Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing

Business networks along innovation life cycle

Anna Paola Codini
Article information:
To cite this document:
Anna Paola Codini , (2015),"Business networks along innovation life cycle", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 30
Iss 3/4 pp. 329 - 341
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-11-2012-0235
Downloaded on: 02 May 2015, At: 02:07 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 75 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 20 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)

Giovanni Battista Dagnino, Gabriella Levanti, Anna Min, Pasquale Massimo Picone, (2015),"Interorganizational network and
innovation: a bibliometric study and proposed research agenda", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 3/4
pp. 354-377 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-02-2013-0032
Simone Guercini, Andrea Runfola, (2015),"Actors roles in interaction and innovation in local systems: a conceptual taxonomy",
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 3/4 pp. 269-278 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-12-2012-0256
Daniela Corsaro, Chiara Cant, (2015),"Actors heterogeneity and the context of interaction in affecting innovation networks",
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 3/4 pp. 246-258 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-12-2014-0249

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 543096 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
Department of Economics and Management, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy

Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to investigate how the relationships among the different actors within the business networks affect the evolution of
innovation along the different steps of technology life cycle.
Design/methodology/approach The study is supported by a longitudinal case study referred to a mechanical company operating in the knitting
machineries industry. A triangulation method integrating multiple data sources in a multiple method design was used to gather data.
Findings The longitudinal study supports the idea that interactions among the actors within the business networks heavily influence the
technology evolution.
Research limitations/implications Although the longitudinal case study reported in this paper refers to a period of time of about 10 years, our
findings refer only to a single case study in a specific sector and so they cannot be generalized.
Practical implications This paper provides important guidelines on how to manage the relationships emerging within a business network to
influence the new technologies development.
Originality/value The paper contributes to business networks literature, filling the gaps about how the relationships among the actors involved
in a network can evolve over time and influence the evolution of technology in itself.
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)

Keywords Innovation, Longitudinal study, Business networks, Technology life cycle, Textile sector
Paper type Case study

1. Introduction So, the idea that networks assume a strategic role in

One of the most interesting features of innovation derives from
the belief that it is a crossing activity, crossing in relation to the
companys departments and crossing in relation to the
companys boundaries. Innovation management often implies
the involvement of different departments in addition to
R&D and often needs to go beyond the companys
boundaries, looking for the contribution of external actors. As
a result, it is possible to state that the main point of new
product development processes today is knowledge.
Through the 1980s, the knowledge management perspective
was developed (Leonard Barton, 1995; Nonaka and Takeuchi,
1995). The changes in the competitive context and the increasing
complexity of the organization of the large managerial company
demonstrated the limits of the rationalist approach to new
product development, claiming the importance of innovation as
a continuous process of generation, usage and dissemination of
knowledge (Leonard Barton, 1995; Nonaka and Takeuchi,
1995; Nonaka, 2000, 2007).
The approaches developed in these years, defined as
Fourth and Fifth generations models (Rothwell, 1994) are
based on System and Network Integration; specific and
fundamental elements of this approach are the knowledge
sharing and the creation of networks of relationships within
the company and with external actors.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0885-8624.htm
innovation success is consolidated in literature. Many scholars
(Westerlund and Rajala, 2010; Rindfleisch and Moorman,
2003; Sividas and Dwyer, 2000; Wuyts et al., 2004) focused
their attention on the importance of inter-firm cooperation.
The open innovation literature also advocates the
importance of external agents for innovation (Chesbrough,
2003). In business-to-business and industrial marketing
literature, the role of networks in fostering innovation has been
deeply investigated (Ford, 1980; Hakansson, 1982; Turnbull
et al., 1996; Oberg and Grundstrom, 2009).
Recently business-to-business literature focused its
attention on the interactions emerging within the innovation-
generating network (Cant et al., 2012; Mason, 2012; Corsaro
and Snehota, 2011; Rampersad et al., 2010). Even if some
authors (Provan et al., 2007; Quitens and Matthyssens, 2010;
Olander et al., 2010) provide evidence of many studies of
business networks focusing on the existing business network,
there are also many researches regarding the role of change
and time in network perspective (Koza and Lewin, 1999;
Brito, 2001; Koka et al., 2006; Zaheer and Soda, 2009;
Degbey and Pelto, 2013).
While the literature about networks change and
development is rich, contributions regarding the impact of
network structure on innovation are scarce, especially those
adopting an evolutionary approach. Based on the gaps
emerging in the literature review, and supporting the idea that
knowledge processes are crucial in innovation management,
this paper addresses the cognitive approach to innovation
evolution (Kaplan and Tripsas, 2008).

