Chen, J

Di Minin, A

Minshall, T

Su, YS

Xue, L

Zhou, Y

CUED - Cambridge University Engineering Department

The New Silk Road: R&amp;D networks, knowledge diffusions, and open innovation

Apollo (Cambridge)

© 2021 The Authors. R&D Management published by RADMA and John Wiley & Sons Ltd 1The New Silk Road: R&D networks, knowledge diffusions, and open innovationJin Chen1, Alberto Di Minin2,*, Tim Minshall3,  Yu- shan Su4, Lan Xue5 and Yuan Zhou51 School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. chenjin@sem.tsinghua.edu.cn2 Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna di Pisa, Institute of Management, Pisa, Italy.  alberto.diminin@santannapisa.it3 Institute for Manufacturing, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. thwm100@cam.ac.uk4 School of Technology and Engineering, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.  yssu@ntnu.edu.tw5 School of Public Policy and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, xuelan@tsinghua.edu.cn, zhou_yuan@mail.tsinghua.edu.cnThe Silk Road connected the East and West for almost 2,000 years from B.C. 300 to the 1700s. It provided a network of trade routes as well as the mechanism for the reciprocal exchange of knowl-edge that stimulated and diffused great innovations such as printing, textiles, and gun powder. However, with the shifting center of gravity of economic activ-ity over recent centuries, the thriving Silk Road declined and largely faded away. And as one conse-quence, the knowledge flows between the East and West became intermittent and more unidirectional, with Western nations playing more central roles in the global knowledge networks and many Eastern countries became the recipients of technologies transferred from elsewhere.This context has now changed. Recent research has identified the new trend of international tech-nology transfer and corporate strategies, such as ‘reverse’ knowledge flows from the East to West, as well as the South- South technology transfers, which challenge the models of recent centuries (Hart and Christensen, 2002; Govindarajan and Ramamurti, 2011; Zhou et al., 2016, 2020). The ‘Belt and Road’ initiative (BRI, or so- called ‘New Silk Road’), pro-posed by the Chinese government in 2013, has as its overarching aim the re- connection of East Asia, Central Asia, Africa, the Middle East, as well as Europe in aspects of economics, politics, and society. In particular, innovation collaborations and technol-ogy transfer among these regions are becoming one of the key focal areas of this initiative.This Special Issue (SI) aims to highlight the need to expand our understanding of new paradigms for cultivating innovation development along the ‘New Silk Road’ enabled by the BRI that connects tradi-tional innovation leaders and those catching up in Europe and Asia. This SI attempts to develop an analytical framework to study the BRI based on six research articles focused around three different top-ics. The first topic is the innovation catch- up oppor-tunities enabled by the BRI; the second is the new collaboration models of BRI, and the third is the new technology- transfer practices of BRI. These three research topics form the key dimensions for studying the BRI in this SI.Firstly, the BRI provides opportunities for tradi-tional technology- followers to catch up or potentially leapfrog current leaders, given the rapid develop-ment of Eastern economies (de la Tour et al., 2011; Li et al., 2015). Successful catch- up requires follow-ers to form a local science- technology infrastructure This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial- NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non- commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.© 2021 The Authors. R&D Management published by RADMA and John Wiley & Sons LtdCHEN ET AL2 R&D Management 0, 0, 2021(Chen et al., 2012), which involves new approaches to cross- border knowledge diffusion within these regions (Häussler, 2010; Tang, 2016). Collinson and Liu (2019) recently found that the collabora-tion between multinational enterprises (MNEs) and Chinese firms can generate superior innovation performance because MNEs in China provide local partners with new technologies, solid intellectual property (IP) rights, and advanced capabilities for process and product development. The factors that make China so attractive for foreign investors are also explored by the works of Gassmann and Han (2004) and von Zedtwitz (2004). Back at the beginning of the 2000s, China was already the third most R&D intensive country in the world, not only thanks to its R&D investment in the percentage of GDP, which was already 1.3% in 2002 (according to the world bank, this was raised to 2.18% in 2018), but also for the many policies that the Chinese government introduced with the sole goal of attracting Western companies (von Zedtwitz, 2004). Specifically in this SI, Brem and Nylund (2021) argue that to effectively create a New Silk Road of Innovation, innovation ecosystems may need to expand across national bor-ders taking the inherent uncertainty and newness of innovation into consideration.Secondly, the BRI represents a formidable oppor-tunity to explore East- West open innovation prac-tices. The growth of the national innovation systems of Eastern economies provides new enabling factors for Eastern firms to augment inbound and outbound knowledge flows with local universities for original innovations (Gawer and Cusumano, 2014; West et al., 2014; Cassiman and Valentini, 2016). The analysis of Fischer and Farr (1985) shows how China was keen on developing more open R&D units as far back as the 1980s. Their result shows that even at that time, some Chinese R&D units within the academic