基于公司战略网络的角色定位及其战略研究
|
摘要
创造经济价值的方式正在发生根本性的改变,知识和技术的复杂性、全球竞争的加剧以及信息技术的飞速发展加快了改变的进程。随着生产和服务业分工越来越细,单个公司,即使是跨国的大公司如果全部依靠自身的能力进行从产品开发创新到客户服务整条价值链的活动将是非常困难的,而且从经济的角度上来看这种尝试也是不合理的。在这种情况下,公司之间进行合作,互相提供对方需要的互补型的资源和能力便成为一种合理的选择。公司与公司之间通过不断地合作形成各种经济利益上相联系的战略网络。战略网络更适应知识密集的环境,因为它们比市场和层级组织有更优越的信息处理能力和灵活的监督机制,网络组织在经济和社会创新中处于领导地位。近年来包括公司联盟形式的公司合作的频率越来越高,公司与其他组织成员越来越深入地内嵌在社会的、专业的、交换的关系网络中。公司作为自治的实体从外部或内部资源和能力形成竞争优势的观点得到普遍认同,将公司看作孤立的经济参与人的观点并不适合。
许多学者认为不同的网络结构对内嵌其中的公司的战略行为有重要的影响并进一步影响公司的绩效。最早关于公司网络的理论始于对社会关系网络的研究,主要考虑网络的结构空洞以及网络密度对网络参与人的影响。其后的公司战略网络的研究基本上也沿用了这一思维构架,它们的重点在于研究网络本身的特征对内嵌公司行为和绩效的影响机制,而对内嵌公司所处网络地位对公司影响的研究则显得不足,并且缺乏实证支持。本文针对这一不足,按照内嵌公司在战略网络中所处地位的不同,建立了宏观战略网络角色定位模型,分析了这些不同的角色定位对公司行为与绩效的影响。然后,在对微观战略网络的分析基础上,提出了“微观网络吸引力—竞争能力矩阵”模型。在此基础上,提出了公司构建网络战略的模式,并对我国投资银行组成的承销团在承销股票时所形成的战略网络进行了分析。
本文首先对公司战略网络的形成和发展做了一个描述。将公司看作孤立“原子”而不和其他公司发生联系的想法是不合适的。在一个更宏观的世界里,公司内嵌在和其他参与人一起组成的一个社会的、专业的和交换的关系的网络中,因此战略网络对公司的战略行为有重要影响作用。在对本文所讨论的问题以及研究目的和意义进行了说明以后,阐述了文章的内容和创新点,最后对本文的研究方法做了说明。
对公司战略网络进行了研究的基础来源于四个主要理论。战略网络形成的基础是公司间的合作,对战略网络的研究先从公司间的合作原理开始,主要有四种不同的观点:交易成本理论、资源能力理论、组织学习理论以及社会网络理论。四种理论从不同的角度对公司网络的形成机制进行了有益的尝试,并且部分地得到实证支持。公司网络基础理论将有助于分析不同网络以及处于网络不同地位公司的行为。本文对战略网络文献进行了总结并指出现有战略研究的不足之处。
为了建立了战略网络对公司行为与绩效影响机制模型,本文研究了战略网络与公司资源之间的关系,通过对资源的研究,可以得出公司战略网络成为公司的资源结论。公司网络战略也成为公司获得能力的重要途径。对公司战略联盟与战略网络关系的研究表明战略联盟是战略网络的出发点,战略联盟的理论可以在一定条件下解释战略网络的特点,特别是战略联盟对公司行为和绩效的影响机制可以应用到战略网络的研究上。由此本文建立了战略网络对公司行为与绩效的影响机制模型。
从社会网络理论的观点来看,内嵌公司即是网络中的节点。网络的节点在网络中的中心性有三个参数:中心度、紧密度和中间性,它们具有不同意义和数学表达公式,本文讨论了中心性与网络其他参数以及社会网络中所研究的结构空洞的关系。按照公司所处战略网络中不同的地位,本文以中心性的三个参数为维度建立了宏观战略网络角色定位模型,将公司的在网络中的角色分为8类,主要包括主导者、边缘人、深入者、探索者和中间人这5种,分析了战略网络对不同宏观战略网络角色定位的公司的行为与绩效产生的影响。
在建立了宏观战略网络角色定位模型以后,本文进一步从产业集群的角度入手,建立了微观网络的概念,并在此基础上分析了微观网络的驱动因素、地位和结构以及相互关系。对于战略网络的形成理论界存在不同的观点:网络战略观和伙伴战略观。根据网络战略观,公司应该在不同的微观战略网络中,主动地进行选择,由此本文提出了“微观网络吸引力—竞争能力矩阵”模型,然后分析了网络的动态演化动因。
综合前述战略网络对公司绩效影响机制模型以及宏观战略网络模型和微观网络模型,本文提出了构建公司网络战略的一般模式。网络战略首先从外部环境主要是产业特性分析开始,接着是公司内部资源和能力分析,特别是出于不同生命周期的公司在资源需求和能力方面的差异分析。在此基础上形成公司的网络战略目标。在对现有战略网络进行了解的基础上,明确公司的战略网络角色定位,制定网络战略并实施,最后对战略网络进行管理。
在建立了相关理论模型以后,本文对理论模型进行了实例分析,选定了我国证券公司在股票IPO承销中形成的战略网络。在特定的股票发行中,投资银行建立承销团共同创造市场和分销公司证券,在长期合作中形成战略网络。他们在网络中处于不同的地位,这将对他们的承销能力和绩效产生重大影响。通过宏观战略网络角色定位模型将参与IPO的投资银行进行了分类,并以两个不同角色定位的公司为例,揭示了不同公司采用不同网络角色定位的条件和原因。
最后是全文总结与研究展望,概括了本文的基本思路、框架和创新之处,并说明了本文的不足之处,对战略网络的未来研究方向提出了建议。
The ways of creating economic value have been fundamentally changing and the progress of the change has been quickened by the complexity of knowledge and technology, intensified global competition and swift development of the digital information technology. Along with more and more detailed division of labor in production and service trades, an individual company, even a major multinational can not internally master all the relevant activities of the value chain from product innovation to customer care based on only its own ability, moreover it is not economically sensible for them to try. In consequence, it has become a reasonable choice to cooperate between firms and other social actors, provide the resources and capabilities that the other party needs, and gradually create the increasingly strategic network in which various economic benefits linked closely. The strategic networks of firms are thought of a better adaptability to the present knowledge-rich age and environment because of they have an information-processing capacity superior to the market and hierarchical organizations, and more flexible supervisory mechanism, furthermore, the networks have taken a leading position in the economic and social innovation. In recent years increasingly high collaborative frequency among the firms including company alliance has made the firms to be internally embedded with the members of other relevant organizations within one of social, professional, and exchanging networks.
It is universally recognized that a firm, as an autonomous entity, possesses a competitive advantage due to its external and internal industrial resources and capabilities. However, the viewpoint that a firm is only regarded as an isolated participant in a strategic network is unilateral and inadequate. Many scholars consider that every net structure has an important influence on the strategic activities of the firms imbedded in it and further on their achievements. The earliest theory of corporate network started from social network study, which researched the influence of net structure hollow and net density on participants in the net. The following studies of strategic network continue to use the same thinking framework, but put their stress on the functions of characteristics of the network itself to the activities and achievements of the embedded firms and, however, it seems not enough that the study on the network position of the embedded firms influence the firms, and it also lacks the support of substantial evidence. According to different positions of the embedded firms in strategic network, this paper divides them into different roles and expounds the effects of these roles to the behaviors and achievements of embedded firms, then put forward the embedded firms’patterns in locating roles, and further analyzes and demonstrates the strategic network formed in the course of selling stocks by underwriting syndicates for acting as sales which consists of investment banks in China.
This paper is composed of the following parts:
Chaper1 first describes the formation and development of strategic network. The view that taking firms as atomistic actors competing for profits against each other in an impersonal marketplace is increasingly inadequate. Firms are embedded in networks of social, professional, and exchange relationships with other organizational actors. Strategic network has very important effect on embedded firms. The purpose of this paper is to find out how network location influence corporate behavior and performance. Last, the significance and methods are presented.