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Received 30 November 2012

30/3/4 (2015) 329 341 Revised 30 April 2013
Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0885-8624] 25 October 2013
[DOI 10.1108/JBIM-11-2012-0235] Accepted 28 October 2014

329
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
Although many studies focus on the general importance of
networks to competitive performances of the firms, there are
few studies that investigate whether the strength of ties linking
the members of a network can really have an impact on
innovation performances.
Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how
innovation-generating business networks evolve through the
steps of the technology life cycle, giving particular attention to
the relationships among the actors involved in the network.
To answer the research question, the paper reports a
longitudinal case study. The case study refers to a mechanical
company operating in the knitting machinery industry. About
10 years ago, this company, which originally manufactured
circular hosiery and knitting machines, launched a new
technology that enabled the creation of the so-called
seamless clothing.
The introduction of this new technology resulted in
economic advantages related to production costs savings, as
well as market advantages related to the good fit and
fashionable content of the clothing manufactured by the new
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
machines.
The development of this innovation was thanks to strong
cooperation with a lead user, while its development on the
market was due to the contribution of the network. Through
the high potential of this innovation, it evolved toward a
maturity stage. Looking at the evolution of the developed
technology over the years, we noticed that it lost much of the
high degree of novelty that characterized its innovation in the
first years. This, we propose, may be related to the fact that
the relationships linking the various actors in the first years
became weak in the recent years.
The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 reports a
general review of the main contributions regarding business
networks, focusing specifically on innovation-generating
networks. The role of networks in the technology evolution is
specifically examined, referring to the cognitive approach to
the technology life cycle. After a brief description of the
applied methodology in Section 3, in Section 4, we report a
longitudinal case study, giving a picture of the network as it
was in the initial steps of the innovation life cycle and
describing its evolution through the years. Findings emerging
from the case study are discussed in Section 5. General
conclusions, managerial implications, limits and future
research are reported in Section 6.
2. Business networks and technology life cycle:
a general framework
Despite the advantages attainable by innovation, there is an
emerging need to manage complex activities that are aimed at
building the knowledge basis necessary to develop new
products. To create the capabilities necessary to develop a new
product, companies have to expand their internal knowledge;
this requires them to bring into action relationships with
external and specialized sources of knowledge (Ford, 1980;
Hakansson, 1987; Von Hippel, 1988; Webster, 1994).
For many years, literature about new product development
identified knowledge management as the key feature of
innovative processes. In particular, the studies dealt with
dynamic capabilities (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000; Vicari
and Verona, 2000; Danneels, 2002; Helfat and Peteraf, 2003;
330
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
Winter, 2003; Verona and Ravasi, 2003, Zahara et al., 2006;
Wang and Ahmed, 2007) and identified knowledge
acquisition, integration and dissemination as the main features
of companies seeking to launch successful new offerings in the
short term and maintain this ability in the long term.
The approaches defined as Fourth and Fifth generations
models are based on System and Network Integration
(Rothwell, 1994); specific and fundamental elements of this
approach are knowledge sharing and the creation of
relationship networks within the members of the company and
with external actors. Other models (Castaldo and Verona,
1998), based on the resource-based theory, identify the
instrument used to obtain access to the resource of knowledge
in the internal and external network. Further, in the Open
Innovation approach, (Chesbrough, 2005) the benefit to the
firm of using external sources of knowledge is emphasized.
In line with the necessity of firms to extract knowledge from
multiple sources in their innovation activities, innovation-
generating business networks can be defined as constellations
comprising the focal firm and its stakeholders (Munksgaard
and Freytag, 2011; Ritala and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2009;
Mller and Rajala, 2007), with the aim of generating new or
modified sources of value for the participating actors and
relevant external stakeholders.
In addition to the cited literature, we must acknowledge that
technology life cycle studies have also recently focused on the
role of interactions of producers, users and institutions in the
development of new technologies. The study by Kaplan and
Tripsas (2008) represents a significant contribution in this
sense, applying a cognitive lens to understanding technology
trajectories across the life cycle by developing a co-
evolutionary model of technological frames. Because research
on the technology life cycle has been largely silent about
cognitions role, the paper develops a model of technology
evolution that explicitly considers the role of cognitive
dynamics across organizations. The authors use cognitive
factors to refine their understanding of why technologies
evolve along a particular path over the course of the life cycle.
For each stage of the technology life cycle, they identify
conditions under which applying a cognitive lens might
change the expected technological outcome predicted by
purely economic or organizational models.
Before reviewing the literature focusing on the relationship
between network evolution and innovation, we will provide a
brief synthesis of the main contributions regarding network
evolution in itself.
Koza and Lewin (1999) focus on the coevolution of network
alliances and explore the antecedents and stimuli for the
formation of the network, the network morphology, the
motivation of the network members and the ways in which
the network coevolves with its environment and with the
adaptation practices of its members. Examining a single
longitudinal case study of a professional service network in the
public accounting industry, the paper concludes with a model
of the coevolutionary process.
Focusing on the environmental effects of network change,
the study by Koka et al. (2006) develops a framework for the
network change. Across four environmental change scenarios,
the authors propose four patterns of network change: network
expansion, network churning, network strengthening and
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
network shrinking. This pattern should give a guideline for a
better understanding of how to build an effective network.
The study by Zaheer and Soda (2009) also focuses on
network evolution. Analysing data on a comembership
network among 501 production teams in the Italian TV
production industry, the authors found that in addition to
structural holes spanned in the past, structural holes spanned
by teams originate from the prior status and centrality of teams
that members were a part of in the past. They also
demonstrate that spanning structural holes is associated with
superior team performance in terms of greater viewership.
