theory and Experimental Results. American Journal of Sociology, 1983, 98.
[28] Cooper, A. C. Challenges in Predicting New Venture Performance. In J. Bull, H. Thomas, G. Willard (Eds). Entrepreneurship: perspectives on theory building. London: Elsevier Science Ltd. 1995.
[29] Covin, J. G, & Slevin. D. P. A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship and Practice, 1991, Fall, 7-25.
[30] Coleman, J. S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 1988(94), 95-120.
[31] Chung, S. Performance effects of cooperative strategies among investment banking firms: A loglinear analysis of organizational exchange networks. Social networks, 1996,18(2), 121-148.
[32] Chung, S. H. Singh, & Lee, K. Complementarity, Status Similarity and Social Capital as Drivers of Alliance Formation. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21(1), 1-22.
[33] Calabrese, T, Baum, J. A. C. & Silverman, B. Canadian biotechnology start-ups, 1991-1997: the role of incumbents' patents and strategic alliances in controlling competition. Social Science Research, 2000,29(4), 503-534.
[34] Christian Lechner, Michael Dowling. Firm networks: external relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 2003(15), 1-26.
[35] Dess, G G, & Robison, R. B. Jr. Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit.Strategic management Journal, 1984,5(3), 265-273.
[36] Dyer, J. H. & Nobeoka, K. Creating and Managing a High Performance Knowledge Sharing Network: The Case of Toyota. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 345-367.
[37] Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 1991(34), 517-554.
[38] Delics, & Beamish, P. W. Geographic Scope, Product Diversification, and the Corporate Performance of Japanese Firms. Strategic Management Journal, 1999, 20(8),711-727.
[39] Davidsson, P., & Honing, B. The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 2003(18), 301-331.
[40] Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. Organizational growth: Kinking founding team, strategy environment, and growth among US semi conductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990(35), 504-529.
[41] Echols, A., & Tsai, W. Niche and Performance: The Moderating Role of Network Embeddedness. Strategic Management Journal, 2005, 26(3), 219-238.
[42] Fornell, C, & Larcher, D. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing Reaearch, 1981(18), 38-50.
[43] Friedman, Debra & Doug McAdam. Collective Identity and Activism: Networks: Choice, and the Life of a Social Movement. in Fronties in Social Movement Theory, (eds.) by Aldon Morris and McClurg Muller, New Haven, Conn. Yale University Press, 1992.
[44] Freeman, L. C. Centrality in Social Networks Concenptual Clarication. Social Networks 1,1979.
[45] Francis, D. H., & Sandberg, W. R. Friendship within entrepreneurial teams and its association with team and venture performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2000,25(2), 27-37.
[46] Fukuyama, F. Trust: The social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1997.
[47] Galaskiewicz, J. & Zaheer, A. Networks of competitive advantage. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1999(16), 237-262.
[48] Gartner, W. B. & Brush, C. B. Entrepreneurship as organizing: emergence, newness and transformation. Academy of Management Conference, Chicago, IL. 1999, 8(7).
[49] Gartner, W. B., Bird, B. J. & Starr, J. A. Acting as if: differentiating entrepreneurial from organizational behavior. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1992,16(3), 13-31.
[50] Goulder, A. The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 1960(25), 161-179.
[51] Granovetter, M. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 1973 (78), 1360-1380.
[52] Granovetter, M. Getting a job: A Study of Contacts and Careers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974.
[53] Granovetter, M. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.American Journal of Sociology, 1985,91(3), 481-510.
[54] Gulati, R. Does familiarity breed trust? The implication of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 1995(38), 85-112.
[55] Gulati, R. Alliances and networks? Strategic Management Journal, 1998, 19(4), 293-317.
[56] Gulati, R. Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 203-215.
[57] Gulati, R. & Gargiulo, M. Where do interorganizational networks come from? American journal of Sociology, 1999,104(5), 1439-1493.
[58] Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. Strategic Networks. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 203-215.
[59] Gulati, R., Lawrence, P., & Puranam, P. Adaptation in Vertical Relationships: Beyond Incentive Conflict. Strategic Management Journal, 2005,26(5), 415-440.
[60] Halinen, A. & Tornroos, J. The Role of Embeddedness in the Evolution of Business Network.Scandinavian Journal of Management, 1998,14(3),187-205.
[61] Hite, J. M., & Hesterly, W. S. The evolution of firm networks: From emergence to early growth of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 2001,22(3), 275-286.
[62] Hoang, H., & Antonicic, B. Network-based Research in Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review. Journal of Business Venturing, 2003(18), 165-187.
[63] Hu, Y, & Korneliussen, T. The effects of personal ties and reciprocity on the performance of small firms in horizontal strategic alliances. Scand. Journal of Management, 1997,13(2), 159-173.
[64] Hansen, E. L., Entrepreneurial networks and new organization growth. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1995,19(4), 7-19.
[65] Heide, J. B. & Miner, A. S. The shadow of the future: effects of anticipated interaction and frequency of contact on buyer-seller cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 1992,35(2), 265-291.
[66] Hoy, F., MacDougall, P. P., & D'souza, D. E. Strategies and environments of high growth firms. In D. L. Sexton, J. D. Kasarda (Eds). The State of the Art of Entrepreneurship. Boston: PWS-Kent, 1992, 341-357.
[67] Ingram, P., & Roberts, P. W. Friendships among competitors in the Sydney hotel industry. American Journal of Sociology, 2000,106(2), 387-423.