Chaper2 present the basic theory of strategic networks. The base of strategic network is corporate cooperation. There are four fundamental views about corporate cooperation: transaction cost theory, resource-based view, organization learning theory and social network theory. These four theories try to explain the formation mechanism of strategic network from different point of views and supported partly by demonstration.
Charper3 summarizes studies on strategic network,corporate resource, capability, learning and reputation has connection with strategic network and their interconnects are main topics in strategic network study. Different basic theories analyze the interconnection between strategic network and firm behavior and performance.
Chapter4 introduces the location parameters of the network. Nodes in network have three centrality parameters: degree, closeness and betweenness. Each parameter has its own meaning and math formula. Then the paper discusses the interconnection between centrality and other net parameters and structural holes in social network and centrality influence on firm performance is discussed. Then eight roles are defined according to firm location in network. Five of them are named as dominant, edge person, embedded person, searcher and broker. A different role an actor plays affects his behavior and performance. Macro strategic network model is built and relation between network density and macro strategic network is analyzed.
Chapter5 first introduces industry cluster and then introduces two different cooperation strategies. A micro network role model is presented. A matrix model is made to show relationship between micro network and corporate resource and capability.
Chaper6 presents a pattern to form a network strategy. Firstly industry and firm are analyzed, then the goal for network strategy is determined. Last the strategy network governance is analyzed.
Chaper7 analyzes an example in IPO underwriting syndicates. In IPO investment banks always build underwriting syndicates to make market and distribute shares and an underwriting network is formed in a long period. Investment banks are positioned in different location in underwriting network.
Chaper8 summarizes the basic theory and innovation points in this paper and points out the future orientation in strategic network study.
许多学者认为不同的网络结构对内嵌其中的公司的战略行为有重要的影响并进一步影响公司的绩效。最早关于公司网络的理论始于对社会关系网络的研究,主要考虑网络的结构空洞以及网络密度对网络参与人的影响。其后的公司战略网络的研究基本上也沿用了这一思维构架,它们的重点在于研究网络本身的特征对内嵌公司行为和绩效的影响机制,而对内嵌公司所处网络地位对公司影响的研究则显得不足,并且缺乏实证支持。本文针对这一不足,按照内嵌公司在战略网络中所处地位的不同,建立了宏观战略网络角色定位模型,分析了这些不同的角色定位对公司行为与绩效的影响。然后,在对微观战略网络的分析基础上,提出了“微观网络吸引力—竞争能力矩阵”模型。在此基础上,提出了公司构建网络战略的模式,并对我国投资银行组成的承销团在承销股票时所形成的战略网络进行了分析。
本文首先对公司战略网络的形成和发展做了一个描述。将公司看作孤立“原子”而不和其他公司发生联系的想法是不合适的。在一个更宏观的世界里,公司内嵌在和其他参与人一起组成的一个社会的、专业的和交换的关系的网络中,因此战略网络对公司的战略行为有重要影响作用。在对本文所讨论的问题以及研究目的和意义进行了说明以后,阐述了文章的内容和创新点,最后对本文的研究方法做了说明。
对公司战略网络进行了研究的基础来源于四个主要理论。战略网络形成的基础是公司间的合作,对战略网络的研究先从公司间的合作原理开始,主要有四种不同的观点:交易成本理论、资源能力理论、组织学习理论以及社会网络理论。四种理论从不同的角度对公司网络的形成机制进行了有益的尝试,并且部分地得到实证支持。公司网络基础理论将有助于分析不同网络以及处于网络不同地位公司的行为。本文对战略网络文献进行了总结并指出现有战略研究的不足之处。
为了建立了战略网络对公司行为与绩效影响机制模型,本文研究了战略网络与公司资源之间的关系,通过对资源的研究,可以得出公司战略网络成为公司的资源结论。公司网络战略也成为公司获得能力的重要途径。对公司战略联盟与战略网络关系的研究表明战略联盟是战略网络的出发点,战略联盟的理论可以在一定条件下解释战略网络的特点,特别是战略联盟对公司行为和绩效的影响机制可以应用到战略网络的研究上。由此本文建立了战略网络对公司行为与绩效的影响机制模型。
从社会网络理论的观点来看,内嵌公司即是网络中的节点。网络的节点在网络中的中心性有三个参数:中心度、紧密度和中间性,它们具有不同意义和数学表达公式,本文讨论了中心性与网络其他参数以及社会网络中所研究的结构空洞的关系。按照公司所处战略网络中不同的地位,本文以中心性的三个参数为维度建立了宏观战略网络角色定位模型,将公司的在网络中的角色分为8类,主要包括主导者、边缘人、深入者、探索者和中间人这5种,分析了战略网络对不同宏观战略网络角色定位的公司的行为与绩效产生的影响。
在建立了宏观战略网络角色定位模型以后,本文进一步从产业集群的角度入手,建立了微观网络的概念,并在此基础上分析了微观网络的驱动因素、地位和结构以及相互关系。对于战略网络的形成理论界存在不同的观点:网络战略观和伙伴战略观。根据网络战略观,公司应该在不同的微观战略网络中,主动地进行选择,由此本文提出了“微观网络吸引力—竞争能力矩阵”模型,然后分析了网络的动态演化动因。
综合前述战略网络对公司绩效影响机制模型以及宏观战略网络模型和微观网络模型,本文提出了构建公司网络战略的一般模式。网络战略首先从外部环境主要是产业特性分析开始,接着是公司内部资源和能力分析,特别是出于不同生命周期的公司在资源需求和能力方面的差异分析。在此基础上形成公司的网络战略目标。在对现有战略网络进行了解的基础上,明确公司的战略网络角色定位,制定网络战略并实施,最后对战略网络进行管理。
在建立了相关理论模型以后,本文对理论模型进行了实例分析,选定了我国证券公司在股票IPO承销中形成的战略网络。在特定的股票发行中,投资银行建立承销团共同创造市场和分销公司证券,在长期合作中形成战略网络。他们在网络中处于不同的地位,这将对他们的承销能力和绩效产生重大影响。通过宏观战略网络角色定位模型将参与IPO的投资银行进行了分类,并以两个不同角色定位的公司为例,揭示了不同公司采用不同网络角色定位的条件和原因。
最后是全文总结与研究展望,概括了本文的基本思路、框架和创新之处,并说明了本文的不足之处,对战略网络的未来研究方向提出了建议。
The ways of creating economic value have been fundamentally changing and the progress of the change has been quickened by the complexity of knowledge and technology, intensified global competition and swift development of the digital information technology. Along with more and more detailed division of labor in production and service trades, an individual company, even a major multinational can not internally master all the relevant activities of the value chain from product innovation to customer care based on only its own ability, moreover it is not economically sensible for them to try. In consequence, it has become a reasonable choice to cooperate between firms and other social actors, provide the resources and capabilities that the other party needs, and gradually create the increasingly strategic network in which various economic benefits linked closely. The strategic networks of firms are thought of a better adaptability to the present knowledge-rich age and environment because of they have an information-processing capacity superior to the market and hierarchical organizations, and more flexible supervisory mechanism, furthermore, the networks have taken a leading position in the economic and social innovation. In recent years increasingly high collaborative frequency among the firms including company alliance has made the firms to be internally embedded with the members of other relevant organizations within one of social, professional, and exchanging networks.
It is universally recognized that a firm, as an autonomous entity, possesses a competitive advantage due to its external and internal industrial resources and capabilities. However, the viewpoint that a firm is only regarded as an isolated participant in a strategic network is unilateral and inadequate. Many scholars consider that every net structure has an important influence on the strategic activities of the firms imbedded in it and further on their achievements. The earliest theory of corporate network started from social network study, which researched the influence of net structure hollow and net density on participants in the net. The following studies of strategic network continue to use the same thinking framework, but put their stress on the functions of characteristics of the network itself to the activities and achievements of the embedded firms and, however, it seems not enough that the study on the network position of the embedded firms influence the firms, and it also lacks the support of substantial evidence. According to different positions of the embedded firms in strategic network, this paper divides them into different roles and expounds the effects of these roles to the behaviors and achievements of embedded firms, then put forward the embedded firms’patterns in locating roles, and further analyzes and demonstrates the strategic network formed in the course of selling stocks by underwriting syndicates for acting as sales which consists of investment banks in China.