Within the literature about business networks and
relationships, some interesting contributions refer to the role
of alignment and misalignment, on which the next cited
studies are centred.
Corsaro and Snehota (2011), in their study of alignment
and misalignment in business relationships, found that there
are no patterns in how alignment changes, but they identify a
slight tendency to misalignment over time. Their longitudinal
study shows that when parties are aware of misalignment and
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
when there are no external constraints to action, the effort to
align practices produces a positive effect on business
relationships, even when misalignment exists.
The role of actors as they develop resource combinations for
complex product and service solutions is investigated in the
recent study by Cant et al. (2012). Supported by a
longitudinal study of the construction of the first two
pre-discharge homes for patients with cognitive and motor
disabilities, the authors argue that each actor in a business
network has a dual role, participating in resource combining as
both provider and user of resources. The study provides a
contribution to existing research by showing the dual role of
each actor as user and producer and suggests that solutions
and resource combinations are conceived and developed as
the users and providers interact in business relationships.
In addition to the studies aimed at describing business-
to-business networks and relationships adopting an
evolutionary approach, we will focus on studies that more
deeply analyse the features assumed by the innovation
network, in an effort to understand the features of the network
contributing to innovation creation.
The study by Ahuja (2000) demonstrated that direct and
indirect ties have a positive impact on innovation, but the
impact of indirect ties is moderated by the number of a firms
direct ties. In this case, structural holes are proposed to have
both positive and negative influences on subsequent
innovation. The longitudinal study reported by Ahuja
indicates support for the predictions on direct and indirect
ties, but in the inter-firm collaboration network, an increasing
number of structural holes have a negative effect on
innovation.
With reference to how network characteristics influence
performances in the field of innovation, Tsai (2001) found
that the connectivity of business units in the network was
positively correlated with the innovation and performance of
the unit, while Burt (2004) showed that the likelihood of
managers to come up with good ideas depended on their
position within a network.
In their recent study, Bjrk and Magnusson (2009)
explored the relationship between innovation idea quality and
331
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
the network connectivity of idea providers, using the social
network analysis. The analysis they conducted reveals that
there is a clear relationship between the network connectivity
and the quality of the innovation ideas created.
Another interesting study about the impact of network
features on innovation is that by Berghman et al. (2012),
focusing on how learning mechanisms and information from
supply chain partners affect innovation processes. Analysing
survey data of 182 industrial firms, they examine how
information provision by upstream and downstream supply
chain parties moderates the effect of internal deliberate
learning mechanisms on value innovation. Results of PLS
analysis suggest that internal learning mechanisms and
external information exchange do not always work
symbiotically.
Literature relating to innovation-generating business
networks has focused on the different features assumed by the
networks over time. The main differences emerging in
innovation-generating business networks are based on the role
of contractual relations and informal ties (Powell and Grodal,
2005), the power balance among the actors (Ibarra, 1993), the
level of trust and social capital (Inkpen and Tsang, 2005) and
the level of openness (Pisano and Verganti, 2008).
In addition, innovation-generating business networks differ
depending on the radicalness of innovation and looseness and
cohesion of the network. The primal form of innovation-
generating business networks usually connects various actors,
such as universities, institutions and company-based research
organizations; they typically generate radical innovations and
influence emerging business and technological fields (Mller
and Svahn, 2006; Mller and Rajala, 2007). This primal form
of networks then evolves into inter-firm networks with the aim
of establishing a dominant technological design (Mller and
Rajala, 2007; Powell and Grodal, 2005; Anderson and
Tushman, 1990). These networks usually involve
collaborating and competing companies, together with other
stakeholders such as officials and financial institutions. The
most organized form of innovation networks are often
characterized by collaboration between complementary
technology producers and/or pilot customers (Mller and
Rajala, 2007), and they aim to create commercial business
applications starting from technological innovations.
Moving from one business form to another, the knowledge
held by the network changes. While in the primal form of
networks, knowledge held is often tacit, individual and widely
dispersed (Doz et al., 2000), in the most organized networks,
knowledge used becomes more explicit and codifiable.
Innovation-generating business networks can also evolve to
address the role of specific mechanisms of coordination in
networks. Ritala et al. (2012) analyse how innovation-
generating business networks and their coordination evolve
over time, emphasizing the evolutionary element inherent in
innovation-generating networks. In particular, the authors
discuss and analyse how two specific coordination
mechanisms management as coordination by
commanding and orchestration as coordination by
enabling as well as the role of actors, evolve during the
development of such networks. Closer examination of the
network evolution indicates that, while in the beginning,
uncertainty is more pronounced, clear goals and structures
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
sometimes emerged. In particular, the authors found that
network orchestration and management were emphasized
differently during different evolutionary phases and that they
had different roles.
To conclude this brief literature review of the relationships
between network evolution and innovation, we examine the
contribution by Capaldo (2007), who investigates why and
how strong dyadic inter-firm ties and two alternative network
architectures influence the innovative capability of the lead
firm in an alliance network; the author gives interesting
suggestions for advances on this topic. Using a longitudinal
case study, he suggests that, over time, a dual network
architecture exerts a positive impact on the innovative
capability of the lead firm in an alliance network by promoting
a virtuous circle in which growing numbers of contacts and
increasing network diversity reinforce each other, resulting in
a large, diverse and open network.
Although many studies focus on the general importance of
networks on competitive performances of firms, there are not
many studies that investigate whether the strength of ties
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
linking the members of a network really have an impact on
innovation performances. Although there is a high number of
contributions regarding business networks, the scarcity of
contributions on cognitive approaches to the technology life
cycle demonstrates the need to investigate more deeply how
the configuration of the network should be changed following
the introduction of technology and its diffusion on the market
to support the ensuing steps of innovation evolution (growing