world, such as the R&D unit of the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS), were more likely to show degrees of openness compared to those more associated with the industrial world. Mu and Di Benedetto (2011) found that the role of open innovation in China is of strate-gic importance when it comes to the networking ori-entation of firms. Particularly in this SI, Chesbrough et al. (2021) found that the Chinese government acts as an orchestrator of open innovation among state- owned enterprises, privately- owned companies and foreign firms in China. Additionally, Corsi, Fu, and Külzer- Sacilotto (2021) identified two new industry- based boundary- spanning roles in university- industry (U- I) collaborations, including the ‘Dual Cultural Bridger’ that spans organizational and national cul-tural gaps; and ‘International Network Enhancer’ that act as trust- building and local knowledge listen-ing posts for an MNE’s global network.Thirdly, the BRI generates opportunities to develop new R&D networks (Rothwell and Dodgson, 1991; Macpherson et al., 2004). Given the rapid catch- up in innovation, those emerging economies along the ‘New Silk Road’ may develop East- East R&D networks as well as East- West ‘reverse’ R&D flows (McDougall et al., 1994; Von Zedtwitz, 2004; Di Minin et al., 2012), and generate reverse inno-vation dynamics (Govindarajan and Trimble, 2012; Corsi et al., 2014). For many years, successful com-panies in China, as well as many universities and research institutions, appear to be embracing stra-tegic alliances as a means to achieving competitive advantages (Turpin et al., 1996). Their strategy is to build a complex web of varying modes of relation-ships which is crucial for developing the approach that bests suits their strategies. From this reasoning, the authors identify four main categories of research alliances. First, there are those guided by the scien-tific bricoleur, intending to build science- driven links oriented toward a wide range of industries. Second, there are those guided by the scientific boundary rid-ers, intending to build science- driven links focused on specific research fields. Third, there are those guided by the industrial bricoleur, intending to build industry- driven links with large firms based on a wide range of products. Finally, those guided by the industrial boundary riders have the goal of building industry- driven links with large firms based on core technologies. By focusing on networking orien-tation, firms are able to access external sources of knowledge and recombining them with their own in order to better exploit both the market and the new technologies opportunities (Mu and Di Benedetto, 2011). Specifically in this SI, Crupi (2021) proposed new indices to study the technology transfer and boundary- spanning activities in China, considering the complexity of the Chinese environment. In addi-tion, Li et al. (2021) found that knowledge transfer plays an important role in the policy effect of BRI implementation on R&D outcomes of Chinese firms that have affiliates in BRI- related countries.Let us finally consider how the papers in this SI respond to the research questions raised in the call for papers. First, what is the role of the ‘New Silk Road’ to facilitate innovation collaborations and knowledge transfer? Authors support the idea that BRI is a catch- up opportunity allowing latecomers to develop a science- technology infrastructure and then use this to sustain catch up activities. Second, what are the business models and organizational designs to capture value through collaborations © 2021 The Authors. R&D Management published by RADMA and John Wiley & Sons Ltd R&D Management 0, 0, 2021 3and transfer between the regions of the New Silk Road? Two new industry- based boundary- spanning roles in U- I collaboration have been identified, and the Chinese government can be seen to be acting as an orchestrator in facilitating open innovation among firms in China. Third, how do companies adapt their R&D Management practices to compete and collaborate along the New Silk Road? Articles in this SI found that R&D outcomes of Chinese firms with affiliates in BRI- related countries are positively affected by the knowledge transfer activ-ities after the implementation of BRI. However, limited transferable management practices have been proposed in this SI, which requires further investigation.This SI is greatly inspired by the papers presented at the 2018 R&D Management workshop hosted by Tsinghua University, which focused on tackling a diverse range of interesting and relevant topics for supporting innovation in the digital era. We wish to thank Ellen Enkel, Xiaolan Fu, Letizia Mortara from the Editorial Board of the R&D Management for their very useful comments during the development of this SI.ReferencesBrem, A. and Nylund, P.A. (2021) Maneuvering the bumps in the New Silk Road: open innovation, technological complexity, dominant design, and the international impact of Chinese innovation. R&D Management, 1, 1– 16. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12451Cassiman, B. and Valentini, G. (2016) Open innovation: are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary? Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1034– 1046.Chen, J., Guo, Y., and Zhu, H. (2012) Can me- too products prevail? Performance of new product development and sources of idea generation in China – an emerging mar-ket. R&D Management, 42, 273– 288.Chesbrough, H., Heaton, S., and Mei, L. (2021) Open inno-vation with Chinese characteristics: a dynamic capabili-ties perspective. R&D Management, 1, 1– 13. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12438Collinson, S. and Liu, Y. (2019) Recombination for innova-tion: performance outcomes from international partner-ships in China. R&D Management, 49, 46– 63. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12293Corsi, S., Di Minin, A., and Piccaluga, A. (2014) Reverse innovation at Speres: a case study in China. Research- Technology Management, 57, 28– 34.Corsi, S., Fu, X., and Külzer- Sacilotto, C. (2021) Boundary spanning roles in cross- border university- industry col-laboration: the case of Chinese multinational cor-porations. R&D Management, 1, 1– 13. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12431Crupi, A. (2021) Technology transfer and team boundary- spanning activities and their antecedents: do the classic measures apply to China? R&D Management, 1, 1– 13. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12441Di Minin, A., Zhang, J., and Gammeltoft, P. (2012) Chinese foreign direct investment in R&D in Europe: a new model of R&D internationalization? European Management Journal, 30, 189– 203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2012.03.004Fischer, W.A. and Farr, C.M. (1985) Dimensions of innova-tive climate in Chinese R&D units. R&D Management, 15, 183– 190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9310.1985.tb005 39.xGassmann, O. and Han, Z. (2004) Motivations and barriers of foreign R&D activities in China. R&D Management, 34, 423– 437. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9310.2004.00350.xGawer, A. and Cusumano, M.A. (2014) Industry plat-forms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31, 417– 433.Govindarajan, V. and Ramamurti, R. (2011) Reverse inno-vation, emerging markets, and global strategy. Global Strategy Journal, 1, 191– 205.Govindarajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2012) Reverse inno-vation: a global growth strategy that could pre- empt disruption at home. Strategy & Leadership, 40, 5– 11. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878 57121 1257122Hart, S.L. and Christensen, C.M. (2002) The great leap: driving innovation from the base of the pyramid. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44, 51.Häussler, C. (2010) The economics of knowledge regula-tion: an empirical analysis of knowledge flows. R&D Management, 40, 300– 309.Li, S., Su, J., Liu, Y., Lepech, M.D., and Wang, J. (2021) How ‘Belt and Road’ initiative implementa-tion has influenced R&D outcomes of Chinese enter-prises: asset- exploitation or knowledge transfer? R&D Management, 1, 1– 20. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12445Li, X., Zhou, Y., Xue, L., and Huang, L. (2015) Integrating bibliometrics and roadmapping methods: a case of dye- sensitized solar cell technology- based industry in China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 97, 205– 222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techf ore.2014.05.007Macpherson, A., Jones, O., and Zhang, M. (2004) Evolution or revolution? Dynamic capabilities in a knowledge- dependent firm. R&D Management, 34, 161– 177.McDougall, P., Shane, S., and Oviatt, B.M. (1994) Explaining the formation of international new ven-tures: the limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing, 9, 469– 487. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883- 9026(94)90017 - 5Mu, J., and Di Benedetto, A. (2011) Strategic orientations and new product commercialization: mediator, moder-ator, and interplay. R&D Management, 41, 337– 359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9310.2011.00650.xRothwell, R. and Dodgson, M. (1991) External linkages and innovation in small and medium- sized enterprises. R&D Management, 21, 125– 138.© 2021 The Authors. R&D Management published by RADMA and John Wiley & Sons LtdCHEN ET AL4 R&D Management 0, 0, 2021Tang, C. (2016) Accessed external knowledge, centrality of intra- team knowledge networks, and R & D employee creativity. R&D Management, 46, 992– 1005.de la Tour, A., Glachant, M., and Ménière, Y. (2011) Innovation and international technology transfer: the case of the Chinese photovoltaic industry. Energy Policy, 39, 761– 770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.050Turpin, T., Garrett- Jone, S., and Rankin, N. (1996) Bricoleurs and boundary riders: managing basic research and inno-vation knowledge networks. R&D Management, 26, 267– 282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9310.1996.tb009 61.xWest, J., Salter, A., Vanhaverbeke, W., and Chesbrough, H. (2014) Open innovation: the next decade. Research Policy, 43, 805– 811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol. 2014.03.001von Zedtwitz, M. (2004) Managing foreign R&D laborato-ries in China. R&D Management, 34, 439– 452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9310.2004.00351.xZhou, Y., Li, X., Lema, R., and Urban, F. (2016) Comparing the knowledge bases of wind turbine firms in Asia and Europe: patent trajectories, networks, and globalisation. Science and Public Policy, 43, 476– 491.Zhou, Y., Miao, Z., and Urban, F. (2020) China’s leadership in the hydropower sector: identifying green windows of opportunity for technological catch- up. Industrial and Corporate Change, 29, 1319– 1343.

https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/322635/radm.12479.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y

The New Silk Road: R&D networks, knowledge diffusions, and open innovation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CUED - Cambridge University Engineering Department

Apollo (Cambridge)

The New Silk Road: R&amp;D networks, knowledge diffusions, and open innovation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CUED - Cambridge University Engineering Department

Apollo (Cambridge)

The New Silk Road: R&D networks, knowledge diffusions, and open innovation