[68] Johnston, W. J., Leath, M. P., & Liu, A. H. Theory testing using case studies in business to business research. Industrial Marketing Management, 1999(28), 443-456.
[69] Jacobs, J., & Bruce, K. The concept of Guanxi and Local Politics in a Rural Chinese Cultural Setting. Social Interaction in Chinese Society, New York: Praeger, 1982, 209-236.
[70] Jones, C, Hesterly, W. S. & Borgatti, S. P. A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 1997,22(4), 911-945.
[71] Kale, P., Singh, H. & Perlmutter, H. Learning and protection of proprietary assets in alliance: building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 217-237.
[72] Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. Social Networks and Organizations. London: Sage Publications, 2003.
[73] Kilduff, M., Tsai, W., & Hanke, R. A Paradigm Too Far? A Dynamic Stability Reconsideration of the Social Network Research program. Academy of Management Review, 2006, 31(4), 1031-1048.
[74] Krackhardt, D. The Strength of Strong Ties. In Nohria, R.and Robert Eccles (eds.) Networks and Organization, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press, 1992.
[75] Knokey, D., & Kuklisnski, J. H. Network analysis. Bverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1982,9-21.
[76] Kaufman, A., Wood, H. C, & Theyel, G Collaboration and Technology Linkages: A Strategic Supplier Typology. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21(6), 649-663.
[77] Luhmann, N., Trust and Power, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1979.
[78] Lumpkin, G T., & Gregory, G Dess. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 1996, 21(1), 135-172.
[79] Larson, A. Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of the governance of exchange relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1992(37), 76-104.
[80] Larson, A. L., & Starr, J. A. A network model of organization formation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1993,17(2), 5-10.
[81] Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent. Technological Forecasting & Social Change,2002(69),681-701.
[82] Liden, R. C, & Maslyn, J. M. Multimensionality of Leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 1998(24), 43-72.
[83] Lin, N., & Yanjie B. Getting Ahead in Urban China. American Journal of Sociology, 1991(97), 657-688.
[84] Lou, C, C, & Qiu Haixiong. Employee Compensation Reform in China's Firms: Results of the First Decade. China Report, 1997,4.
[85] Moran, P. Structure Relational Embeddedness: Social Capital and Management Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 2005(26), 1129-1151.
[86] Madhok, A. Reassessing the fundamentals and beyond: Ronald Coase, the transaction costs and resource-based theories of the firm and the institutional structure of production. Strategic Management Journal, 2002(23), 535-550.
[87] Merrilees, B., & Tiessen, J. H. Building generalizable SME international marketing models using case studies. International Marketing Review, 1999(16), 35-38.
[88] Mcgee, J. E., Dowling, M. J., & Megginson W. L. Cooperative Strategy and New Venture Performance: The Role of Business Strategy and Management Experience.Strategic Management Jpurnal, 1995(16), 565-580.
[89] McDonald, R. P., & Marsh, H.W. Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 1990(107), 247-255.
[90] McEvily, B., & Marcus, A. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 2005(26), 1033-1055.
[91] Murphy, G B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. Measuring Performance in Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Business Research, 1996(36), 15-23.
[92] Nahapiet, J. & S. Ghoshal. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998(23), 242-266.
[93] Niren V., & Arch, G. W. An inductive model of industrial supplier choice process. Journal of marketing, 1984(48),122-127.
[94] Oliver, C. Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes. Academy of Management Review, 1991(16), 123-129.
[95] Peng, M. W., & J. Q. Zhou. How Network Strategies and Institutional Transitions Evolve in Asia.Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2005,22(4), 321-336.
[96] Porac, J. F., Thomas, H., & Wilson, F. etal., Rivalry and the industry model of Scottish knitwear producers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1995(40), 203-229.
[97] Pfeffer, J., & Salaucik, G R. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row, 1978.
[98] Rowley, T, Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 369-386.
[99] Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2003(48), 240-267.
[100] Rindfleisch, A., & Moorman, C. The Acquisition and Utilization of Information in New Product Alliances: A Strength of Ties Perspective. Journal of Marketing, 2001(65), 1-18.
[101] Richter, F. J, & Vettel, K. Successful joint ventures in Japan: Tansferring knowledge through organizational learning. Long Range Planning, 1995, 28(3), 37-45.
[102] Robinson, K. C, & McDougall, P. P. Entry barriers and new venture performance: a comparison of universal and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 2001(22), 659-685.
[103] Schmitt, N. W., & Klimoski, R. J. Research methods in human resources management. Cincinnati, OH: Sourth-Western Publishing. 1991.
[104] Shamir B., Zakay E., Breinin E., & Popper, M. Correlates of charismatic leader behavior on military units: Subordinates' attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors' appraisals of leader performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1998,41(4), 387-409.
[105] Stake, R. E., The Art of Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, 1995.
[106] Shamdasani, P. N., & Sheth, J. N. An Experimental Approach to Investigating Satisfaction and Continuity in Marketing Alliances. European Journal of Marketing, 1995,29(4), 6-23.
[107] Stuart, T. E., Hoang, H. & Hybels, R. Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44(2), 315-349.
[108] Uzzi, B. The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review 1996(61), 674-698.
[109] Uzzi, B. Social Structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997,42(1), 35-67.
[110] Uzzi, B. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks between firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 1999, 64(8), 481-505.
[111] Uzzi, B., & Gillespie, J. Corporate Social Capital and the Cost of Financial Capital: An Embedded Approach. In R. Leenders & S. Gabbay (Eds.), Corporate Social Capital and Liability. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
[112] Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approach. Academy of Management Review, 1986,1(4), 801-804.