and maturity steps).
Therefore, the aim of this paper is to use a longitudinal case
study to analyse how the network supporting innovation
evolves over time and to identify its contribution during the
various steps of the innovation life cycle. In particular, the
paper aims to investigate how innovation-generating business
networks evolve through the steps of the technology life cycle
and how they affect the evolution of innovation.
3. The methodology
The empirical part of this paper is a longitudinal case study.
The longitudinal case study reported in this paper refers to
a mechanical company in the knitting machinery industry.
About 10 years ago, this company, originally operating in the
manufacturing of circular hosiery and knitting machines,
launched a new technology, which enabled it to create the
so-called seamless clothing.
Thanks to new technology, the new machines enabled the
fast production of outwear and underwear characterized by
the absence of seams, passing in just a few minutes from
the yarn to the finished product. This simplified both the
manufacturing process and the entire supply chain. The
introduction of this new technology resulted in economic
advantages related to the production costs savings, as well as
market advantages related to the good fit and fashionable
content of the clothes manufactured by the new machines.
The choice of this case study was not by chance: the
innovation we decided to focus on was generated within the
network thanks to the cooperation of a lead user and its
diffusion on the market was thanks to the contribution of the
network. Over the years, the market evolved rapidly and
influenced the actors interactions. Such complex context gave
332
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
us the opportunity to see how the relationships within the
network evolved and how they influenced the innovation
generated from their introduction to the market, up to the
present day.
With regard to the research question, the selected case study
was revealed to be very interesting. This case made the change
process transparently observable and the phenomenon of
interest most likely to appear (Eisenhardt, 1989).
In this specific case study, it was crucial for the company to
find out which elements affect the evolution of innovation and
its profitability to invest in new technologies. As we will see,
limited financial resources, related to the high investment that
a textile technology requires, create many difficulties in the
new product development stage. The risk of developing
unsuccessful products is so high that the company refuses to
do it without having the assurance that someone will adopt the
new technology when it is ready. As a result, data gathering is
naturally easier when the aim of the research contributes to
both the advancement of knowledge and the practical
concerns of the organization.
The longitudinal case study has been preferred to another
qualitative methodology for various reasons. First, the
longitudinal approach was considered to be suitable for
examining the how and why questions (Yin, 1994). By
using longitudinal field studies, the researcher can get close
enough to the studied phenomena to discover the forces most
crucial to the object of inquiry how the relationships among
the various actors within the business networks affect the
evolution of innovation through the steps of the technology life
cycle. Moreover, this methodology allows the researcher to
remain close to the studied phenomena for long enough
to discover the causal links among events and constructs to
create a fertile basis for generating theory (Miller and Friesen,
1982).
Second, the benefits of longitudinal real-time studies make
them particularly useful for studying processes of change and
development in organizations (Barley, 1990; Van de Ven,
1993). As we said before, some time had passed from the
introduction of the innovation we decided to study, so this
enables us to understand, through a retrospective view, how
the relationships within the network evolved over the years,
and at the same time analyse the evolution of the innovation
using a longitudinal perspective, and following the change
process step by step.
Although the general fit of the longitudinal study with our
research questions (how the relationships among the different
actors within the business networks affect the evolution of
innovation through the steps of technology life cycle), gathering
longitudinal data on business-to-business relationships implies
serious challenges (Anderson, 1995):
Researchers need to collect data about the same set of relationships with
identical partners over several periods. In many instances, this is a virtually
impossible task and may partly explain why longitudinal research is still an
exception even when we deal with dynamic phenomena such as business
relationship (Eggert et al., 2006).
To overcome this limitation to the use of longitudinal study,
we decided to apply a triangulation method integrating
multiple data sources in a multi-method design, as
recommended by Jick (1979).
The data collection included not only people used within
the observed company but also the main actors operating
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
within the network. This approach gave us a better
understanding of the relationships among the actors and the
investigated company, and of their evolution through time.
Therefore, we can state that the longitudinal study directly
involved the company: various kinds of data were collected in
the most critical stage of the innovation life cycle to get
information about the evolution of the innovation itself. The
analysis of the relationships within the network was based on
information emerging from the interviews of both company
managers and the main strategic actors operating in the
network. Documents and informal interviews collected during
the most critical stages of the innovation life cycle were also
useful for this research.
As reported by Table I, the duration of observation and data
gathering changed as the innovation passed from one life cycle
stage to the next. The introduction stage took about two years,
during which data collection was based mainly on formal
interviews and document analysis. The growth and the
maturity stages lasted one year and six months, respectively.
During this second step, participant observation, informal
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
interviews and documents analysis were preferred to maintain
the trust relationship.
As in every longitudinal study, real-time analysis was
combined with retrospective analysis. For retrospective
analysis, data were collected using mainly formal interviews
and document analysis, while in real-time analysis, informal
interviews, participant observation and documents analysis
were preferred.
Studying only one organization obviously leads to
disadvantages in terms of generalization. To go beyond this
limitation, we decided to select an organization that could be
considered representative of the specific type of the studied
phenomenon (as noted above), and where the process could
be observable (hlstrm and Karlsson, 2009). The
involvement of the various subjects acting within the network,
then, brought aspects of a multiple case study to a single,
longitudinal case.
In the end, we must acknowledge that using the longitudinal
case study approach implies significant researcher
commitment and organizational access. One of the most
important steps in the research design is to find an internal
vantage point from which to gather data.
Given that data collection in case studies should not be
driven by pre-formulated propositions (Eisenhardt, 1989), in
Table I The longitudinal study: temporal flow and object of observation
Life cycle stage Duration of observation