This paper is composed of the following parts:
Chaper1 first describes the formation and development of strategic network. The view that taking firms as atomistic actors competing for profits against each other in an impersonal marketplace is increasingly inadequate. Firms are embedded in networks of social, professional, and exchange relationships with other organizational actors. Strategic network has very important effect on embedded firms. The purpose of this paper is to find out how network location influence corporate behavior and performance. Last, the significance and methods are presented.
Chaper2 present the basic theory of strategic networks. The base of strategic network is corporate cooperation. There are four fundamental views about corporate cooperation: transaction cost theory, resource-based view, organization learning theory and social network theory. These four theories try to explain the formation mechanism of strategic network from different point of views and supported partly by demonstration.
Charper3 summarizes studies on strategic network,corporate resource, capability, learning and reputation has connection with strategic network and their interconnects are main topics in strategic network study. Different basic theories analyze the interconnection between strategic network and firm behavior and performance.
Chapter4 introduces the location parameters of the network. Nodes in network have three centrality parameters: degree, closeness and betweenness. Each parameter has its own meaning and math formula. Then the paper discusses the interconnection between centrality and other net parameters and structural holes in social network and centrality influence on firm performance is discussed. Then eight roles are defined according to firm location in network. Five of them are named as dominant, edge person, embedded person, searcher and broker. A different role an actor plays affects his behavior and performance. Macro strategic network model is built and relation between network density and macro strategic network is analyzed.
Chapter5 first introduces industry cluster and then introduces two different cooperation strategies. A micro network role model is presented. A matrix model is made to show relationship between micro network and corporate resource and capability.
Chaper6 presents a pattern to form a network strategy. Firstly industry and firm are analyzed, then the goal for network strategy is determined. Last the strategy network governance is analyzed.
Chaper7 analyzes an example in IPO underwriting syndicates. In IPO investment banks always build underwriting syndicates to make market and distribute shares and an underwriting network is formed in a long period. Investment banks are positioned in different location in underwriting network.
Chaper8 summarizes the basic theory and innovation points in this paper and points out the future orientation in strategic network study.
引文
[1] Achrol RS,Kotler P. Marketing in the network economy. J Mark 1999,63:146– 63 [Special Issue].
[2] Argyris C,Schon D A. Organization learning: A theory of action perspertive. MA: Addison-Wesley,1978.
[3] Ahuja G. Collaboration networks,structural holes and innovation: a longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly,2000,45: 425–455.
[4] Ahuja G. The duality of collaboration: inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal,2000,Special Issue 21(3): 317–343.
[5] Anderson J,Ha°kansson H,Johanson J. Dyadic business relationships within a business network context. J Mark ,1994;58:1– 15.
[6] Ann E.,Wenpin T. Niche and performance:The moderating role of network embeddedness. Strat. Mgmt. J.,2005,26: 219–238
[7] Anthony G.,Paul W.B. The effect of alliance network diversity on multinational enterprise performance. Strat. Mgmt. J.,2005,26: 333–354
[8] Arthur , B. W. Competing technologies and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal,1989,99(394),pp. 116–131.
[9] Axelsson B,Easton G,editors. Industrial networks: a new view of reality. London: Routledge,1992.
[10] Baker,W. E.. Market networks and corporate behavior. American Journal of Sociology,1990,96: 589–625.
[11] Barney,J. B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,1991,17(1),pp. 99–120.
[12] Barney,J. B. Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: a ten-yearretrospective on the resourcebased view. Journal of Management,2001,27(6): 643–650.
[13] Barney,J. B. and M. H. Hansen .Trustworthiness as a form of competitive advantage .Strategic Management Journal,1994,Winter Special Issue,15,pp. 175–190.
[14] Baum JAC,Calabrese T,Silverman BS. Don’t go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal,Special Issue,2000,21(3): 267–294.
[15] Baum,J. A. C. and J. Dutton . The embeddedness of strategy. In P. Shrivastava,A. S. Huff and J. E. Dutton (eds.),Advances in Strategic Management. Vol. 13. JAI Press,Greenwich,CT,1996,pp. 3–40
[16] Baum , J. A. C. and H. J. Korn. Dynamics of dyadic competitive interaction.Strategic. Management Journal,1999,20(3),pp. 251–278
[17] Baum,J. A. C.,T. Calabrese and B. S. Silverman .Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’performance in Canadian biotechnology.Strategic Management Journal,2000,21,Special Issue,pp. 267–294.
[18] Beckman C,Haunschild P. Network learning: the effects of partners’heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly ,2002,47: 92–124.
[19] Bill M.,Alfred M. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strat.Mgmt. J.,2005,26: 1033–1055
[20] Bosch F. A. J. V.,Volberda H. W.,Boer,M. D. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science,1999,10: 551–568.
[21] Borgatti SP,Everett MG.. Notions of position in social network analysis. Sociological Methodology,1992,22:1–35.
[22] Burt R. S. Corporate Profits and Cooperation. Academic Press: New York,1983
[23] Burt R. S.,Knez M. Kinds of third-party effects on trust. Rationality and Society,1995,7: 225–292.
[24] Burt R. S. Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. American Journal of Sociology,1987,92: 1287–1335.
[25] Burt R. S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press,Cambridge,MA,1992.
[26] Burt R. S. The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42(2): 339–365.
[27] Burt R. S.. The network structure of social capital. In Research in Organizational Behavior,2000,Vol. 22,Sutton RI,Staw BM (eds). JAI Press: Greenwich,CT;345–423.
[28] Burt R. S. Toward a structural theory of action. Network models of social structures,perception and action. 1985,New York: Academic Press.
[29] Burt R. S. Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In Social Capital: Theory and Research,Lin N,Cook K,Burt RS (eds). Aldine de Gruyter: Chicago,IL; 2001,31–56.
[30] Castells M. The rise of the network society. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell,1996.
[31] Caves,R. and M. E. Porter. From entry barriers to mobility barriers: Conjectural decisions and contrived deterrence to new competition. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1977,May,pp. 241–261.
[32] Chatman J,Polzer J,Barsade S,Neale M. Being different yet feeling similar: the influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1998,43: 749–781.
[33] Chung SA,Singh H,Lee K. Complementarity,status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal ,2000,21(1): 1–22.
[34] Coase R.E. The nature of the firm. Economica 1937,4: 386–405.
[35] Coase R.E. Industrial organization: a proposal for research. In Policy Issues andResearch Opportunities in Industrial Organization,Fuchs VR (ed.). National Bureau of Economic Research: New York; 1972,59–73.
[36] Coase R.E. The nature of the firm: influence.Journal of Law,Economics,and Organization.1988,4:33–48.
[37] Coase R.E. Accounting and the theory of the firm. Journal of Accounting and Economics. 1990,12: 3–13.
[38] Cohen WM,Levinthal DA. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35: 128–152.
[39] Cohen WM,Levinthal DA. Fortune favors the prepared firm. Management Science,1994,40(2): 227–251.
[40] Coleman JS. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,1988,94:(Supplement): 95–120.
[41] Coleman JS. Foundations of Social Theory. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press: Cambridge,MA,1990.
[42] Coleman,J. S. Rational action,social networks,and the emergence of norms. In C. Calhoun , M.W. Meyer,& W. R. Scott (Eds.) , Structures of power and constraint,1990,91–112. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[43] Dacin,M. T. Ventresca,M. J.,& Beal,B. D. The embeddedness of organizations: Dialogue directions. Journal of Management,1999,25: 317–356.
[44] Darr E,Kurtzberg T. An investigation of partner similarity dimensions on knowledge transfer. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes ,2000,82: 28–44.