[113] White, H. Where Do Markets Come from. American Journal of Sociology, 1981, (87), 517-547.
[114] Wong, S. L. Chinese Entrepreneurs and Business Trust, In G Hamilton(Ed.,) Business Networks and Economic Development in East and Southeast Asia, Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies, the University of Hong Kong, 1991.
[115] Woolcock, M. Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society, 1998(27), 151-208.
[116] Xin, K. R., & Pearce J. L. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39(6), 1641-1658.
[117] Yang, K. S. Chinese Personality and its change. The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong : Oxford University Press,1986.
[118] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research Methods: Design and Methods, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1984.
[119] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2003, 26 (1), 73-90.
[120] Yeung, H. W. Business Networks and Transnational Corporations: A Study of Hong Kong Firms in the ASEAN Region, Economic Geography, 1997, 73(1), 1-25.
[121] Yang, H. L., & Tang, J. H. Team structure and team performance in IS development:a social network perspective.Information and Management,2004(41),335-349.
[122]Zaheer,A.,McEvily,B.& Perrone,V.Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance.Organization Science,1998,9(2),141-159.
[123]Zhao,L.& Aram,J.D.Networking and growth of young technology-intesive ventures in China.Journal of Business Venturing,1995(10),349-370.
[124]Zucker,L.Production of Trust:Institutional Sources of Economics Structure.B.M.Staw & L.L.Cunrmings(eds),Research in Organization Behavior 8,Greenwich,CT:JAI Press,1986.
[125]Zukin,S.& DiMaggio,P.Structures of capital:The social organization of the economy.Cambridge:Cabridge University Press,1990,377-418.
[126]罗伯特 A.巴隆,斯科特 A.谢恩.创业管理:基于过程的观点.机械工业出版社,2005,8-11.
[127]边燕杰,丘海雄.企业的社会资本及其功效.中国社会科学,2000(2),87-99.
[128]边燕杰.网络脱生.创业过程的社会学分析.社会学研究,2006(6),74-88.
[129]托马斯·福特·布朗.社会资本理论综述.马克思主义与现实,2000(2),41-46.
[130]储小平.家族企业研究:一个具有现代意义的话题.中国社会科学,2000(5),51-58.
[131]储小平,李怀祖.家族企业成长与社会资本的融合.经济理论与经济管理,2003(6),45-51.
[132]陈莉平.企业的生命周期演变及可持续成长.福州大学学报(哲社版),2004(2),5-9.
[133]陈莉平,万迪昉.嵌入社会网络的中小企业资源整合模式.软科学,2006,20(6),133-136.
[134]陈艳莹,原毅军.治理机制与企业网络规模:嵌入性视角的研究.中国工业经济,2006(9),102-108.
[135]陈东升.高科技产业组织网络统理架构的内涵及其演变的探讨:以台湾集体电路产业封装部门为例.中山管理评论(台湾大学),夏季号,1999.
[136]陈传平,周小虎.关于企业家社会资本的若干思考.南京社会科学,2001(1),1-6.
[137]陈加州,凌文辁,方俐洛.企业员工心理契约的结构维度.心理学报,2003(35),404-410.
[138]付宏,苏晓燕.企业家社会网络与中小企业成长--结合华中地区的实证分析.湖北经济学院学报,2005,3(1),95-99.
[139]郭毅,朱淼.企业家及企业家网络构建的理论分析--基于社会网络的分析观点.苏州城市建设环境保护学院学报,2002,4(1),44-48.
[140]郭毅,朱扬帆,朱熹.人际关系互动与社会结构网络化.社会科学,2003(8),64-74.
[141]郭劲光.网络嵌入:嵌入差异与嵌入绩效.经济评论,2006(6),24-30.
[142]黄中伟,王宇露.关于经济行为的社会嵌入理论研究述评.2007,29(12),1-8.
[143]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用.教育科学出版社,2004.
[144]林剑.社会网络作用于创业融资的机制研究.南开管理评论,2006,9(4),70-75.
[145]卢福财,何炜.论中国传统关系网络对外部网络的影响.当代财经,2005(2),71-74.
[146]刘存福,侯光明,李存金.中小企业集群的社会网络分析及发展趋势探讨.科学学与科学技术管理,2005(7),144-148.
[147]李林艳.社会空间的另一种想象.社会学研究,2004(3),64-75.
[148]李久鑫,郑绍濂.管理的社会网络嵌入性视角.外国经济与管理,2002,24(6),2-6.
[149]刘世定.嵌入性与关系合同.社会学研究,1999(4),75-88.
[150]刘林平.企业的社会资本:概念反思和测量途径.社会科学,2006,2.
[151]李乾文.公司创业活动与绩效关系测度体系评价.外国经济与管理,2005,27(2),2-9.
[152]刘卫东.论全球化与地区发展之间的辨证关系--被动嵌入.世界地理研究,2003,12(1),1-9.
[153]刘宏.社会资本与商业网络的构建:当代华人跨国主义的个案研究.华侨华人历史研究,2000(1),1-15.
[154]林闽钢.社会学视野中的组织间网络及其治理.社会学研究,2002(2),40-50.
[155]李新春.信任、忠诚与家族主义困境.管理世界,2002(6),87-93.
[156]李新春.信任与企业成长方式的相机选择.经济体制改革,2003(1),51-55.