Introduction (2000-2002) 2 years
Growth (2002-2007) 1 year
Maturity (2007-today) 6 months
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
our case study, we will consider the pragmatics of literature
related to networks to interpret the results emerging from the
longitudinal observation and to formulate our hypothesis. As
suggested by the literature, the theoretical framework was
used here like a telescope (Berg, 1974), pointing to the
organization to direct the researchers attention towards some
aspects of the actors interaction evolution and the consequent
innovation dynamics. What we expect as the main
contribution of our research is the formulation of a hypothesis
referring to how the evolution of business relationships affects
innovation development in its life cycle.
With reference to the operationalization of the variables
involved in the case study, to capture the strength of the business
relationships, we referred to the operationalization of strength, as
described by Granovetter (1973) and recently adapted by
Capaldo (2007). According to this frame, tie strength of a
relationship is composed of a temporal dimension (the
relationships overall duration), a resource dimension (the
frequency of collaboration) and a social dimension (the intensity
of collaboration including the knowledge exchange).
To capture the innovative performance, the other
dimension involved in the analysis, we referred to the general
innovative capability of the firm. To express a judgment on
this capability, we analysed the launched innovations
according to their level of novelty, their ability to stay on the
market for a long time and their level of profitability deriving
from innovation sales.
4. The longitudinal study
The longitudinal case study reported in this paper refers to a
mechanical company in the knitting machinery industry.
About 10 years ago, this company, originally operating in the
manufacture of circular hosiery and knitting machines,
launched a new technology that enabled the production of
so-called seamless clothing.
Thanks to new technology, the new machines enabled the
fast production of outwear and underwear characterized by
the absence of seams, passing from the yarn to the finished
product in just a few minutes. This simplified the
manufacturing process and the entire supply chain. The
introduction of this new technology resulted in economic
advantages related to production costs savings, as well as
Data gathering
Direct interviews with managers of the company and with strategic actors networks
Documents analysis (internal and external)
Direct interviews with managers of the company
Documents analysis (internal and external)
Informal interviews with strategic actors network
Participant observation
Direct interviews with managers of the company
Documents analysis (internal and external)
Informal interviews with strategic actors network
Participant observation
Documents analysis
333
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
market advantages related to the good fit and fashionable
content of the clothes manufactured by the new machines.
Herein, we will describe the different stages of the seamless
life cycle, illustrating for each stage the innovation launched
(and the addressed market) and the articulation of the
network, with particular focus on the involved actors and their
interactions.
4.1 The introduction stage
The development stage of this new technology was very
interesting. In fact, the concept was born from a lead user
idea. A customer operating in the area of hosiery
manufacturing suggested to the company that the diameter of
the machines traditionally used to produce hosiery be enlarged
to create a tubular body fit. Cooperation with the customer
improved the new technology and created the first seamless
machines.
The introduction of this new technology to the market gave
the company the opportunity to strengthen its leading position
in the hosiery market and to enter new markets, such as
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
underwear.
The penetration of seamlesswear in the underwear market
was amazing. Within only three years, the portion of
seamlesswear in the underwear market went from 2 to 9 per
cent. Eventually, the new technology allowed the industry to
produce many different finished products such as sportswear,
outerwear and medical wear, but the initial great success of
seamless was in underwear.
This was not by chance. First, seamless technology is
technically very similar to hosiery technology, so introducing it
was easier for the hosiery manufacturing companies who did
not need to invest as much in the acquisition of new know-
how. Second, this was a mature market that needed to
reposition its commercial strategies. The introduction of
seamless technology gave hosiery manufacturers the
opportunity to diversify their production, focusing not only on
hosiery but also on underwear, and, in some cases, outwear
too.
The initial success of seamless technology in the market was
related mostly to the ability of the company to create a
network (Figure 1). The involvement of various actors
communicated the benefits of this new technology to the
Figure 1 The network around seamless technology in the
introduction stage
334
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
company and supported the launch of this technology and its
diffusion on the market. The network was composed of direct
customers (knitting companies), final customers (the final
brands of underwear, sportswear, prt-a-porter and
medicalwear), suppliers, fashion schools, universities, research
centres, stylists, associations, event organizers, and so on.
4.2 The growing stage
After the market launch, the following years were
characterized by a general contraction of demand. Hence, in
this period, the company decided to invest in new technology
development and to search for new market opportunities.
During this period, the earliest models of seamless machines
were improved. Compared to the first models, the newer
models launched on the market were able to create more
fashionable clothing, with more variety and a higher quality in
the finished products. The new seamless machines were able
to use more types of yarns (microfibers and other synthetic
fibres) to make more comfortable clothing, and to create a
wider range of textiles and prints.
During the growing stage, the company moved in two main
directions:
1 It consolidated its leading position in the underwear
market.
2 It tried to get into new markets, such as sportswear and
prt-a-porter, thanks to the strengthening of partnerships
with many famous brand names.
Another main goal of this stage was the strengthening of the
relationship with distributors, who represented the main link
with the final consumer. Many promotional actions were
planned during this stage, in cooperation with some
underwear brands, to give more visibility to the seamless
products at the point of sales.
4.3 The maturity stage
In the last year of the study, seamless technology approached
its maturity stage. The heavy economic crisis hit the global
market during these years, also affecting the textile sector. In
these years, many of the marketing actions realized in the past
were revised and eliminated. The company decided to focus
on the specific tools of business-to-business communication
(specialized reviews and the most important exhibition of the
sportswear and knitting sectors) and to revise the articulation
of the network (Figure 2).
This does not mean that the articulation of the network
changed, but that among the many relationships developed
Figure 2 The network around seamless technology in the maturity
stage
 Business networks along innovation life cycle Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anna Paola Codini Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341

