The Positive Impact of Inter-Organizational Networking in Innovation in Biotechnology Industry: Comparative Case Analysis of Biotech Network One Nucleus



Vivek Verma and Vasilki T Zoumpa


To further substantiate the role of inter-organizational networking in innovation, we explored the positive impact of large networks on innovation in the biotechnology industry. The research was conducted in two parts. In the first part, a qualitative research methodology using exploratory case study is performed on the three SME members of the UK-based biotech network One Nucleus. In the second part, a quantitative research approach using comparative empirical OECD data analysis is performed. The two research methodologies used are subsequently linked together thorough a unique research approach known as processual research. A new insight is explored regarding issues linked to inter-organizational networking, like the role of networks on organizational learning, the role of third party organizations within networks, diversity of partners and the nature of learning (localized vs. global) within biotech networks. The primary data is generated on the number of alliances, types of alliances and types of innovation, whereas innovation is measured as a dependent variable. Empirical results obtained clearly indicate that innovation output (patent approval rate, patent success rate) with respect to each alliance made by the sample firms is positively impacted by the parent biotech network One Nucleus.


Inter-organizational networking, innovation, biotechnology industry, processual research, OECD, innovation output.


  • Arora, A. and Gambardella, A. (1990) ‘Complementary and external linkages: The strategies of the large firms in biotechnology’, Journal of Industrial Economics, 38:4, pp. 361–79.
  • Baum, J.A., Calabrese, T. and Silverman, B. (2000) ‘Don’t go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology’, Strategic Management Journal, 21:3, pp. 267–94.
  • Butler, J.E. (1988) ‘Theories of technological innovation as useful tools for corporate strategy’, Strategic Management Journal, 9, pp. 15-29.
  • Capello, R. (1999) ‘Spatial transfer of knowledge in high technology milieux: Learning versus collective learning processes’, Regional Studies. 33:4, pp. 352–65.
  • Chin, J. (2004) ‘Biotechnology’s special forces: field based medical science liaisons’, Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 10:4, pp. 12–18.
  • Damanpour, F. and Gopoalakrishnan, S. (1999) ‘Organizational Adaptation and Innovation: The Dynamics of Adopting Innovation Types’, in Brockhoff, K., Chakrabarti, A. and Hauschild, J. (1st edn.) The Dynamics of Innovation, Berlin, Springer, pp. 57–80.
  • DeBresson, C. and Amesse, F. (1991) ‘Networks of innovators: A review and introduction to the issue’, Research Policy, 20:5, pp. 363–79.
  • Ettlie, J.E. (1995) ‘Product-process development integration in manufacturing’, Management Science, 41:7, pp. 1224–1237.
  • Fox-Wolfgramm, S. J. (1997) ‘Towards developing a methodology for doing qualitative research: the dynamic- comparative case study method’, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13:4, pp.439-455.
  • Edwards, T. (2000) ‘Innovation and organizational change: developments towards an interactive process perspective. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 12:4, pp. 445–65.
  • Ettlie, J.E. (1995) ‘Product-process development integration in manufacturing’, Management Science, 41:7, pp 1224–1237.
  • George, G. Zahra, S.A. and Wood, D.R. (2002) ‘The Effects of Business-university Alliances on Innovative Output and Financial Performance: A Study of Publicly Traded Biotechnology Companies’, Journal of Business Venturing, 17, pp. 577–609.
  • Glass, A.M. Wokaun, A. and Heritage, J.P. (1981) ‘Enhanced two-photon fluorescence of molecules adsorbed on silver particle films’, Phys. Rev. B, 24:8, pp. 4906–4909.
  • Goerzen, A. and Beamish, P.W. (2005) ‘The effect of alliance network diversity on multinational enterprise performance’, Strategic Management Journal, 26:4, pp. 333–54.
  • Gulati, R. (1995) ‘Social structure and alliance formation patterns’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 40:4, pp. 619–52.
  • Gulati, R. and Higgins, M.C. (2003) ‘Which ties matter when? The contingent effects of inter-organizational partnerships on IPO success’, Strategic Management Journal, 24:2, pp.127–44.
  • Hagedoorn, J. (1993) ‘Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences’, Strategic Management Journal, 14:5, pp. 371–85.
  • Hinings, C.R. (1997) ‘Reflections on processual research’, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13:4, pp. 493–503.
  • Kogut, B. (1988), ‘Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives’, Strategic Management Journal, 9:4, pp. 319–32.
  • Kogut, B. (2000) ‘the network as knowledge: Generative rules and the emergence of structure’, Strategic Management Journal, 21:3, pp. 405–25.
  • Larson, A. (1992) ‘Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of the governance of exchange relationships’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 37:1, pp. 76–104.
  • Lippitt, R., Watson, J. and Westly, B. (1958) ‘The dynamics of planned change’. New York: Harcourt Mohr, J.J. & Sengupta, S. (2002) ‘managing the paradox of inter firm learning: The role of governance mechanisms’. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 17:4, pp. 282 -301.
  • Mowery, D.C., J.E. Oxley, and Silverman, B.S. (1998) ‘Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: Implications for the resource based view of the firm’, Research Policy, 27:5, pp. 507–23.
  • Nelson, A (2009) ‘Measuring Knowledge Spillovers: What patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion’. Research Policy, 38:6, pp. 994-1005.
  • Oliver, A. (2001) ‘Strategic alliances and the learning life-cycle of biotechnology firms’ Organization Studies, 22:3, pp. 467–89.
  • Orton, J.D. (1997) ‘From Inductive to Iterative Grounded Theory: Zipping the Gap between Process Theory and Process Data’, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13:4, pp. 419-38.
  • Oxley, J.E. and Sampson, R.C. (2004) ‘The scope and governance of international R&D alliances’, Strategic Management Journal, 25:89, pp. 723–49.
  • Ozman, M. (2009) ‘Inter-firm networks and innovation: a survey of literature’, Economic of Innovation and New Technology, 18:1, pp. 39–67.
  • Perreault,W. D. and Leigh, L. E. (1989) ‘Reliability of nominal data based on qualitative judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 26:2, pp. 135-148.
  • Powell, W.W. Koput, K.W. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1996) ‘Inter-organizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41:1, pp.116–45.
  • Shan, W.Walker, G.and Kogut, B. (1994) ‘Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry’, Strategic Management Journal, 15:5, pp. 387–94.
  • Soh, P. and Roberts, E.B (2003) ‘Networks of innovators: A longitudinal perspective’, Research Policy, 32:9, pp. 1569–88.
  • Smith, O.J. and Powell, W (2004) ‘Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: the effects of spillovers in Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science, 15:1, pp. 5–21.
  • Thorelli, H.B. (1986) ‘Networks: Between markets and hierarchies’, Strategic Management Journal, 7:1, pp. 37–51.
  • Wernerfelt, B. (1984) ‘A resource-based view of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 5:2, pp. 171–80.
  • Williamson, O. (1991) ‘Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36:2, pp. 269–96.

RNI Registration No. CHAENG/2016/68678