[157]李惠斌,杨冬雪.社会资本与社会发展.社会科学出版社,2000年版.
[158]骆骏.创业企业社会网络胜任力与创业绩效关系研究.硕士学位论文.浙江大学,2006.
[159]马君,文庆能.信任的经济学分析:一种嵌入性视角.潍北煤炭师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,26(2),63-66.
[160]彭华涛,谢科范.创业社会网络的概念界定及拓展分析.学术论坛,2005(2),75-78.
[161]彭华涛,谢科范.创业社会网络图谱的特征及形成机理分析.科学学研究,2007,25(2),324-327.
[162]雷丁(G.Redding):《海外华人企业家的管理思想--文化背景与风格》,上海三联书店1993年版,第4页(原英文书名为The Spirit of Chinese Capitalism,1990).
[163]石军伟,胡立军,付海燕.企业社会资本的功效结构:基于中国上市公司的实证研究.中国工业经济,2007(2),84-93.
[164]石秀印.中国企业家成功的社会网络基础.管理世界,1998(6),187-196.
[165]孙国强,范建红.网络组织治理机制与绩效的典型相关分析.经济管理·新管理,2005,6(12),50-55.
[166]王志宏.社会网络对旅行业间策略联盟绩效影响之研究.硕士学位论文.台湾中国文化大学观光事业研究所,2003.
[167]王凤彬,李奇会.组织背景下的嵌入性研究.经济理论与经济管理,2007(3),28-33.
[168]王凤彬,刘松博.企业社会资本生成问题的跨层次分析.浙江社会科学,2007(4),87-132.
[169]吴晓波,韦影.制药企业技术创新战略网络中的关系性嵌入.科学学研究,2005,23(4),561-565.
[170]吴东晓.创业社会胜任力结构模型与绩效关系研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2005.
[171]姚小涛,席酉民.社会网络理论及其在企业研究中的应用.西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2003,23(3),22-27.
[172]姚小涛,万涛.中小企业成长的社会网络解释与分析.西安电子科技大学学报(社会科学版),2003,13(4),79-83.
[173]姚小涛,王洪涛,李武.社会网络与中小企业成长模型.系统工程理论方法应用,2004,13(1),49-53.
[174]姚小涛,张田,席酉民.强关系与弱关系:企业成长的社会关系依赖研究.管理科学学报,2008,11(1),143-152.
[175]薛澜,陶海青.产业集群成长中的企业家社会网络演化--一种“撒网”模型.当代经济科学,2004(6),60-66.
[176]肖鸿.试析当代社会网研究的若干进展.社会学研究,1999(3),1-11.
[177]肖冬平,梁臣.社会网络研究的理论模式综述.广西社会科学,2003(12),166-168.
[178]余志良,谢洪明,蓝海林.战略网络中的嵌入关系及其特征和影响分析.科技进步与对策,2003(10),11-13.
[179]余维清.中小企业关系网络的演进分析.经济问题探索,2008(2),100-103.
[180]杨中芳,彭泗清.中国人人际信任的概念化:一个人际关系的观点.社会学研究,1999(2),1-21.
[181]杨俊,张玉利.基于企业家资源禀赋的创业行为过程分析.外国经济与管理,2004,26(2),2-6.
[182]朱瑜,王雁飞,蓝海林.产业网络中社会嵌入影响机制及其效应研究.科技管理研究,2008(2),146-148.
[183]曾一军.嵌入社会网络:新创企业成功的必由之路.企业活力,2006(9),94-95.
[184]周红云.社会资本及其在中国的研究与应用.经济社会体制比较研究,2004(2),135-144.
[185]赵都敏.社会网络视角在创业研究中的进展.科学学与科学技术管理,2007(8),71-76.
[186]张荣祥,伍满桂.网络动态能力.创新网络质量及其创新绩效关系研究.兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2009,37(2),107-113.
[187]甑志宏.从网络嵌入性到制度嵌入性.江苏社会科学,2006(3),97-100.
[188]周业安等.嵌入性与制度演化--一个关于制度演化理论的读书笔记.中国人民大学学报,2001(6),58-64.
[2] Anderson, J. C, & Narus, J. A. A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer Firm Working Partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 1990(54), 42-58.
[3] Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 2001(16), 495-527.
[4] Adler, P., & Kwon, S. Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept. Academy of Management Review, 2002,27(1), 17-40.
[5] Ahuja, G. Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2000(45), 424-455.
[6] Anderson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. The Strategic Impact of External Networks: Subsidiary Performance and Competence Development in the Multinational Corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 2002(23), 979-996.
[7] Aldrich, H. E., & Zimmer, E. R. Entrepreneurship through Social Network. In D. L. Sexton & R. W. Smilor (Eds.), The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1986, 3-23.
[8] Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51(6), 1173-1182.
[9] Bell, G. Clusters, Network, and Firm Innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 2005(26), 287-295.
[10] Bhide, A. The Origin and Evolution of New Business. Oxford University Press, 2000.
[11] Barnes, J. A. Class and Committees in a Norwegian Island Parish. Human Relations, 1954, 7(1), 39-58.
[12] Bruyat, C, & Julien, P. A. Defining the field of research in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 2002(16), 165-180.
[13] Burt, R. Networks Items and the General Social Survey, Social Networks, 6.
[14] Burt, R. Kings of Relations in American Discussion Netwoeks, Structure of Power and Constraint, edited by C. J. Calhoun, M. W. Mayer, & W. R. Scott. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
[15] Burt, R. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
[16] Burt, R. The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42(2), 339-365.
