The Transnational Field of Technology Innovation and The Relational Strategic Actions

Paulo Cesar Matui, Roniberto Morato do Amaral, Mário Sacomano Neto, Silvio Eduardo Alvarez Candido
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21529/RECADM.2019013

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to analyze the influence of new technologies on the relational structure of the automotive field. We are using a Strong Connected Component (SCC) as a proxy for an action field. This is a simulation based on the data extracted from 7,211 tetrahedral patents – which is simultaneously valid with China, US, Europe and Japan. We have adopted a descriptive form of strategic action in a field modeled as a network. From this network we present the data in panels to identify the structural changes of the groups and the nodal metric of the betweenness. We also perform semantic analysis to simulate the pattern of the actors' choices about technological concepts and present the data in panels that identify the pattern of technological choices before and after Google's entry. The relational structures analyzed in this research showed that the formation of hierarchical groups in SCC shows the strategic action of automakers in stabilizing the field of technological innovation. We found evidence of relational action as a way of framing the action of competitors and their choices. We identified a marginal participation of the actors of Information Technology and Communications (ICT), and that the innovation of this field is mainly architectural.


Keywords

networks; fields; innovation systems; autonomous car; information technology

Compartilhe

References


Bail, C. A. (2014, julho). The cultural environment: measuring culture with big data. Theory and Society, 43(3-4), 465-482. doi:https://doi-org.ez31.periodicos.capes.gov.br/10.1007/s11186-014-9216-5

Bergek, A., Berggren, C., Magnusson, T., & Hobday, M. (2013). Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation? Research Policy, 42, 1210-1224. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.009

Binz, C., & Truffera, B. (2017). Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts. Research Policy, 46, 1284–1298. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.05.012

Bourdieu, P. (2001). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson, M. Granovetter, & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The Sociology of Economic Life (2nd ed.), Cambridge: Westview Press.

Clauset, A., Newman, M. E., & Moore, C. (2004, dezembro). Finding community structure in very large networks. Physical Review E, 70(6), 1-6.

Dijk, M., PeterWells, & Kemp, R. (2016). Will the momentum of the electric car last? Testing an hypothesis on disruptive innovation. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 105, 77–88. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.01.013

Fellows, R., & Liu, A. M. (2016, September). ‘What does this mean’? Sensemaking in the strategic action field of construction. Construction Management and Economics, 35(8-9), 578-596. doi:10.1080/01446193.2016.1231409

Fligstein, N. (1996, August). Markets As Politics: A Political-Cultural Approach To Market Institutions. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 656-673.

Fligstein, N. (2001). The architecture of markets (1st ed.). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012). A Theory of Fields (1st Edition ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Franssen, T., & Kuipers, G. (2013, February). Coping with uncertainty, abundance and strife: Decision-making processes of Dutch acquisition editors in the global market for translations. Poetics, 41(1), 48-74. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2012.11.001

Garlaschelli, D., & Loffredo, M. I. (2004). Patterns of link reciprocity in directed networks. Physical review letters, 93(26), 268701.

Hansen, D. L., Shneiderman, B., & Smith, M. A. (2010). Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL (1st. ed.). Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann.

Higuchi, K. (2017). KH Coder 3 Reference Manual. Ritsumeikan University.

Hölzl, W., & Janger, J. (2014). Distance to the frontier and the perception of innovation barriers across European countries. Research Policy, 43, 707–725. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.001

Hong, Q., Wallace, R., & Krueger, G. (2014). Connected vs. Automated Vehicles as Generators of Useful Data (Relatório de Pesquisa/2014), Michigan, MI, Michigan Department of Transportation, MDOT, Center for Automotive Research, CAR..

Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2008). Social Network Analysis (2nd. ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Lazzarini, S. (2011). Capitalismo de laços (1a. ed.). Ro de Janeiro: Campus.

Lee, J.-Y., Bachrach, D. G., & Lewis, K. (2014, May-Jun). Social Network Ties, Transactive Memory, and Performance in Groups. Organization Science, 25(3), 951-967. doi:10.1287/orsc.2013.0884

Lundvall, B.-Å. (2007). National Innovation Systems - Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), 95-119. doi: 10.1080/13662710601130863

Marti, G. (2017, March). New Concepts for New Dynamics: Generating Theory for the Study of Religious Innovation and Social Change. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 56(1), 6-18. doi:10.1111/jssr.12325

Matui, P. C., & Sacomano Neto, M. (2017). Relational governance of Japanese automotive industry: modularity and multiregional strategic action field. IJATM, 17(4), 430-451. doi:10.1504/IJATM.2017.10010247

Mitnick, B. M., & Ryan, R. C. (Apr de 2015). On making meanings: Curators, social assembly, and mashups. Strategic Organization, 13(2), 141-152. doi:https://doi-org.ez31.periodicos.capes.gov.br/10.1177/1476127015580310

Newman, M. E. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. PNAS, 103(23), 8577–8582.

Ravasz, E., & Barabási, A.-L. (2003). Hierarchical organization in complex networks. Physical Review, 67(2), 026112.

Schuelke-Leech, B.-A. (2018). A model for understanding the orders of magnitude of disruptive technologies. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 129, 261–274. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.033

Shuen, A., & Sieber, S. (2009). Orchestrating the New Dynamic Capabilities. IESE Insights, Fourth Quarter (3), 58-65.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.

Variano, E. A., McCoy, J. H., & Lipson, H. (2004, May 7). Networks, Dynamics, and Modularity. Physical Review Letters, 92(18), 1-4.

White, H. C., Boorman, S. A., & Breiger, R. L. (1976). Social Structure from Multiple Networks. I. Blockmodels of Roles and Positions. American Journal of Sociology, 81(4), 730-780.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.