[45] Doreian P,Woodard K.L. Fixed list versus snowball selection of social networks. Social Science Research ,1992,21: 216–233.
[46] Dyer J.H. Effective interfirm collaboration: how transactors minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7): 535–556.
[47] Dyer J. H. Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: Evidence from the auto industry. Strategic Management Journal,1996,17(4),pp. 271–291.
[48] Dyer J.H. Singh. The relational view: Cooperative strategies and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(4),pp. 660–679.
[49] Dyer J. H.,Nobeoka K. Creating and maintaining a high-performance knowledge sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal,2000 ,21(3):345–368.
[50] Dyer J.H. Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: evidence form the auto industry. Strateg Manage J 1996;17(4):271– 92.
[51] Eisenhardt KM,Martin JA. Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manage J ,2000;21:1105– 21.
[52] Foss N. Networks , capabilities , and competitive advantage. Scand J Manag,1999;15(1):1– 16.
[53] Freeman L.C. A set of measures of centrality based on betweeness. Sociometry,1977,40: 35–41.
[54] Freeman L. C. Centrality in social networks: I. Conceptual clarifications. Social Networks,1979,1: 215–239.
[55] Friedkin N.E. Information flow through strong and weak ties in interorganizational social networks. Social Networks,1982,3: 273–285.
[56] Galaskiewicz J. and A Zaheer. Networks of competitive advantage. In S. Andrews and D. Knoke (eds.),Research in the Sociology of Organizations. JAI Press,Greenwich,CT,1999,pp. 237–261.
[57] Gomes-Casseres,B. Group versus group: How alliance networks compete. Harvard Business Review,1994,72(4),pp. 62–74.
[58] Grapher G,editor. The embedded firm. On the socio-economics of industrialnetworks. Great Britain: Routledge; 1993.
[59] Gnyawali D.R.,Madhavan R. Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a structural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Review,2001,26(3):431–445.
[60] Granovetter M.S. Business groups. In Handbook of Economic Sociology,Smelser NJ,Swedberg R(eds). Princeton University Press: Princeton,NJ,1994,453–475.
[61] Granovetter M.S. Economic action and social structure: A theory of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,1985,91,pp. 481–510.
[62] [62] Granovetter M.S. Problems of explanation in economic sociology. In Networks and Organizations,Nohria N,Eccles RG (eds). Harvard Business School Press: Boston,MA; 25–56,1992.
[63] Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology,1973,6: 1360–1380.
[64] Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited. In Sociological Theory , Randall C (ed). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco ,CA;1983,201–233.
[65] 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: 911–945.
[66] Gulati R. Social structure and alliance formation pattern: A longitudinal analysis.Administrative Science Quarterly,1995,40,pp. 619–642.
[67] Gulati R. Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choices. Academy of Management Journal,1995 35,pp. 85–112.
[68] Gulati R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(4),pp. 293–317.
[69] Gulati R. Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation.Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(5),pp. 397–420.
[70] Gulati R.,T Khanna and N Nohria. Unilateral commitments and the importance of process in Alliances.Sloan Management Review,1994 35(3),pp. 61–69.
[71] Gulati R. and M Gargiulo. Where do interorganizational networks come from. American Journal of Sociology,1999,104(5),pp. 1439–1493.
[72] Gulati R.,H Singh. The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,43,pp. 781–814.
[73] Hakansson,H. and Snehota,I. Developing Relationships in Business Networks[M]. London:Routledge,1995.
[74] Hambrick D. C. Top management groups: A conceptual integration and reconsideration of the team label. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.),Research in organizational behavior,1994,Vol. 16,171–214. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press.
[75] Hambrick D. C.,Mason P. A. 1984. Upper echelon: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review,1984,9: 193–206.
[76] Hamel G.,Y. L. Doz ,C. K. Prahalad. Collaborate with your competitors—and win’,Harvard Business Review,1989,67(1),pp. 133–139.
[77] Hamel G. Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal,1991,12:83– 103.
[78] Hargadon A,Sutton R. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly ,1997,42: 716–749.
[79] Hitt M,Dacin T,Levitas E,Arregle Anca Borza J-L. Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. Academic Management Journal,2000,43:449– 67.
[80] Jarillo J.C. On strategic networks. Strategic Managemet Journal,1988,9.
[81] Jarillo J.C. Strategic networks: creating the borderless organization. Oxford(UK):Butterworth,1993.
[82] Jones C , Hesterly W.S. , Borgatti SP. A general theory of network governance:exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Acad Manage Rev,1997,22(4):911–45.
[83] Khanna T.,R Gulati,,N Nohria. The dynamics of learning alliances: Competition,cooperation,and relative scope. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(3),pp. 193–210.
[84] Kogut B. Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management Journal,1988,9(4),pp. 319–332.
[85] Kogut B. The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal,2000,Special Issue 21: 405–425.
[86] Kogut B,Kulatilaka N. Operating flexibility,global manufacturing,and the option value of a multinational network. Management Scienc,1994,e 40: 123–139.
[87] Koka B,Prescott J. Strategic alliances as social capital: a multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal ,2002,23(9): 795–816.
[88] Krackhardt , D. The strength of strong ties: The importance of Philos in organizations. In N. Nohria & R.G. Eccles (Eds.),Networks and organizations: Structure,form,and action:,1992,216–239. Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press
[89] Krackhardt D.,Stern R. N. Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly,1998,51: 123–140.
[90] Krackhardt,J. Hanson,Informal networks: the company behind the chart,Harvard Business Review ,1993,July–August,104–111.
[91] Leik RK. New directions for network exchange theory: strategic manipulation of network linkages.Social Networks ,1992,14: 309–323.
[92] Levae`ic R , Mitchell J , editors. Markets , hierarchies and networks. The Coordination of Social Life. Great Britain: SAGE Publications; 1994.
[93] Lewin A.,Volberda H. Prolegomena on coevolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms. Organization Science,1999,10: 519–534.
[94] Lin N. Social networks and status attainment.Annual Review of Sociology,1999,25: 467–487.
[95] Lin N,Ensel W,Vaughn J. Social resources and strength of ties: structural factors in occupational status attainment. American Sociological Review,1981 ,46:393–405.
[96] Loeser B.O. How to set up a cooperation network in the production industry. Ind Mark Manage ,1999,28:453–65.
[97] Lundall,Bengt-Ake. National Innovation System of Economic Learning: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London:Printer Publishers. 1988.
[98] Madhavan R. Does network structure really matter? A meta-analytic synthesis of the evidence. Working Paper,Katz Graduate School of Business,University of Pittsburgh,2001
[99] Madhavan R,Koka B,Prescott J. Networks in transition: how industry events (re)shape interfirmrelationships. Strategic Management Journal ,1998,19:439–459.
[100] March J G.,H Simon. Organization . Blackwell Business,1959
[101] Mattsson L-G. Management of strategic change in a‘‘market-as-networks perspective’’. In: Pettigrew A,editor. The management of strategic change. London: Blackwell,1987,p. 234– 56.
[102] Miles R.E.,Snow C.C.,Miles G. TheFuture.org. Long Range Plan 2000;33(3):297– 474.
[103] Miller C,Burke L,Glick W. Cognitive diversity among upper echelon executives: implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(1): 39–58.
[104] McEvily B,Marcus A. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitivecapabilities. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26: 1033–1055
[105] McEvily B.,A Zaheer. Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabili-ties.Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(12),pp. 1133–1158.
[106] Miller D. The embeddedness of corporate strategy: Isomorphism vs. differentiation. In J. A. C. Baum & J. E. Dutton (Eds.),Advances in strategic management,1996,Vol. 13. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press
[107] Miller C,Burke L,Glick W. Cognitive diversity among upper echelon executives: implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(1): 39–58
[108] Nahapiet J.,Ghoshal S. Social capital,intellectual capital,and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review,1998,23: 242–266.
[109] Naude P,Turnbull PW,editors. Network dynamics in international marketing. Oxford: Pergamon; 1998.
[110] Nohria N,Garcia-Pont C. Global strategic linkages and industry structure. Strategic Management Journal,Summer Special Issue,1991,12: 105–124.
