Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Unpacking the Dual Roles of Networks and Openness in Innovation Performance A Cross-National Analysis of Knowledge-Based Capabilities

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1, 127 - 142, 30.06.2025

Ali İhsan Çetin , Sedat Ilgaz Günay

Öz

This study investigates the dual roles of Networks and International Openness as both mediators and moderators in the relationship between knowledge-based capabilities -specifically Knowledge Diffusion (KD) and Knowledge Absorption (KA)- and Innovation Performance, measured through the Global Innovation Index (GII). Drawing on the Dynamic Capabilities View and innovation ecosystem theory, we construct a five-model framework, empirically testing four mediation and moderation pathways and one integrated model across a cross-national dataset.
The results reveal that Networks play a significant mediating role in the relationship between both KD and KA and innovation performance, while International Openness exhibits a marginally significant mediation effect only for KD. No statistically significant moderation effects were observed, though theoretical relevance justifies their inclusion. This dual analytical approach extends the knowledge-based dynamic capabilities (KBDC) literature by empirically distinguishing the ecosystem mechanisms through which knowledge flows affect national innovation outcomes.
The study contributes to the strategic innovation management literature by confirming that countries with stronger knowledge diffusion and absorption capacities, supported by dense networks, tend to perform better in innovation. These findings offer actionable insights for policymakers in emerging economies seeking to enhance their national innovation systems through ecosystem-based capacity building.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Knowledge based dynamic capabilities Innovation performance Knowledge diffusion Knowledge absorption Networks

Kaynakça

  • Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Ritala, P. (2017). Network management in the era of ecosystems: Systematic review and management framework. Industrial Marketing Management, 67, 23-36.
  • Abdulai, A. F., Murphy, L., & Thomas, B. (2020). University knowledge transfer and innovation performance in firms: The Ghanaian experience. International Journal of Innovation Management, 24(03), 2050023.
  • Acemoglu, D., Moscona, J., & Robinson, J. A. (2016). State capacity and American technology: evidence from the nineteenth century. American Economic Review, 106(5), 61-67.
  • Acs, Z. J., Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Szerb, L. (2018). Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: An ecosystem perspective. Small Business Economics, 51(2), 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0013-9
  • Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306-333.
  • Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015
  • Autio, E., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2014). Innovation ecosystems: Implications for innovation management? In M. Dodgson, D. M. Gann & N. Phillips (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management (pp. 204–228). Oxford University Press.
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  • Beuter Júnior, N., Faccin, K., Volkmer Martins, B., & Balestrin, A. (2019). Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities for sustainable innovation: the case of the green plastic project. Sustainability, 11(8), 2392.
  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). ‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3–4), 201–234. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374
  • Charterina, J., Basterretxea, I., & Landeta, J. (2016). Types of embedded ties in buyer-supplier relationships and their combined effects on innovation performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(2), 152-163.
  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.
  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
  • Denford, J. S. (2013). Building knowledge: developing a knowledge‐based dynamic capabilities typology. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 175-194.
  • Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., & Wunsch Vincent, S. (Eds.). (2019). The Global Innovation Index 2019: Creating Healthy Lives—The Future of Medical Innovation. World Intellectual Property Organization. https://www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index/en/2019/
  • Drejer, I. (2004). Identifying innovation in surveys of services: A Schumpeterian perspective. Research Policy, 33(3), 551–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2003.07.004
  • Edquist, C., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M., Barbero, J., & Zofío, J. L. (2018). On the meaning of innovation performance: Is the synthetic indicator of the Innovation Union Scoreboard flawed?. Research Evaluation, 27(3), 196-211.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities. What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
  • Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
  • Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (2009). Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past. Research Policy, 38(4), 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.018
  • Galati, F., Bigliardi, B., & Petroni, A. (2016). Open innovation in food firms: Implementation strategies, drivers and enabling factors. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(03), 1650042.
  • Godin, B. (2009). National Innovation System: The System Approach in Historical Perspective. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 34(4), 476–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243908329187
  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171110
  • Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90, 102098.
  • Herrmann, A. M., & Peine, A. (2011). When ‘national innovation system’ meet ‘varieties of capitalism’ arguments on labour qualifications: On the skill types and scientific knowledge needed for radical and incremental product innovations. Research Policy, 40(5), 687–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.02.004
  • Klarl, T. (2014). Knowledge diffusion and knowledge transfer revisited: two sides of the medal. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24, 737-760.
  • Klimas, P., & Czakon, W. (2022). Species in the wild: a typology of innovation ecosystems. Review of Managerial Science, 16(1), 249-282.
  • Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques (2nd ed.). New Age International.
  • Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  • Lundvall, B. (2007). National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry & Innovation, 14(1), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662710601130863
  • Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing research: An applied orientation (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Malerba, F., & McKelvey, M. (2020). Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship integrating Schumpeter, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems. Small business economics, 54(2), 503-522.
  • Mercan, B., & Goktas, D. (2011). Components of innovation ecosystems: A cross-country study. International research journal of finance and economics, 76(16), 102-112.
  • Parrilli, M. D., Balavac, M., & Radicic, D. (2020). Business innovation modes and their impact on innovation outputs: Regional variations and the nature of innovation across EU regions. Research Policy, 49(8), 104047.
  • Pattinson, R. (2018). National Innovation Systems in the Asia Pacific: A Comparative Analysis. [Chapter in Clarke, Chelliah & Pattinson]. ideas.repec.org+4researchgate.net+4semanticscholar.org+4
  • Peltier, J. W., Dahl, A. J., & Swan, E. L. (2020). Digital information flows across a B2C/C2C continuum and technological innovations in service ecosystems: A service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of Business Research, 121, 724-734.
  • Robertson, J., Caruana, A., & Ferreira, C. (2023). Innovation performance: The effect of knowledge based dynamic capabilities in cross country innovation ecosystems. International Business Review, 32(2), 101866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101866
  • Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2014). Diffusion of innovations. In An integrated approach to communication theory and research (pp. 432-448). Routledge.
  • Rybnicek, R., & Königsgruber, R. (2019). What makes industry–university collaboration succeed? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of business economics, 89(2), 221-250.
  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44(8), 1407–1418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.004
  • World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators. The World Bank Open Data Repository. https://data360.worldbank.org/en/search
  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.6587995
  • Zahra, S. A., & Nambisan, S. (2012). Entrepreneurship and strategic thinking in business ecosystems. Business horizons, 55(3), 219-229.
  • Zheng, S., Zhang, W., & Du, J. (2011). Knowledge‐based dynamic capabilities and innovation in networked environments. Journal of knowledge management, 15(6), 1035-1051.