over the years since the market launch (aimed at creating
awareness of the new technology), the company decided to
concentrate on the most strategic ones.
In the realization of new technologies, co-production with
the main customers operating in underwear, sportswear and
knitting is critical. Because of the limited financial resources
during this period, new technologies are developed only when
customers ask for them. Without a clear indication of interest
by the customer, new product development would be too
expensive.
With regard to the served markets, it is important to stress that
in this period, the underwear market no longer represented the
main market because of its low margins, and hence the decision
of the company to invest in sportswear and knitting.
5. Findings and discussion
As a conclusion of the case study, we can posit that:
during the innovation life cycle, the business network
evolved and changed its configuration; and
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
involved in the networks and the strength of the developed
relationships), and some information about innovations
launched (developed technologies and their main features). In
particular, the involved actors were hosiery and underwear,
sportswear and knitting (in the introduction stage);
underwear, sportswear and knitting (in the growth stage) and
underwear, sportswear and knitting and outwear (in the
maturity stage).
With regard to the developed technologies, the table reports
the various models of textile machines launched on the
market. We point out that the names reported in the fourth
column of Table II refer to three different product lines. The
SM models in general refer to the mono-frontura
technology. These are single jersey electronic circular
machines with only one selection point per feed for the
production of single body-size garments, for underwear,
outwear, beachwear, sportswear and sanitary wear. The
SM-DJ models use the doppia frontura technology.
These are double-knit electronic circular knitting machines for
the production of seamless garments for underwear,