[111] Nohria N,Eccles RG,editors. Networks and organizations: structure,form,and action. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press; 1992.
[112] Nohria & R.Eccles (Eds.),Networks and organizations: Structure form,and action: 311–347. Boston: Harvard University,1992.
[113] O’Reilly C,Caldwell D,Barnett W. Work group demography,social integration,and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly,1989,34: 21–37.
[114] Palich L,Cardinal L,Miller C. Curvilinearity in the diversification–performance linkage: an examination of over three decades of research. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3): 155–174.
[115] Pelled L,Eisenhardt K,Xin K. Exploring the black box: an analysis of work group diversity,conflict,and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,44: 1–28.
[116] Peter M. Structural vs relational embeddedness:social capital and managerial performance. Strat.Mgmt.J.,2005,26: 1129–1151
[117] Peteraf M. A. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal,1993,14(3),pp. 179–191.
[118] Peteraf M. ,M. Shanley. Getting to know you: A theory of strategic group identity. Strategic Management Journal,1997,Summer Special Issue,18,pp. 165–186.
[119] Pfeffer,J.,& Salancik,G. R. The external control of organizations. New York: Harper and Row,1978.
[120] Penrose E. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Basil Blackford: Oxford,1959
[121] Piercy N.F.,Cravens D.W. The network paradigm and the marketing organization: developing a new management agenda. Eur J Mark 1995; 29(3):7–34.
[122] Podolny J. Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Administrative Science Quarterly,1994,39: 458–483.
[123] Podolny,J. M. A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology,1993,98(4), i. 829–872.
[124] Prahalad C,Bettis R. The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal,1986,7(6): 485–501.
[125] Porter,M. E. Competitive Strategy. Free Press,New York,1980
[126] Porter M.E. The structure within industries and companies’performance. Review of Economics and Statistics,1979,214–227.
[127] Porter M.E. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press;1990.
[128] Portes A. Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology,Annual Review of Sociology,1998,24:1–24.
[129] Powell W. W. Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior,1990,12: 295–336.
[130] Powell W. W.,K. Koput,L. Smith-Doerr. Interorganizational collaboration and thelocus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology.Administrative Science Quarterly,1996,41,pp. 116–145.
[131] Powell W.W.,Smith-Doerr L. Networks and economic life. In The Handbook of Economic Sociology,Smelser NJ,Swedberg R (eds). Princeton University Press: Princeton,NJ;1994,368–402.
[132] Reagans R,Zuckerman E.W. Networks,diversity,and productivity: the social capital of R&D teams. Organization Science,2001,12(4): 502–517.
[133] Rodan S,Galunic C. More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal ,2004,25(6): 541–562.
[134] 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,Special Issue 21: 369–386.
[135] Rowley T,Baum JAC. The dynamics of network positions and strategies. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meetings,Denver,CO,2002,August.
[136] Rowley,Baum. Sophistication of interfirm network strategies in the Canadian investment banking industry Scand. J. Mgmt,2004,20,103–124
[137] Rowley , Baum , Shipilov . Competing in groups . Manage.Decis.Econ. 2004, 25:453-473
[138] Rumelt R. P.,D. E. Schendel,D. J. Teece (eds.) . Fundamental Issues in Strategy Research: A Research Agenda. Harvard Business School Press,Boston,MA,1994
[139] Snow CC. Managing 21st century network organizations. Organ Dyn,1992; 20(3):5–20.
[140] Teece D.J. Managing Intellectual Capital. Great Britain: Biddles Ltd.,Guildford and King’s Lynn; 2000.
[141] Teece D.J.Competition,cooperation and innovation.Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1992,18: 1–25.
[142] Teece D.J.,Pisano G. The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1994,3: 537–556.
[143] Teece D.J.,Pisano G,Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7): 509–534.
[144] Tim J. R.et al. Competing in Groups. Manage. Decis. Econ,2004,25: 453–471
[145] Timothy J,R.,J.A.C. Baum. Sophistication of interfirm network strategies in the Canadian investment banking industry. Scand. J. Mgmt. 20 ,2004,103–124
[146] Thompson G,Frances J,Levae`ic R,Mitchell J,editors. Markets,hierarchies and networks. The Coordination of Social Life. Great Britain: SAGE Publications,1994.
[147] Tsai W,Ghoshal S. Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal,1998,41(4): 464–476.
[148] Uzzi B. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: how social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review,1999,64: 481–505.
[149] Uzzi B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: the network effect. American Sociological Review,1996,61: 674–698.
[150] Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42: 35–67
[151] Walker G,Kogut B,Shan W. Social capital,structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science ,1997,8(2): 109–125
[152] Walker G.. Strategy and network formation. In Advances in Strategic Management,1998,Vol. 15.
[153] Walker G. Network position and cognition in a computer software firm. Administrative Science Quarterly,1985,30: 103–130.
[154] Wang zongjun and Cheng guo. A Winning Strategy for Chinese E-Business.TheJournal of Corporate Accounting & Finance,2006,17(6) :17-23
[155] Watson W,Kumar K,Michaelsen L. Cultural diversity’s impact on integration process and performance: comparing homogenous and diverse workgroups. Academy of Management Journal,1993,36:590–602.
[156] Wellman,B. Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In B. Wellman & S.D. Berkowitz (Eds.),Social structures: A network approach,1991,19–61. Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press
[157] Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal ,1984,5(2): 171–180.
[158] Williamson O.E. Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly,1991,36: 269–296
[159] Williamson,O. E.The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Free Press,New York,1985.
[160] [160] Williamson,O. E. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives.Administrative Science Quarterly , 1991,36: 269–296.
[161] Williamson O.E. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. Free Press: New York,1975
[162] Williamson O.E. Strategy research: governance and competence perspectives. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(12): 1087–1108.
[163] Williamson O.E. Strategizing , economizing , and economic organization. StrategicManagement Journal,1991,Winter Special Issue 12: 75–94.
[164] Williamson OE. Technology and transaction cost economics. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1988,10: 355–363.
[165] Zahra S.A.,George G. Absorptive capacity: a review,reconceptualization,and extension. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(2): 185–203.
[166] Zahra,S. A. Governance,ownership,and corporate entrepreneurship: Themoderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal,1996,39: 1713–1735.
[167] Zaheer A.,N. Venkatraman. Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange. Strategic Management Journal,1995,16(5),pp. 373–392.
[168] Zaheer A. ,S. Zaheer. Catching the wave: Alertness,responsiveness,and market influence in global electronic networks. Management Science,1997,43(11),pp. 1493–1509.
[169] Zajac E. Commentary on‘Alliances and networks’by R. Gulati. Strategic Management Journal,1998,Special Issue 19: 319–321.
[170] Zenger T,Lawrence B. Organizational demography: the differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal ,1989,32: 353–376.
[171]蔡继荣,胡配.基于合作溢出的战略联盟不稳定性研究.中国管理科学,2005,4:142-148
[172]高展军,李垣.战略网络结构对企业技术创新的影响研究.科学学研究,2006,6:474-479
[173]龚毅,谢恩.中外企业战略联盟知识转移效率的实例分析.科学学研究,2005,8:500-505
[174]成果,王宗军,柯昌文.实物期权在制造系统中的应用.价值工程:2007. 10
[175]缪匡华.企业动态联盟的关键要素研究.管理评论.2005,9:43-48
[176]黎群.航空公司战略联盟的经济动因分析.管理工程学报,2005,2:99-103
[177]李维安等.网络组织:组织发展新趋势.北京:经济科学出版社,2006.6
[178]李婉萍,罗贤栋.提高我国证券公司竞争力的途径.财会研究,2005,7:47-48
[179]李焕荣,林健.战略网络研究的新进展.经济管理,2004,4
[180]林健,李焕荣.企业在战略网络中的学习策略研究.系统工程,2004,1:39-42
[181]聂清慨.基于心理契约视觉的网络组织文化重构研究.管理评论,2005,7
[182]彭本红,吴晓伟,孙绍容.动态联盟的复杂性及其综合集成研讨厅.科研管理,2005,9:137-140
[183]祁红梅,黄瑞华.知识型动态联盟信任缺失与对策研究.研究与发展管理,2005,2:55-59.