[17] Burt, R. The network structure of social capital. Sutton R I, Staw B M. Research in Organizational Behavior. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 2000.
[18] Bourdieu, Pierre, & Passeron, Jean-Claude: Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: SAGE, 1977.
[19] Bourdier, Pierre. Forms of Capital, In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. John G Richardson, New York: Greenwood Press, 1983.
[20] Blau, Peter, M., & Otis Dudley Duncan. The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley, 1967.
[21] Brass, D. J. Power in organizations: a social network perspective. Research of Political Sociology, 1992(4), 295-323.
[22] Brass, D. J. A social network perspective on human resources management. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 1995(13), 39-79.
[23] Barber, Bernard. The Logic and Limits of Trust: New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1983.
[24] Bos, W., & Tarnai, C. Content analysis in empirical social research. International Journal of Educational Research, 1999(31), 659-671.
[25] Brown, B. & Butle, J. E. Competitors as allies: a study of entrepreneurial networks in the U.S. wine industry. Journal of Small Business Management, 1995, 33(3), 57-66.
[26] Brass, D. J., & Marlene, E. Burkhardt. Centrality and Power in Organizations. In Nohria and Robert G Eccles(eds.) Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press, 1992.
[27] Cook, K. S., Emerson, R. M, & Gillmore, M. R. The Distribution of Power in Exchange Networks: Theory and Experimental Results. American Journal of Sociology, 1983, 98.
[28] Cooper, A. C. Challenges in Predicting New Venture Performance. In J. Bull, H. Thomas, G. Willard (Eds). Entrepreneurship: perspectives on theory building. London: Elsevier Science Ltd. 1995.
[29] Covin, J. G, & Slevin. D. P. A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship and Practice, 1991, Fall, 7-25.
[30] Coleman, J. S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 1988(94), 95-120.
[31] Chung, S. Performance effects of cooperative strategies among investment banking firms: A loglinear analysis of organizational exchange networks. Social networks, 1996,18(2), 121-148.
[32] Chung, S. H. Singh, & Lee, K. Complementarity, Status Similarity and Social Capital as Drivers of Alliance Formation. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21(1), 1-22.
[33] Calabrese, T, Baum, J. A. C. & Silverman, B. Canadian biotechnology start-ups, 1991-1997: the role of incumbents' patents and strategic alliances in controlling competition. Social Science Research, 2000,29(4), 503-534.
[34] Christian Lechner, Michael Dowling. Firm networks: external relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 2003(15), 1-26.
[35] Dess, G G, & Robison, R. B. Jr. Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit.Strategic management Journal, 1984,5(3), 265-273.
[36] Dyer, J. H. & Nobeoka, K. Creating and Managing a High Performance Knowledge Sharing Network: The Case of Toyota. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 345-367.
[37] Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 1991(34), 517-554.
[38] Delics, & Beamish, P. W. Geographic Scope, Product Diversification, and the Corporate Performance of Japanese Firms. Strategic Management Journal, 1999, 20(8),711-727.
[39] Davidsson, P., & Honing, B. The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 2003(18), 301-331.
[40] Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. Organizational growth: Kinking founding team, strategy environment, and growth among US semi conductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990(35), 504-529.
[41] Echols, A., & Tsai, W. Niche and Performance: The Moderating Role of Network Embeddedness. Strategic Management Journal, 2005, 26(3), 219-238.
[42] Fornell, C, & Larcher, D. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing Reaearch, 1981(18), 38-50.
[43] Friedman, Debra & Doug McAdam. Collective Identity and Activism: Networks: Choice, and the Life of a Social Movement. in Fronties in Social Movement Theory, (eds.) by Aldon Morris and McClurg Muller, New Haven, Conn. Yale University Press, 1992.
[44] Freeman, L. C. Centrality in Social Networks Concenptual Clarication. Social Networks 1,1979.
[45] Francis, D. H., & Sandberg, W. R. Friendship within entrepreneurial teams and its association with team and venture performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2000,25(2), 27-37.
[46] Fukuyama, F. Trust: The social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1997.
[47] Galaskiewicz, J. & Zaheer, A. Networks of competitive advantage. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1999(16), 237-262.
[48] Gartner, W. B. & Brush, C. B. Entrepreneurship as organizing: emergence, newness and transformation. Academy of Management Conference, Chicago, IL. 1999, 8(7).
[49] Gartner, W. B., Bird, B. J. & Starr, J. A. Acting as if: differentiating entrepreneurial from organizational behavior. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1992,16(3), 13-31.
[50] Goulder, A. The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 1960(25), 161-179.
[51] Granovetter, M. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 1973 (78), 1360-1380.
[52] Granovetter, M. Getting a job: A Study of Contacts and Careers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974.
[53] Granovetter, M. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.American Journal of Sociology, 1985,91(3), 481-510.
[54] Gulati, R. Does familiarity breed trust? The implication of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 1995(38), 85-112.
[55] Gulati, R. Alliances and networks? Strategic Management Journal, 1998, 19(4), 293-317.
[56] Gulati, R. Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 203-215.
[57] Gulati, R. & Gargiulo, M. Where do interorganizational networks come from? American journal of Sociology, 1999,104(5), 1439-1493.
[58] Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. Strategic Networks. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 203-215.
[59] Gulati, R., Lawrence, P., & Puranam, P. Adaptation in Vertical Relationships: Beyond Incentive Conflict. Strategic Management Journal, 2005,26(5), 415-440.