the interactions among the involved actors influenced the

evolution of technology.
The innovations launched in the market, starting from the
introduction of seamless introduction to the present stage of
maturity, were many. By analysing in depth the features of the
various machine models launched in the market over the
years, we notice that they were highly influenced by market
dynamics and, in particular, by the interactions with the
network actors.
Table II reports, with regard to the different stages of life
cycle, some information about the network (the actors
outerwear, sportswear, beachwear and sanitary wear in
continuous tubular fabric and/or separated pieces having
single welt and separation yarn with two selection points on
the cylinder and dial on each feed. Compared to the previous
technology, this machine allows the use of all different types of
rib, as well as links structures, due to the availability of one
needle-by-needle selection in cylinder and dial. Technologies
identified by the SWD name include electronic WARP
knitting machines for seamless items (pantyhose, underwear
and outwear garments). This is a linear rather than a circular
machine.

Table II The evolution of the business network and of innovation along the different life cycle steps
Developed
Life cycle stage Involved actors Strength of the relationships technologies Innovation features
Introduction Hosiery and Very strong relationships both with customers SM8 SM9 First seamless machines using a technology
underwear and with the other actors of the network similar to the hosiery one
Sportswear
Knitting
Growth Underwear Strong relationships with customers and with SM4-TR2 Improved versions of the first seamless
some strategic actors of the network SM4-TL2 machines specialized in the realization of
(distributors in particular) SM4-PLUS3 more fashionable finished products
SM4-C
SM8-TOP1V
SM8-TOP2
SM8-EV04
SM-DJ
SM-DJ2T
SM-DJ2TS
Sportswear
Knitting
Maturity Underwear Very strong relationships with customers and SWD4/SJ SWD6/2J Improved versions of the first seamless
weak relationships with the other actors of SM8-TR1 machines specialized in: the usage of high-
the network SM6-RIB2 quality yarns, the realization of different
Sportswear knitting and the realization of traditional
Knitting and knitting
outwear The usage of traditional yarns (cotton and
wool), the usage of high-quality yarns and
the realization of different knitting