[184]任新建,项保华.链式战略联盟合作困境及突破探析.科研管理,2005,9:68-72
[185]王凤彬,刘松博.战略联盟中的风险及其控制.管理评论,2005,6:50-54
[186]阮平南,刘高艳.基于耗散结构理论的战略网络.北京工业大学学报.2007.8.:28-31.
[187]吴晓波,杜健,韦影.基于价值网络的战略联盟研究.科学学研究,2005,2:59-63
[188]吴翠花,万威武.基于组织学习的联盟网络形成机理研究.科学学研究,2005,10:672-676
[189]项后军..产业集群、核心企业与战略网络.当代财经,2007,7:86-89
[190]谢洪明.战略网络结构对企业动态竞争行为的影响研究.科研管理,2005,3:104-112
[191]谢洪明,吴隆增,王成,葛志.组织学习的前因后果:一个新的理论框架.科学学与科学技术管理2006.8:161-168
[192]张维迎.博弈论与信息.上海:上海人民出版社,1996(2002重印)
[193]郑胜华,徐金发.基于整合观的联盟管理研究.科研管理,2005,7:105-108
[2] Argyris C,Schon D A. Organization learning: A theory of action perspertive. MA: Addison-Wesley,1978.
[3] Ahuja G. Collaboration networks,structural holes and innovation: a longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly,2000,45: 425–455.
[4] Ahuja G. The duality of collaboration: inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal,2000,Special Issue 21(3): 317–343.
[5] Anderson J,Ha°kansson H,Johanson J. Dyadic business relationships within a business network context. J Mark ,1994;58:1– 15.
[6] Ann E.,Wenpin T. Niche and performance:The moderating role of network embeddedness. Strat. Mgmt. J.,2005,26: 219–238
[7] Anthony G.,Paul W.B. The effect of alliance network diversity on multinational enterprise performance. Strat. Mgmt. J.,2005,26: 333–354
[8] Arthur , B. W. Competing technologies and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal,1989,99(394),pp. 116–131.
[9] Axelsson B,Easton G,editors. Industrial networks: a new view of reality. London: Routledge,1992.
[10] Baker,W. E.. Market networks and corporate behavior. American Journal of Sociology,1990,96: 589–625.
[11] Barney,J. B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,1991,17(1),pp. 99–120.
[12] Barney,J. B. Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: a ten-yearretrospective on the resourcebased view. Journal of Management,2001,27(6): 643–650.
[13] Barney,J. B. and M. H. Hansen .Trustworthiness as a form of competitive advantage .Strategic Management Journal,1994,Winter Special Issue,15,pp. 175–190.
[14] Baum JAC,Calabrese T,Silverman BS. Don’t go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal,Special Issue,2000,21(3): 267–294.
[15] Baum,J. A. C. and J. Dutton . The embeddedness of strategy. In P. Shrivastava,A. S. Huff and J. E. Dutton (eds.),Advances in Strategic Management. Vol. 13. JAI Press,Greenwich,CT,1996,pp. 3–40
[16] Baum , J. A. C. and H. J. Korn. Dynamics of dyadic competitive interaction.Strategic. Management Journal,1999,20(3),pp. 251–278
[17] Baum,J. A. C.,T. Calabrese and B. S. Silverman .Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’performance in Canadian biotechnology.Strategic Management Journal,2000,21,Special Issue,pp. 267–294.
[18] Beckman C,Haunschild P. Network learning: the effects of partners’heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly ,2002,47: 92–124.
[19] Bill M.,Alfred M. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strat.Mgmt. J.,2005,26: 1033–1055
[20] Bosch F. A. J. V.,Volberda H. W.,Boer,M. D. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science,1999,10: 551–568.
[21] Borgatti SP,Everett MG.. Notions of position in social network analysis. Sociological Methodology,1992,22:1–35.
[22] Burt R. S. Corporate Profits and Cooperation. Academic Press: New York,1983
[23] Burt R. S.,Knez M. Kinds of third-party effects on trust. Rationality and Society,1995,7: 225–292.
[24] Burt R. S. Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. American Journal of Sociology,1987,92: 1287–1335.
[25] Burt R. S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press,Cambridge,MA,1992.
[26] Burt R. S. The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42(2): 339–365.
[27] Burt R. S.. The network structure of social capital. In Research in Organizational Behavior,2000,Vol. 22,Sutton RI,Staw BM (eds). JAI Press: Greenwich,CT;345–423.
[28] Burt R. S. Toward a structural theory of action. Network models of social structures,perception and action. 1985,New York: Academic Press.
[29] Burt R. S. Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In Social Capital: Theory and Research,Lin N,Cook K,Burt RS (eds). Aldine de Gruyter: Chicago,IL; 2001,31–56.
[30] Castells M. The rise of the network society. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell,1996.
[31] Caves,R. and M. E. Porter. From entry barriers to mobility barriers: Conjectural decisions and contrived deterrence to new competition. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1977,May,pp. 241–261.
[32] Chatman J,Polzer J,Barsade S,Neale M. Being different yet feeling similar: the influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1998,43: 749–781.
[33] Chung SA,Singh H,Lee K. Complementarity,status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal ,2000,21(1): 1–22.
[34] Coase R.E. The nature of the firm. Economica 1937,4: 386–405.
[35] Coase R.E. Industrial organization: a proposal for research. In Policy Issues andResearch Opportunities in Industrial Organization,Fuchs VR (ed.). National Bureau of Economic Research: New York; 1972,59–73.
[36] Coase R.E. The nature of the firm: influence.Journal of Law,Economics,and Organization.1988,4:33–48.
[37] Coase R.E. Accounting and the theory of the firm. Journal of Accounting and Economics. 1990,12: 3–13.
[38] Cohen WM,Levinthal DA. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35: 128–152.
[39] Cohen WM,Levinthal DA. Fortune favors the prepared firm. Management Science,1994,40(2): 227–251.
[40] Coleman JS. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,1988,94:(Supplement): 95–120.
[41] Coleman JS. Foundations of Social Theory. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press: Cambridge,MA,1990.
[42] Coleman,J. S. Rational action,social networks,and the emergence of norms. In C. Calhoun , M.W. Meyer,& W. R. Scott (Eds.) , Structures of power and constraint,1990,91–112. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[43] Dacin,M. T. Ventresca,M. J.,& Beal,B. D. The embeddedness of organizations: Dialogue directions. Journal of Management,1999,25: 317–356.
[44] Darr E,Kurtzberg T. An investigation of partner similarity dimensions on knowledge transfer. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes ,2000,82: 28–44.
[45] Doreian P,Woodard K.L. Fixed list versus snowball selection of social networks. Social Science Research ,1992,21: 216–233.
[46] Dyer J.H. Effective interfirm collaboration: how transactors minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7): 535–556.
[47] Dyer J. H. Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: Evidence from the auto industry. Strategic Management Journal,1996,17(4),pp. 271–291.
[48] Dyer J.H. Singh. The relational view: Cooperative strategies and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(4),pp. 660–679.
[49] Dyer J. H.,Nobeoka K. Creating and maintaining a high-performance knowledge sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal,2000 ,21(3):345–368.
[50] Dyer J.H. Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: evidence form the auto industry. Strateg Manage J 1996;17(4):271– 92.
[51] Eisenhardt KM,Martin JA. Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manage J ,2000;21:1105– 21.
[52] Foss N. Networks , capabilities , and competitive advantage. Scand J Manag,1999;15(1):1– 16.
[53] Freeman L.C. A set of measures of centrality based on betweeness. Sociometry,1977,40: 35–41.
[54] Freeman L. C. Centrality in social networks: I. Conceptual clarifications. Social Networks,1979,1: 215–239.
[55] Friedkin N.E. Information flow through strong and weak ties in interorganizational social networks. Social Networks,1982,3: 273–285.