[60] Halinen, A. & Tornroos, J. The Role of Embeddedness in the Evolution of Business Network.Scandinavian Journal of Management, 1998,14(3),187-205.
[61] Hite, J. M., & Hesterly, W. S. The evolution of firm networks: From emergence to early growth of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 2001,22(3), 275-286.
[62] Hoang, H., & Antonicic, B. Network-based Research in Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review. Journal of Business Venturing, 2003(18), 165-187.
[63] Hu, Y, & Korneliussen, T. The effects of personal ties and reciprocity on the performance of small firms in horizontal strategic alliances. Scand. Journal of Management, 1997,13(2), 159-173.
[64] Hansen, E. L., Entrepreneurial networks and new organization growth. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1995,19(4), 7-19.
[65] Heide, J. B. & Miner, A. S. The shadow of the future: effects of anticipated interaction and frequency of contact on buyer-seller cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 1992,35(2), 265-291.
[66] Hoy, F., MacDougall, P. P., & D'souza, D. E. Strategies and environments of high growth firms. In D. L. Sexton, J. D. Kasarda (Eds). The State of the Art of Entrepreneurship. Boston: PWS-Kent, 1992, 341-357.
[67] Ingram, P., & Roberts, P. W. Friendships among competitors in the Sydney hotel industry. American Journal of Sociology, 2000,106(2), 387-423.
[68] Johnston, W. J., Leath, M. P., & Liu, A. H. Theory testing using case studies in business to business research. Industrial Marketing Management, 1999(28), 443-456.
[69] Jacobs, J., & Bruce, K. The concept of Guanxi and Local Politics in a Rural Chinese Cultural Setting. Social Interaction in Chinese Society, New York: Praeger, 1982, 209-236.
[70] Jones, C, Hesterly, W. S. & Borgatti, S. P. A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 1997,22(4), 911-945.
[71] Kale, P., Singh, H. & Perlmutter, H. Learning and protection of proprietary assets in alliance: building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 217-237.
[72] Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. Social Networks and Organizations. London: Sage Publications, 2003.
[73] Kilduff, M., Tsai, W., & Hanke, R. A Paradigm Too Far? A Dynamic Stability Reconsideration of the Social Network Research program. Academy of Management Review, 2006, 31(4), 1031-1048.
[74] Krackhardt, D. The Strength of Strong Ties. In Nohria, R.and Robert Eccles (eds.) Networks and Organization, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press, 1992.
[75] Knokey, D., & Kuklisnski, J. H. Network analysis. Bverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1982,9-21.
[76] Kaufman, A., Wood, H. C, & Theyel, G Collaboration and Technology Linkages: A Strategic Supplier Typology. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21(6), 649-663.
[77] Luhmann, N., Trust and Power, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1979.
[78] Lumpkin, G T., & Gregory, G Dess. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 1996, 21(1), 135-172.
[79] Larson, A. Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of the governance of exchange relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1992(37), 76-104.
[80] Larson, A. L., & Starr, J. A. A network model of organization formation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1993,17(2), 5-10.
[81] Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent. Technological Forecasting & Social Change,2002(69),681-701.
[82] Liden, R. C, & Maslyn, J. M. Multimensionality of Leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 1998(24), 43-72.
[83] Lin, N., & Yanjie B. Getting Ahead in Urban China. American Journal of Sociology, 1991(97), 657-688.
[84] Lou, C, C, & Qiu Haixiong. Employee Compensation Reform in China's Firms: Results of the First Decade. China Report, 1997,4.
[85] Moran, P. Structure Relational Embeddedness: Social Capital and Management Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 2005(26), 1129-1151.
[86] Madhok, A. Reassessing the fundamentals and beyond: Ronald Coase, the transaction costs and resource-based theories of the firm and the institutional structure of production. Strategic Management Journal, 2002(23), 535-550.
[87] Merrilees, B., & Tiessen, J. H. Building generalizable SME international marketing models using case studies. International Marketing Review, 1999(16), 35-38.
[88] Mcgee, J. E., Dowling, M. J., & Megginson W. L. Cooperative Strategy and New Venture Performance: The Role of Business Strategy and Management Experience.Strategic Management Jpurnal, 1995(16), 565-580.
[89] McDonald, R. P., & Marsh, H.W. Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 1990(107), 247-255.
[90] McEvily, B., & Marcus, A. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 2005(26), 1033-1055.
[91] Murphy, G B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. Measuring Performance in Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Business Research, 1996(36), 15-23.
[92] Nahapiet, J. & S. Ghoshal. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998(23), 242-266.
[93] Niren V., & Arch, G. W. An inductive model of industrial supplier choice process. Journal of marketing, 1984(48),122-127.
[94] Oliver, C. Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes. Academy of Management Review, 1991(16), 123-129.
[95] Peng, M. W., & J. Q. Zhou. How Network Strategies and Institutional Transitions Evolve in Asia.Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2005,22(4), 321-336.
[96] Porac, J. F., Thomas, H., & Wilson, F. etal., Rivalry and the industry model of Scottish knitwear producers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1995(40), 203-229.
[97] Pfeffer, J., & Salaucik, G R. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row, 1978.
[98] Rowley, T, Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 2000(21), 369-386.
[99] Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2003(48), 240-267.
[100] Rindfleisch, A., & Moorman, C. The Acquisition and Utilization of Information in New Product Alliances: A Strength of Ties Perspective. Journal of Marketing, 2001(65), 1-18.
