Cognitive proximity and innovation performance: are collaborators equal?

Abstract

PurposeThis paper combines the concepts of search depth and cognitive proximity to investigate the impact of intense collaboration with different external agents on firms' innovation performance. It empirically tests whether firms that draw deeply on cognitively proximate collaborative partners are more innovative than those collaborating intensively with cognitively distant partners. It explores whether the impact of each external agent is equally important in determining the innovation output of firms.Design/methodology/approachUsing data from the Irish Community Innovation Survey 2012–2014, this paper employs a probit model to empirically test the impact of collaboration with cognitively proximate and distant sources of external knowledge to establish whether their impact on innovation performance is uniform.FindingsThe results show that not all collaborators equally impact firm innovation performance. Firms who indicate that knowledge sourced from backward linkages with suppliers is highly important are more likely to engage in both product and process innovation, with the effect more pronounced for the former. The extent of this is greatest for backward linkages compared to forward, horizontal and public linkages. Public linkages have the weakest impact on innovation output which raises questions from a policy perspective given the focus on university–industry collaboration for innovation. The findings indicate that collaboration with cognitively proximate sources of knowledge benefits firms' innovation output.Originality/valueThe study provides empirical evidence on the role of intense collaboration with cognitively proximate and distant external knowledge sources to explore their impact on the subsequent innovation performance of firms. The results can be used to help shape firm-level innovation policy, and indeed national policy, to promote innovation performance.

Spatio-temporal evolution and influencing factors of scientific and technological innovation level: A multidimensional proximity perspective

“…However, up to now, the five dimensions proposed by Boschma ( 2005 ) and the three dimensions proposed by Knoben and Oerlemans ( 2006 ) have the “proximity paradox” caused by “lock-in”, that is, close enough distance is conducive to innovation, while too close distance is a hindrance to innovation. “Proximity paradox” can be regarded as the logical starting point of “which is more important in depth or breadth of knowledge search” (O'Connor et al, 2021 ), so it is a proposition worthy of further exploration. In addition, the proximity of different dimensions is not an independent relationship but can affect each other and to some extent substitute each other.…”

Heterogeneous collaborative networks and firm performance: Do the contingent effects of family management and intellectual property rights matter?

“…, 2010). For instance, suppliers and universities can provide knowledge about firms' production processes, whereas customers and competitors can give firms greater market insights (O'Connor et al. , 2021).…”

“…Prior research indicates that firms networking with functionally different partners in their innovation processes (Classen et al, 2012;Nieto and Santamar ıa, 2007) can benefit from a more diverse set of knowledge, capabilities, resources and commercialisation opportunities (Garcia Martinez et al, 2017;Jiang et al, 2010). For instance, suppliers and universities can provide knowledge about firms' production processes, whereas customers and competitors can give firms greater market insights (O'Connor et al, 2021). In this collaborative context, the potential for achieving improved firm performance would (mainly) come from exploiting synergies arising from complementarities between organisations located in distinct parts of the supply chain (Van Beers and Zand, 2014).…”

Análise configuracional das proximidades em alianças de inovação

“…Já quando se trata de inovação para exploitation, os resultados foram congruentes com os destacados nos trabalhos de Hansen (2014) e Huber (2011), nos quais se aponta a necessidade de proximidade cognitiva, a fim de que os resultados sejam alcançados em um período menor. Esses resultados positivos a partir de colaboração com fontes cognitivamente próximas são observados tanto para inovação de produtos quanto de processos (O'Connor, Doran, & McCarthy, 2020). Assim, conforme esperado, em todas as configurações nas alianças de inovação para exploitation, a proximidade cognitiva apresenta-se como central (Huber, 2011).…”