[56] Galaskiewicz J. and A Zaheer. Networks of competitive advantage. In S. Andrews and D. Knoke (eds.),Research in the Sociology of Organizations. JAI Press,Greenwich,CT,1999,pp. 237–261.
[57] Gomes-Casseres,B. Group versus group: How alliance networks compete. Harvard Business Review,1994,72(4),pp. 62–74.
[58] Grapher G,editor. The embedded firm. On the socio-economics of industrialnetworks. Great Britain: Routledge; 1993.
[59] Gnyawali D.R.,Madhavan R. Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a structural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Review,2001,26(3):431–445.
[60] Granovetter M.S. Business groups. In Handbook of Economic Sociology,Smelser NJ,Swedberg R(eds). Princeton University Press: Princeton,NJ,1994,453–475.
[61] Granovetter M.S. Economic action and social structure: A theory of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,1985,91,pp. 481–510.
[62] [62] Granovetter M.S. Problems of explanation in economic sociology. In Networks and Organizations,Nohria N,Eccles RG (eds). Harvard Business School Press: Boston,MA; 25–56,1992.
[63] Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology,1973,6: 1360–1380.
[64] Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited. In Sociological Theory , Randall C (ed). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco ,CA;1983,201–233.
[65] 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: 911–945.
[66] Gulati R. Social structure and alliance formation pattern: A longitudinal analysis.Administrative Science Quarterly,1995,40,pp. 619–642.
[67] Gulati R. Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choices. Academy of Management Journal,1995 35,pp. 85–112.
[68] Gulati R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(4),pp. 293–317.
[69] Gulati R. Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation.Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(5),pp. 397–420.
[70] Gulati R.,T Khanna and N Nohria. Unilateral commitments and the importance of process in Alliances.Sloan Management Review,1994 35(3),pp. 61–69.
[71] Gulati R. and M Gargiulo. Where do interorganizational networks come from. American Journal of Sociology,1999,104(5),pp. 1439–1493.
[72] Gulati R.,H Singh. The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,43,pp. 781–814.
[73] Hakansson,H. and Snehota,I. Developing Relationships in Business Networks[M]. London:Routledge,1995.
[74] Hambrick D. C. Top management groups: A conceptual integration and reconsideration of the team label. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.),Research in organizational behavior,1994,Vol. 16,171–214. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press.
[75] Hambrick D. C.,Mason P. A. 1984. Upper echelon: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review,1984,9: 193–206.
[76] Hamel G.,Y. L. Doz ,C. K. Prahalad. Collaborate with your competitors—and win’,Harvard Business Review,1989,67(1),pp. 133–139.
[77] Hamel G. Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal,1991,12:83– 103.
[78] Hargadon A,Sutton R. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly ,1997,42: 716–749.
[79] Hitt M,Dacin T,Levitas E,Arregle Anca Borza J-L. Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. Academic Management Journal,2000,43:449– 67.
[80] Jarillo J.C. On strategic networks. Strategic Managemet Journal,1988,9.
[81] Jarillo J.C. Strategic networks: creating the borderless organization. Oxford(UK):Butterworth,1993.
[82] Jones C , Hesterly W.S. , Borgatti SP. A general theory of network governance:exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Acad Manage Rev,1997,22(4):911–45.
[83] Khanna T.,R Gulati,,N Nohria. The dynamics of learning alliances: Competition,cooperation,and relative scope. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(3),pp. 193–210.
[84] Kogut B. Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management Journal,1988,9(4),pp. 319–332.
[85] Kogut B. The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal,2000,Special Issue 21: 405–425.
[86] Kogut B,Kulatilaka N. Operating flexibility,global manufacturing,and the option value of a multinational network. Management Scienc,1994,e 40: 123–139.
[87] Koka B,Prescott J. Strategic alliances as social capital: a multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal ,2002,23(9): 795–816.
[88] Krackhardt , D. The strength of strong ties: The importance of Philos in organizations. In N. Nohria & R.G. Eccles (Eds.),Networks and organizations: Structure,form,and action:,1992,216–239. Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press
[89] Krackhardt D.,Stern R. N. Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly,1998,51: 123–140.
[90] Krackhardt,J. Hanson,Informal networks: the company behind the chart,Harvard Business Review ,1993,July–August,104–111.
[91] Leik RK. New directions for network exchange theory: strategic manipulation of network linkages.Social Networks ,1992,14: 309–323.
[92] Levae`ic R , Mitchell J , editors. Markets , hierarchies and networks. The Coordination of Social Life. Great Britain: SAGE Publications; 1994.
[93] Lewin A.,Volberda H. Prolegomena on coevolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms. Organization Science,1999,10: 519–534.
[94] Lin N. Social networks and status attainment.Annual Review of Sociology,1999,25: 467–487.
[95] Lin N,Ensel W,Vaughn J. Social resources and strength of ties: structural factors in occupational status attainment. American Sociological Review,1981 ,46:393–405.
[96] Loeser B.O. How to set up a cooperation network in the production industry. Ind Mark Manage ,1999,28:453–65.
[97] Lundall,Bengt-Ake. National Innovation System of Economic Learning: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London:Printer Publishers. 1988.
[98] Madhavan R. Does network structure really matter? A meta-analytic synthesis of the evidence. Working Paper,Katz Graduate School of Business,University of Pittsburgh,2001
[99] Madhavan R,Koka B,Prescott J. Networks in transition: how industry events (re)shape interfirmrelationships. Strategic Management Journal ,1998,19:439–459.
[100] March J G.,H Simon. Organization . Blackwell Business,1959
[101] Mattsson L-G. Management of strategic change in a‘‘market-as-networks perspective’’. In: Pettigrew A,editor. The management of strategic change. London: Blackwell,1987,p. 234– 56.
[102] Miles R.E.,Snow C.C.,Miles G. TheFuture.org. Long Range Plan 2000;33(3):297– 474.
[103] Miller C,Burke L,Glick W. Cognitive diversity among upper echelon executives: implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(1): 39–58.
[104] McEvily B,Marcus A. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitivecapabilities. Strategic Management Journal,2005,26: 1033–1055
[105] McEvily B.,A Zaheer. Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabili-ties.Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(12),pp. 1133–1158.
[106] Miller D. The embeddedness of corporate strategy: Isomorphism vs. differentiation. In J. A. C. Baum & J. E. Dutton (Eds.),Advances in strategic management,1996,Vol. 13. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press
[107] Miller C,Burke L,Glick W. Cognitive diversity among upper echelon executives: implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(1): 39–58
[108] Nahapiet J.,Ghoshal S. Social capital,intellectual capital,and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review,1998,23: 242–266.
[109] Naude P,Turnbull PW,editors. Network dynamics in international marketing. Oxford: Pergamon; 1998.
[110] Nohria N,Garcia-Pont C. Global strategic linkages and industry structure. Strategic Management Journal,Summer Special Issue,1991,12: 105–124.
[111] Nohria N,Eccles RG,editors. Networks and organizations: structure,form,and action. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press; 1992.
[112] Nohria & R.Eccles (Eds.),Networks and organizations: Structure form,and action: 311–347. Boston: Harvard University,1992.
[113] O’Reilly C,Caldwell D,Barnett W. Work group demography,social integration,and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly,1989,34: 21–37.
[114] Palich L,Cardinal L,Miller C. Curvilinearity in the diversification–performance linkage: an examination of over three decades of research. Strategic Management Journal,2000,21(3): 155–174.
[115] Pelled L,Eisenhardt K,Xin K. Exploring the black box: an analysis of work group diversity,conflict,and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,44: 1–28.
[116] Peter M. Structural vs relational embeddedness:social capital and managerial performance. Strat.Mgmt.J.,2005,26: 1129–1151
[117] Peteraf M. A. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal,1993,14(3),pp. 179–191.
[118] Peteraf M. ,M. Shanley. Getting to know you: A theory of strategic group identity. Strategic Management Journal,1997,Summer Special Issue,18,pp. 165–186.
[119] Pfeffer,J.,& Salancik,G. R. The external control of organizations. New York: Harper and Row,1978.