Ağların ve Uluslararası Açıklığın İnovasyon Performansına Çift Yönlü Etkilerini Açımlamak: Bilgi Tabanlı Kapasitelere İlişkin Uluslararası Bir Analiz

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1, 127 - 142, 30.06.2025

Ali İhsan Çetin , Sedat Ilgaz Günay

Öz

Bu çalışma, bilgi temelli yetkinlikler –özellikle Bilgi Yayılımı (KD) ve Bilgi Özümsemesi (KA)– ile İnovasyon Performansı arasındaki ilişkide Ağlar ve Uluslararası Açıklığın hem aracılık (mediation) hem de düzenleyici (moderation) rollerini incelemektedir. İnovasyon performansı, Küresel İnovasyon Endeksi (Global Innovation Index - GII) ile ölçülmüştür. Dinamik Yetkinlikler Görüşü ve inovasyon ekosistemi teorisinden yola çıkılarak, dört aracılık ve düzenleyicilik yolunu ve bir bütünleşik modeli ampirik olarak test eden beş modelli bir çerçeve oluşturulmuştur.

Bulgular, Ağların hem KD hem de KA ile inovasyon performansı arasındaki ilişkide anlamlı bir aracılık rolü oynadığını ortaya koyarken, Uluslararası Açıklığın yalnızca KD için marjinal düzeyde anlamlı bir aracılık etkisi gösterdiğini ortaya koymaktadır. İstatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir düzenleyici etki gözlemlenmemiştir; ancak kuramsal gerekçelerle bu etkilerin modele dahil edilmesi uygun görülmüştür. Bu çift yönlü analiz yaklaşımı, bilgi temelli dinamik yetkinlikler (KBDC) literatürünü genişleterek, bilgi akışlarının ulusal inovasyon sonuçlarını nasıl etkilediğine dair ekosistem temelli mekanizmaları ampirik olarak ayırt etmektedir.

Çalışma, stratejik inovasyon yönetimi literatürüne katkıda bulunarak, güçlü bilgi yayılımı ve özümsenme kapasitesine sahip ve yoğun ağlarla desteklenen ülkelerin inovasyonda daha yüksek performans gösterme eğiliminde olduğunu doğrulamaktadır. Bu bulgular, ulusal inovasyon sistemlerini ekosistem temelli kapasite geliştirme yoluyla güçlendirmek isteyen gelişmekte olan ülke politika yapıcıları için uygulanabilir öneriler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İnovasyon Bilgi Yayılımı Bilgi Özümsenmesi Ağlar Uluslararasılaşma Bilgi temelli dinamik yetkinlikler