[101] Richter, F. J, & Vettel, K. Successful joint ventures in Japan: Tansferring knowledge through organizational learning. Long Range Planning, 1995, 28(3), 37-45.
[102] Robinson, K. C, & McDougall, P. P. Entry barriers and new venture performance: a comparison of universal and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 2001(22), 659-685.
[103] Schmitt, N. W., & Klimoski, R. J. Research methods in human resources management. Cincinnati, OH: Sourth-Western Publishing. 1991.
[104] Shamir B., Zakay E., Breinin E., & Popper, M. Correlates of charismatic leader behavior on military units: Subordinates' attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors' appraisals of leader performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1998,41(4), 387-409.
[105] Stake, R. E., The Art of Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, 1995.
[106] Shamdasani, P. N., & Sheth, J. N. An Experimental Approach to Investigating Satisfaction and Continuity in Marketing Alliances. European Journal of Marketing, 1995,29(4), 6-23.
[107] Stuart, T. E., Hoang, H. & Hybels, R. Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44(2), 315-349.
[108] Uzzi, B. The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review 1996(61), 674-698.
[109] Uzzi, B. Social Structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997,42(1), 35-67.
[110] Uzzi, B. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks between firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 1999, 64(8), 481-505.
[111] Uzzi, B., & Gillespie, J. Corporate Social Capital and the Cost of Financial Capital: An Embedded Approach. In R. Leenders & S. Gabbay (Eds.), Corporate Social Capital and Liability. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
[112] Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approach. Academy of Management Review, 1986,1(4), 801-804.
[113] White, H. Where Do Markets Come from. American Journal of Sociology, 1981, (87), 517-547.
[114] Wong, S. L. Chinese Entrepreneurs and Business Trust, In G Hamilton(Ed.,) Business Networks and Economic Development in East and Southeast Asia, Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies, the University of Hong Kong, 1991.
[115] Woolcock, M. Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society, 1998(27), 151-208.
[116] Xin, K. R., & Pearce J. L. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39(6), 1641-1658.
[117] Yang, K. S. Chinese Personality and its change. The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong : Oxford University Press,1986.
[118] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research Methods: Design and Methods, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1984.
[119] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2003, 26 (1), 73-90.
[120] Yeung, H. W. Business Networks and Transnational Corporations: A Study of Hong Kong Firms in the ASEAN Region, Economic Geography, 1997, 73(1), 1-25.
[121] Yang, H. L., & Tang, J. H. Team structure and team performance in IS development:a social network perspective.Information and Management,2004(41),335-349.
[122]Zaheer,A.,McEvily,B.& Perrone,V.Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance.Organization Science,1998,9(2),141-159.
[123]Zhao,L.& Aram,J.D.Networking and growth of young technology-intesive ventures in China.Journal of Business Venturing,1995(10),349-370.
[124]Zucker,L.Production of Trust:Institutional Sources of Economics Structure.B.M.Staw & L.L.Cunrmings(eds),Research in Organization Behavior 8,Greenwich,CT:JAI Press,1986.
[125]Zukin,S.& DiMaggio,P.Structures of capital:The social organization of the economy.Cambridge:Cabridge University Press,1990,377-418.
[126]罗伯特 A.巴隆,斯科特 A.谢恩.创业管理:基于过程的观点.机械工业出版社,2005,8-11.
[127]边燕杰,丘海雄.企业的社会资本及其功效.中国社会科学,2000(2),87-99.
[128]边燕杰.网络脱生.创业过程的社会学分析.社会学研究,2006(6),74-88.
[129]托马斯·福特·布朗.社会资本理论综述.马克思主义与现实,2000(2),41-46.
[130]储小平.家族企业研究:一个具有现代意义的话题.中国社会科学,2000(5),51-58.
[131]储小平,李怀祖.家族企业成长与社会资本的融合.经济理论与经济管理,2003(6),45-51.
[132]陈莉平.企业的生命周期演变及可持续成长.福州大学学报(哲社版),2004(2),5-9.
[133]陈莉平,万迪昉.嵌入社会网络的中小企业资源整合模式.软科学,2006,20(6),133-136.
[134]陈艳莹,原毅军.治理机制与企业网络规模:嵌入性视角的研究.中国工业经济,2006(9),102-108.
[135]陈东升.高科技产业组织网络统理架构的内涵及其演变的探讨:以台湾集体电路产业封装部门为例.中山管理评论(台湾大学),夏季号,1999.
[136]陈传平,周小虎.关于企业家社会资本的若干思考.南京社会科学,2001(1),1-6.
[137]陈加州,凌文辁,方俐洛.企业员工心理契约的结构维度.心理学报,2003(35),404-410.
[138]付宏,苏晓燕.企业家社会网络与中小企业成长--结合华中地区的实证分析.湖北经济学院学报,2005,3(1),95-99.
[139]郭毅,朱淼.企业家及企业家网络构建的理论分析--基于社会网络的分析观点.苏州城市建设环境保护学院学报,2002,4(1),44-48.
[140]郭毅,朱扬帆,朱熹.人际关系互动与社会结构网络化.社会科学,2003(8),64-74.
[141]郭劲光.网络嵌入:嵌入差异与嵌入绩效.经济评论,2006(6),24-30.
[142]黄中伟,王宇露.关于经济行为的社会嵌入理论研究述评.2007,29(12),1-8.
[143]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用.教育科学出版社,2004.
[144]林剑.社会网络作用于创业融资的机制研究.南开管理评论,2006,9(4),70-75.