[120] Penrose E. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Basil Blackford: Oxford,1959
[121] Piercy N.F.,Cravens D.W. The network paradigm and the marketing organization: developing a new management agenda. Eur J Mark 1995; 29(3):7–34.
[122] Podolny J. Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Administrative Science Quarterly,1994,39: 458–483.
[123] Podolny,J. M. A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology,1993,98(4), i. 829–872.
[124] Prahalad C,Bettis R. The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal,1986,7(6): 485–501.
[125] Porter,M. E. Competitive Strategy. Free Press,New York,1980
[126] Porter M.E. The structure within industries and companies’performance. Review of Economics and Statistics,1979,214–227.
[127] Porter M.E. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press;1990.
[128] Portes A. Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology,Annual Review of Sociology,1998,24:1–24.
[129] Powell W. W. Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior,1990,12: 295–336.
[130] Powell W. W.,K. Koput,L. Smith-Doerr. Interorganizational collaboration and thelocus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology.Administrative Science Quarterly,1996,41,pp. 116–145.
[131] Powell W.W.,Smith-Doerr L. Networks and economic life. In The Handbook of Economic Sociology,Smelser NJ,Swedberg R (eds). Princeton University Press: Princeton,NJ;1994,368–402.
[132] Reagans R,Zuckerman E.W. Networks,diversity,and productivity: the social capital of R&D teams. Organization Science,2001,12(4): 502–517.
[133] Rodan S,Galunic C. More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal ,2004,25(6): 541–562.
[134] 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,Special Issue 21: 369–386.
[135] Rowley T,Baum JAC. The dynamics of network positions and strategies. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meetings,Denver,CO,2002,August.
[136] Rowley,Baum. Sophistication of interfirm network strategies in the Canadian investment banking industry Scand. J. Mgmt,2004,20,103–124
[137] Rowley , Baum , Shipilov . Competing in groups . Manage.Decis.Econ. 2004, 25:453-473
[138] Rumelt R. P.,D. E. Schendel,D. J. Teece (eds.) . Fundamental Issues in Strategy Research: A Research Agenda. Harvard Business School Press,Boston,MA,1994
[139] Snow CC. Managing 21st century network organizations. Organ Dyn,1992; 20(3):5–20.
[140] Teece D.J. Managing Intellectual Capital. Great Britain: Biddles Ltd.,Guildford and King’s Lynn; 2000.
[141] Teece D.J.Competition,cooperation and innovation.Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1992,18: 1–25.
[142] Teece D.J.,Pisano G. The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1994,3: 537–556.
[143] Teece D.J.,Pisano G,Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7): 509–534.
[144] Tim J. R.et al. Competing in Groups. Manage. Decis. Econ,2004,25: 453–471
[145] Timothy J,R.,J.A.C. Baum. Sophistication of interfirm network strategies in the Canadian investment banking industry. Scand. J. Mgmt. 20 ,2004,103–124
[146] Thompson G,Frances J,Levae`ic R,Mitchell J,editors. Markets,hierarchies and networks. The Coordination of Social Life. Great Britain: SAGE Publications,1994.
[147] Tsai W,Ghoshal S. Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal,1998,41(4): 464–476.
[148] Uzzi B. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: how social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review,1999,64: 481–505.
[149] Uzzi B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: the network effect. American Sociological Review,1996,61: 674–698.
[150] Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42: 35–67
[151] Walker G,Kogut B,Shan W. Social capital,structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science ,1997,8(2): 109–125
[152] Walker G.. Strategy and network formation. In Advances in Strategic Management,1998,Vol. 15.
[153] Walker G. Network position and cognition in a computer software firm. Administrative Science Quarterly,1985,30: 103–130.
[154] Wang zongjun and Cheng guo. A Winning Strategy for Chinese E-Business.TheJournal of Corporate Accounting & Finance,2006,17(6) :17-23
[155] Watson W,Kumar K,Michaelsen L. Cultural diversity’s impact on integration process and performance: comparing homogenous and diverse workgroups. Academy of Management Journal,1993,36:590–602.
[156] Wellman,B. Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In B. Wellman & S.D. Berkowitz (Eds.),Social structures: A network approach,1991,19–61. Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press
[157] Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal ,1984,5(2): 171–180.
[158] Williamson O.E. Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly,1991,36: 269–296
[159] Williamson,O. E.The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Free Press,New York,1985.
[160] [160] Williamson,O. E. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives.Administrative Science Quarterly , 1991,36: 269–296.
[161] Williamson O.E. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. Free Press: New York,1975
[162] Williamson O.E. Strategy research: governance and competence perspectives. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(12): 1087–1108.
[163] Williamson O.E. Strategizing , economizing , and economic organization. StrategicManagement Journal,1991,Winter Special Issue 12: 75–94.
[164] Williamson OE. Technology and transaction cost economics. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1988,10: 355–363.
[165] Zahra S.A.,George G. Absorptive capacity: a review,reconceptualization,and extension. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(2): 185–203.
[166] Zahra,S. A. Governance,ownership,and corporate entrepreneurship: Themoderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal,1996,39: 1713–1735.
[167] Zaheer A.,N. Venkatraman. Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange. Strategic Management Journal,1995,16(5),pp. 373–392.
[168] Zaheer A. ,S. Zaheer. Catching the wave: Alertness,responsiveness,and market influence in global electronic networks. Management Science,1997,43(11),pp. 1493–1509.
[169] Zajac E. Commentary on‘Alliances and networks’by R. Gulati. Strategic Management Journal,1998,Special Issue 19: 319–321.
[170] Zenger T,Lawrence B. Organizational demography: the differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal ,1989,32: 353–376.
[171]蔡继荣,胡配.基于合作溢出的战略联盟不稳定性研究.中国管理科学,2005,4:142-148
[172]高展军,李垣.战略网络结构对企业技术创新的影响研究.科学学研究,2006,6:474-479
[173]龚毅,谢恩.中外企业战略联盟知识转移效率的实例分析.科学学研究,2005,8:500-505
[174]成果,王宗军,柯昌文.实物期权在制造系统中的应用.价值工程:2007. 10
[175]缪匡华.企业动态联盟的关键要素研究.管理评论.2005,9:43-48
[176]黎群.航空公司战略联盟的经济动因分析.管理工程学报,2005,2:99-103
[177]李维安等.网络组织:组织发展新趋势.北京:经济科学出版社,2006.6
[178]李婉萍,罗贤栋.提高我国证券公司竞争力的途径.财会研究,2005,7:47-48
[179]李焕荣,林健.战略网络研究的新进展.经济管理,2004,4
[180]林健,李焕荣.企业在战略网络中的学习策略研究.系统工程,2004,1:39-42
[181]聂清慨.基于心理契约视觉的网络组织文化重构研究.管理评论,2005,7
[182]彭本红,吴晓伟,孙绍容.动态联盟的复杂性及其综合集成研讨厅.科研管理,2005,9:137-140
[183]祁红梅,黄瑞华.知识型动态联盟信任缺失与对策研究.研究与发展管理,2005,2:55-59.
[184]任新建,项保华.链式战略联盟合作困境及突破探析.科研管理,2005,9:68-72
[185]王凤彬,刘松博.战略联盟中的风险及其控制.管理评论,2005,6:50-54
[186]阮平南,刘高艳.基于耗散结构理论的战略网络.北京工业大学学报.2007.8.:28-31.
[187]吴晓波,杜健,韦影.基于价值网络的战略联盟研究.科学学研究,2005,2:59-63
[188]吴翠花,万威武.基于组织学习的联盟网络形成机理研究.科学学研究,2005,10:672-676
[189]项后军..产业集群、核心企业与战略网络.当代财经,2007,7:86-89
[190]谢洪明.战略网络结构对企业动态竞争行为的影响研究.科研管理,2005,3:104-112
[191]谢洪明,吴隆增,王成,葛志.组织学习的前因后果:一个新的理论框架.科学学与科学技术管理2006.8:161-168
[192]张维迎.博弈论与信息.上海:上海人民出版社,1996(2002重印)
[193]郑胜华,徐金发.基于整合观的联盟管理研究.科研管理,2005,7:105-108