Kaynakça

  • Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Ritala, P. (2017). Network management in the era of ecosystems: Systematic review and management framework. Industrial Marketing Management, 67, 23-36.
  • Abdulai, A. F., Murphy, L., & Thomas, B. (2020). University knowledge transfer and innovation performance in firms: The Ghanaian experience. International Journal of Innovation Management, 24(03), 2050023.
  • Acemoglu, D., Moscona, J., & Robinson, J. A. (2016). State capacity and American technology: evidence from the nineteenth century. American Economic Review, 106(5), 61-67.
  • Acs, Z. J., Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Szerb, L. (2018). Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: An ecosystem perspective. Small Business Economics, 51(2), 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0013-9
  • Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306-333.
  • Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015
  • Autio, E., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2014). Innovation ecosystems: Implications for innovation management? In M. Dodgson, D. M. Gann & N. Phillips (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management (pp. 204–228). Oxford University Press.
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  • Beuter Júnior, N., Faccin, K., Volkmer Martins, B., & Balestrin, A. (2019). Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities for sustainable innovation: the case of the green plastic project. Sustainability, 11(8), 2392.
  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). ‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3–4), 201–234. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374
  • Charterina, J., Basterretxea, I., & Landeta, J. (2016). Types of embedded ties in buyer-supplier relationships and their combined effects on innovation performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(2), 152-163.
  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.
  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
  • Denford, J. S. (2013). Building knowledge: developing a knowledge‐based dynamic capabilities typology. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 175-194.
  • Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., & Wunsch Vincent, S. (Eds.). (2019). The Global Innovation Index 2019: Creating Healthy Lives—The Future of Medical Innovation. World Intellectual Property Organization. https://www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index/en/2019/
  • Drejer, I. (2004). Identifying innovation in surveys of services: A Schumpeterian perspective. Research Policy, 33(3), 551–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2003.07.004
  • Edquist, C., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M., Barbero, J., & Zofío, J. L. (2018). On the meaning of innovation performance: Is the synthetic indicator of the Innovation Union Scoreboard flawed?. Research Evaluation, 27(3), 196-211.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities. What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
  • Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
  • Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (2009). Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past. Research Policy, 38(4), 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.018
  • Galati, F., Bigliardi, B., & Petroni, A. (2016). Open innovation in food firms: Implementation strategies, drivers and enabling factors. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(03), 1650042.
  • Godin, B. (2009). National Innovation System: The System Approach in Historical Perspective. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 34(4), 476–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243908329187
  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171110
  • Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90, 102098.
  • Herrmann, A. M., & Peine, A. (2011). When ‘national innovation system’ meet ‘varieties of capitalism’ arguments on labour qualifications: On the skill types and scientific knowledge needed for radical and incremental product innovations. Research Policy, 40(5), 687–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.02.004
  • Klarl, T. (2014). Knowledge diffusion and knowledge transfer revisited: two sides of the medal. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24, 737-760.
  • Klimas, P., & Czakon, W. (2022). Species in the wild: a typology of innovation ecosystems. Review of Managerial Science, 16(1), 249-282.
  • Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques (2nd ed.). New Age International.
  • Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  • Lundvall, B. (2007). National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry & Innovation, 14(1), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662710601130863
  • Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing research: An applied orientation (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Malerba, F., & McKelvey, M. (2020). Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship integrating Schumpeter, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems. Small business economics, 54(2), 503-522.
  • Mercan, B., & Goktas, D. (2011). Components of innovation ecosystems: A cross-country study. International research journal of finance and economics, 76(16), 102-112.
  • Parrilli, M. D., Balavac, M., & Radicic, D. (2020). Business innovation modes and their impact on innovation outputs: Regional variations and the nature of innovation across EU regions. Research Policy, 49(8), 104047.
  • Pattinson, R. (2018). National Innovation Systems in the Asia Pacific: A Comparative Analysis. [Chapter in Clarke, Chelliah & Pattinson]. ideas.repec.org+4researchgate.net+4semanticscholar.org+4
  • Peltier, J. W., Dahl, A. J., & Swan, E. L. (2020). Digital information flows across a B2C/C2C continuum and technological innovations in service ecosystems: A service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of Business Research, 121, 724-734.
  • Robertson, J., Caruana, A., & Ferreira, C. (2023). Innovation performance: The effect of knowledge based dynamic capabilities in cross country innovation ecosystems. International Business Review, 32(2), 101866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101866
  • Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2014). Diffusion of innovations. In An integrated approach to communication theory and research (pp. 432-448). Routledge.
  • Rybnicek, R., & Königsgruber, R. (2019). What makes industry–university collaboration succeed? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of business economics, 89(2), 221-250.
  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44(8), 1407–1418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.004
  • World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators. The World Bank Open Data Repository. https://data360.worldbank.org/en/search
  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.6587995
  • Zahra, S. A., & Nambisan, S. (2012). Entrepreneurship and strategic thinking in business ecosystems. Business horizons, 55(3), 219-229.
  • Zheng, S., Zhang, W., & Du, J. (2011). Knowledge‐based dynamic capabilities and innovation in networked environments. Journal of knowledge management, 15(6), 1035-1051.
Toplam 46 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Araştırma, Bilim ve Teknoloji Politikası, Teknoloji Yönetimi, Girişimcilik
Bölüm Research Articles
Yazarlar

Ali İhsan Çetin

Sedat Ilgaz Günay 0009-0007-8762-1537

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 20 Nisan 2025
Kabul Tarihi 21 Haziran 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Çetin, A. İ., & Günay, S. I. (2025). Unpacking the Dual Roles of Networks and Openness in Innovation Performance A Cross-National Analysis of Knowledge-Based Capabilities. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 14(1), 127-142.
 Kapak Resmi İndir