|
|
|
| The Collaborative Mechanism of Key and Core Technology Innovation:An Empirical Research Using Chip Lithography as An Example |
| Zhang Beibei1,Li Cunjin1,Yin Ximing1,2 |
| (1.School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China;2.Research Center for Technological Innovation, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Industry-university-research collaborative innovation is an important way to accelerate the breakthrough of the bottleneck problem of key and core technologies, but few studies have revealed the industry-university-research institution collaborative mechanism for key and core technologies innovation.Following the complex system management theory, this study constructs the industry-university-research institution collaborative mechanism framework of key and core technology innovation to explore the innovation laws hidden in the nonlinear interaction and cooperation of industries, universities and research institutions, and takes the patent cooperation network of chip lithography technology as an example to analyze the framework with the help of social network and other analysis methods.#br#The knowledge integration mechanism of "technology with pure rationality and practical rationality " speeds up knowledge transfer and stimulates creativity through the "potential difference" and "heterogeneity" of knowledge among collaborative subjects,and it is an effective way for the breakthrough of key and core technology innovation. Specifically, in the innovation process of key and core technologies, it is necessary to dissect, absorb and reconstruct the technical knowledge, pure rational knowledge and practical rational knowledge from the collaborative subjects of industries, universities and research institutions. The potential difference between different collaborative subjects accelerates the dissemination, sharing and complementary overflow of knowledge and resources. The heterogeneity between knowledge stimulates the creativity of collaborative subjects, so as to reduce the innovation cost and risk and promote the birth of key and core new technologies.#br#The power distribution rule of "leader-bridge-helper" can effectively explain the value-added process of embedded social relations in the interaction process of collaborative subjects and promote the innovation of key and core technologies. In the industry-university-research institution collaborative innovation system of key and core technology, all subjects interact tacitly and consciously according to the power distribution rules of "leader-bridge-helper", and automatically form an orderly structure under the leading role of the leader organization, the conduction intermediary role of the bridge organization, and the following and auxiliary role of the auxiliary organization. By constantly coordinating the relationship between the interactive subjects, the decentralized action goals between the subjects are integrated into the common goal of the collaborative network, so as to improve the interaction efficiency, avoid transaction costs and other costs, and finally promote the system to produce the effect of "the whole is greater than the sum of parts", and achieve the innovation and value increase of key and core technologies.#br#The network structure of "modularization-loose coupling" can eliminate the interaction obstacles between subjects and maximize the structural dividends. It is the key and core technology innovation breakthrough law of industry-university-research institution collaborative complex network at the system structure level. Specifically, the sub-modules with heterogeneous functions in the key and core technology industry-university-research institution collaborative complex system interact with other modules on a relatively independent basis, so that the whole collaborative system has stability and maintains a certain flexibility. The sub-modules are connected with each other according to the principle of "loose coupling", so as to minimize information redundancy, reduce conflicts and opportunistic risks, improve system flexibility, scalability and the reusability of elements, save management costs and finally promote the innovation and breakthrough of key and core technologies.#br#This study provides some of enlightenment for the key and core technology industry-university-research institution collaborative policy-making and enterprise innovation management. The three parties in the industry-university-research collaboration mechanism framework should evaluate their own resources and find partners purposefully, clarify their network positions and improve collaboration ability accordingly. Moreover, at the national level, the government should appropriately guide and set up technological specialization module development programs according to China's current development stage and basic national conditions, and effectively employ administrative means to establish connections with domestic and foreign resources; at the enterprise level, relevant enterprises should set their own technology sub-module strategies according to their own advantages and disadvantages. It is also vitalfor the government and enterprises to improve relevant systems to ensure the collaboration progress, such as further improving the institutional innovation and incentive policy system design and creating an open, integrated and resilient corporate culture.#br#