[145]卢福财,何炜.论中国传统关系网络对外部网络的影响.当代财经,2005(2),71-74.
[146]刘存福,侯光明,李存金.中小企业集群的社会网络分析及发展趋势探讨.科学学与科学技术管理,2005(7),144-148.
[147]李林艳.社会空间的另一种想象.社会学研究,2004(3),64-75.
[148]李久鑫,郑绍濂.管理的社会网络嵌入性视角.外国经济与管理,2002,24(6),2-6.
[149]刘世定.嵌入性与关系合同.社会学研究,1999(4),75-88.
[150]刘林平.企业的社会资本:概念反思和测量途径.社会科学,2006,2.
[151]李乾文.公司创业活动与绩效关系测度体系评价.外国经济与管理,2005,27(2),2-9.
[152]刘卫东.论全球化与地区发展之间的辨证关系--被动嵌入.世界地理研究,2003,12(1),1-9.
[153]刘宏.社会资本与商业网络的构建:当代华人跨国主义的个案研究.华侨华人历史研究,2000(1),1-15.
[154]林闽钢.社会学视野中的组织间网络及其治理.社会学研究,2002(2),40-50.
[155]李新春.信任、忠诚与家族主义困境.管理世界,2002(6),87-93.
[156]李新春.信任与企业成长方式的相机选择.经济体制改革,2003(1),51-55.
[157]李惠斌,杨冬雪.社会资本与社会发展.社会科学出版社,2000年版.
[158]骆骏.创业企业社会网络胜任力与创业绩效关系研究.硕士学位论文.浙江大学,2006.
[159]马君,文庆能.信任的经济学分析:一种嵌入性视角.潍北煤炭师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,26(2),63-66.
[160]彭华涛,谢科范.创业社会网络的概念界定及拓展分析.学术论坛,2005(2),75-78.
[161]彭华涛,谢科范.创业社会网络图谱的特征及形成机理分析.科学学研究,2007,25(2),324-327.
[162]雷丁(G.Redding):《海外华人企业家的管理思想--文化背景与风格》,上海三联书店1993年版,第4页(原英文书名为The Spirit of Chinese Capitalism,1990).
[163]石军伟,胡立军,付海燕.企业社会资本的功效结构:基于中国上市公司的实证研究.中国工业经济,2007(2),84-93.
[164]石秀印.中国企业家成功的社会网络基础.管理世界,1998(6),187-196.
[165]孙国强,范建红.网络组织治理机制与绩效的典型相关分析.经济管理·新管理,2005,6(12),50-55.
[166]王志宏.社会网络对旅行业间策略联盟绩效影响之研究.硕士学位论文.台湾中国文化大学观光事业研究所,2003.
[167]王凤彬,李奇会.组织背景下的嵌入性研究.经济理论与经济管理,2007(3),28-33.
[168]王凤彬,刘松博.企业社会资本生成问题的跨层次分析.浙江社会科学,2007(4),87-132.
[169]吴晓波,韦影.制药企业技术创新战略网络中的关系性嵌入.科学学研究,2005,23(4),561-565.
[170]吴东晓.创业社会胜任力结构模型与绩效关系研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2005.
[171]姚小涛,席酉民.社会网络理论及其在企业研究中的应用.西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2003,23(3),22-27.
[172]姚小涛,万涛.中小企业成长的社会网络解释与分析.西安电子科技大学学报(社会科学版),2003,13(4),79-83.
[173]姚小涛,王洪涛,李武.社会网络与中小企业成长模型.系统工程理论方法应用,2004,13(1),49-53.
[174]姚小涛,张田,席酉民.强关系与弱关系:企业成长的社会关系依赖研究.管理科学学报,2008,11(1),143-152.
[175]薛澜,陶海青.产业集群成长中的企业家社会网络演化--一种“撒网”模型.当代经济科学,2004(6),60-66.
[176]肖鸿.试析当代社会网研究的若干进展.社会学研究,1999(3),1-11.
[177]肖冬平,梁臣.社会网络研究的理论模式综述.广西社会科学,2003(12),166-168.
[178]余志良,谢洪明,蓝海林.战略网络中的嵌入关系及其特征和影响分析.科技进步与对策,2003(10),11-13.
[179]余维清.中小企业关系网络的演进分析.经济问题探索,2008(2),100-103.
[180]杨中芳,彭泗清.中国人人际信任的概念化:一个人际关系的观点.社会学研究,1999(2),1-21.
[181]杨俊,张玉利.基于企业家资源禀赋的创业行为过程分析.外国经济与管理,2004,26(2),2-6.
[182]朱瑜,王雁飞,蓝海林.产业网络中社会嵌入影响机制及其效应研究.科技管理研究,2008(2),146-148.
[183]曾一军.嵌入社会网络:新创企业成功的必由之路.企业活力,2006(9),94-95.
[184]周红云.社会资本及其在中国的研究与应用.经济社会体制比较研究,2004(2),135-144.
[185]赵都敏.社会网络视角在创业研究中的进展.科学学与科学技术管理,2007(8),71-76.
[186]张荣祥,伍满桂.网络动态能力.创新网络质量及其创新绩效关系研究.兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2009,37(2),107-113.
[187]甑志宏.从网络嵌入性到制度嵌入性.江苏社会科学,2006(3),97-100.
[188]周业安等.嵌入性与制度演化--一个关于制度演化理论的读书笔记.中国人民大学学报,2001(6),58-64.