|
|
Received: 07 January 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] 刘亚东.是什么卡住了我们核心技术的脖子[EB/OL].[2018-06-24]. http://www.ce.cn/xwzx/gnsz/gdxw/2018 06/24/t20180624_29513293.shtml.[2] 陈劲.技术创新的系统观与系统框架[J].管理科学学报,1999,2(3):66-73.[3] 范如国.复杂网络结构范型下的社会治理协同创新[J].中国社会科学,2014，35(4):98-120,206.[4] 尹西明,陈劲,贾宝余.高水平科技自立自强视角下国家战略科技力量的突出特征与强化路径[J].中国科技论坛,2021，37(9):1-9.[5] 王海军,陈劲,成佳.基于模块化视角的ICT企业专利合作网络研究:华为案例[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2018,39(7):74-87.[6] 王海军,陈劲,冯军政.模块化嵌入的一流企业产学研用协同创新演化:理论建构与案例探索[J].科研管理,2020,41(5):47-59.[7] 王海军,张悦,张文耕,等.组织模块化对研究型大学技术转移绩效的影响[J].科技进步与对策,2021,38(24):28-37.[8] 赫尔曼·哈肯.协同学——大自然构成的奥秘[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2005.[9] 陈劲,阳银娟.协同创新的理论基础与内涵[J].科学学研究,2012,30(2):161-164.[10] 黄曼,朱桂龙,刘芳,等.基于三螺旋模型的产学研协同创新机制研究——以潜水设备行业为例[J].华南理工大学学报(社会科学版),2020,22(1):72-81.[11] 项杨雪,梅亮,陈劲.基于价值创造的协同创新本质研究——以浙江大学协同创新中心为例[J].科技进步与对策,2015,32(23):21-26.[12] OKAMURO H, KATO M, HONJO Y. Determinants of R&D cooperation in Japanese start-ups[J]. Research Policy, 2011, 40(5):728-738.[13] MACHER J T, BOERNER C S. Development and the boundaries of the firm: a knowledge-based examination in drug development[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2012, 33(9): 1016-1036.[14] BALDWIN C Y, HIPPEL E V. Modeling a paradigm shift:from producer innovation to user and open cllaborative innovation[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing,2011,22(6):1399-1417.[15] 李久平,姜大鹏,王涛.产学研协同创新中的知识整合——一个理论框架[J].软科学, 2013,27(5):136-139.[16] 陆雄文.管理学大辞典[M].上海:上海辞书出版社,2013.[17] HONG W, SU Y-S. The effect of institutional proximity in non-local university-industry collaborations: an analysis based on Chinese patent data[J]. Research Policy,2013,42(2) :454-464.[18] WIRSICH A, KOCK A, STRUMANN C, et al. Effects of University-industry collaboration on technological newness of firms[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management,2016,33(6):708-725.[19] TSAI F S, BAUGH G S, FANG S C, et al. Contingent contingency: knowledge heterogeneity and new product development performance revisited[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2014, 31(1):149-169.[20] ALEXANDER L, KNIPPENBERG D V. Teams in pursuit of radical innovation: a goal orientation perspective[J]. IEEE Engineering Management Review,2017,45(1):105-120.[21] LEVINTHAL D A, MARCH J G. The myopia of learning[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2010,14(S2):95-112.[22] YANG J, WANG F. Impact of social network heterogeneity and knowledge heterogeneity on the innovation performance of new ventures[J]. Information Discovery and Delivery, 2017, 45(1): 36-44.[23] THUNE T. University-industry collaboration: the network embeddedness approach[J]. Science and Public Policy, 2007,34(3):158-168.[24] FEHR E, HERZ H, WILKENING T. The lure of authority: motivation and incentive effects of power[J]. The American Economic Review, 2013,103(4): 1325-1359.[25] PAUL H, KENNETH H. Situational leadership, perception, and the impact of power[J]. Group & Organization Management, 1979, 4(4):418-428.[26] RAVEN J E. Plato′s thought in the making: a study of the development of his metaphysics[M]. Ireland: CUP Archive,1965.[27] 青木昌彦,奥野正宽,冈崎哲二,等.市场的作用国家的作用[M].北京:中国发展出版社,2002.[28] BALDWIN C Y, CLARK K B. Design rules: the power of modularity[M]. Cambridge MA: MIT Press,2000.[29] WEICK K. Making sense of the organization[M]. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2001.[30] 张首魁,党兴化,李莉.松散耦合系统:技术创新网络组织结构研究[J].中国软科学,2006，21(9):122-129.[31] 田民波.集成电路(IC)制程简论[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2009.[32] LIU Y, YAN Z, CHENG Y, et al. Exploring the technological collaboration characteristics of the global integrated circuit manufacturing industry[J]. Sustainability, 2018, 10(1):196-219.[33] 刘国巍,邵云飞,刘博.模块化网络视角下我国大健康产业链协同创新能力评价研究[J].科技进步与对策,2021,38(24):85-95.[34] DONG J Q,YANG C.Being central is a double-edged sword:knowledge network centrality and new product development in US pharmaceutical industry[J].Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2016,113(12):379-385.[35] MULLER E, PERES R. The effect of social networks structure on innovation performance: a review and directions for research[J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing,2018,34(7):1-17.[36] WASSERMAN S,FAUST K.Social network analysis: methods and applications[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press,1994.[37] SABIDUSSI G. The centrality index of a graph[J]. Psychometrika,1966,31(4):581-603.[38] FREEMAN L. A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness[J]. Sociometry,1977,40:35-41.[39] GOETZE C. An empirical enquiry into co-patent networks and their stars: the case of cardiac pacemaker technology[J]. Technovation,2010, 30(7-8): 436-446.[40] GOULD RV, FERNANDEZ R M. Structures of mediation: a formal approach to brokerage in transaction networks[J]. Sociological Methodology,1989，19: 89-126.[41] BLONDEL V D, GUILLAUME J L, LAMBIOTTE R, et al. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks[J]. 2008, 2008(10): P10008. |
|
|
|