335
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
The first models launched on the market were hailed as a
radical innovation by the company because of their
economic and commercial advantages. However, from an
external point of view, we can define these as marginal
innovations because of their similarity with hosiery
technology. What moved the company in this innovative
process was the customers needs, especially those of hosiery
manufacturers, to diversify their production to get into new
markets with greater demands.
As a result, the main feature of the first models launched on
the market was their similarity to previous technology. The
new machines had high potential in terms of cost savings and
in terms of diversifying the business, but the finished products
they realized were not so radical for the market. The first
underwear realized was seamless but this was not an
advantage that the market particularly appreciated.
We can posit that:
H1. In the introduction stage, a strong relationship with the
customer and strong relationships with all actors in the
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
network positively affect innovation performances.
Only during the following steps did the company realize that
the new technology could have a higher market potential for
investing in the improvement of finished product quality.
During the growing stage, other potential applications of the
technology emerged: sportswear and outwear. In these
businesses, however, the customer goals were different. What
the sportswear and the outwear customers needed in those
years was the opportunity to realize new products that were
fashionable, with a particular type of knitting. This was
the direction that drove the second step of their R&D efforts.
The new machines were able to realize sportswear and
outwear of higher quality (using new yarns and improving the
knitting of the finished products, for example, by inserting
transpiring and compressive areas).
As the maturity stage approached, innovations launched in
the market changed again. In this new context, all the served
customers underwear, sportswear, knitting and outwear
seemed to be particularly cost-oriented. The global economic
crisis and the hard competition characterizing many of the
cited businesses caused them to look for innovations that
ensured increasing margins.
The innovations developed in the last years were:
new models specializing in the knitting of thinner yarns
and able to do various knitting such as laces (innovations
addressed especially to underwear to create higher-quality
products with higher margins as compared to the basic
seamlesswear);
new models specializing in the realization of seamlesswear
with transpiring and compressive areas using innovative
yarns suitable for sport activity; and
new models able to realize more traditional clothing, in
terms of design and yarns (seamless knitting machines able
to create cord and plait using cotton and wool).
What is interesting with regard to these new technologies is
that they are customer-driven. This is particularly evident in
the machines used for knitting and outwear. In their case, the
main features of technology point out the two main sources of
competitive advantage in fashion today: variety and speed.
336
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
While in the introduction stage of seamless technology the
company thought to reach the prt-a-porter market, the
fashion market most suitable for this technology seems to be
the mass market. The entrance to the market of new brands,
such as Zara and H&M, that radically altered the mass market
approach by demanding the continuous introduction of new
collections throughout the year, caused the company to
address its technology to the mass market; only with high
volumes can the high investment in the seamless machines be
paid off.
With regard to the maturity stage, we suggest that:
H2. In the maturity stage, strong relationships with
customers are not enough to positively influence
innovation performances if they are not supported by
strong relationships among the various actors of the
network.
Looking at the two pictures (Figure 1, 2) and reporting the
configuration of the network as it was in the introduction stage
and as it is now in the maturity stage, we can observe that the
articulation of the network has changed significantly. Passing
from the introduction to the maturity stage, we see that the
number of involved actors was greatly reduced, even as the
relationships were reinforced. While in the introduction stage,
the relationships among the actors were generally strong, in
the maturity stage, some of them became weaker and this
heavily influenced the evolution of technology. (Capaldo,
2007).
In the introduction stage, the relationship between user and
producer was a cooperative relationship, which resulted in the
most radical innovation within the seamless technology (the
first seamless machine). The idea of the new technology came
from a suggestion by a lead user and was developed to reach
the same goals for both user and producer. The main users of
the first technologies the hosiery brands had the need to get
into new markets to face the economic crisis afflicting the
hosiery sector in that period and this need was shared by the
hosiery machinery producers, which wanted to diversify its
product portfolio by getting into new, more profitable
markets. The strong relationship in this case brought about
the development of the first prototypes, then consolidated
them in a dominant design, thanks to continuous cooperation
between user and producer.
An important cooperative relationship developed
consequent to the seamless technology development was the
one with suppliers, particularly with the yarn and textile
producers. This also contributed to the consolidation of the
dominant technology.
Other relationships developed during the introduction stage
(with fashion schools, universities, research centres, stylists,
associations, event organizers, and so on) were cooperative
marketing relationships; their aim was to contribute to the
diffusion of the seamless technology innovation in the final
customer market. The basic idea was that to push the seamless
technology, the final customer had to perceive the finished
products, made with seamless technology, as new. This
perception required the cooperation of the entire network
surrounding the seamless technology.
As reported in Table II, the relationships developed during
the introduction stage are defined as strong according to the
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
adopted frame. In particular, the relationships with customers
and with other actors in the network, in this stage, were
revealed to be strong in terms of the cited dimensions of tie
strength, that is, temporal, resource and social dimension.
The relationship developed with the customers, in
particular with the lead user, was a long-term relationship.
The customers operating in hosiery and underwear businesses
who were suggesting the idea of seamless technology were old
customers who had developed long-term and consolidated
trust relationships. They were already customers of the
company as hosiery machine buyers. The relationship
throughout the introduction stage was also frequent because
the customers and the company worked together, for a long
time, to develop the new technology. This relationship was
also intense, in terms of knowledge exchange, as revealed by
the fact that customers and companys employees (people
coming mainly from R&D and marketing departments)
worked together in a sort of task force throughout the entire
concept definition stage.
The relationships with the other actors of the network in this
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
first stage were also revealed to be strong with regard to all the
investigated dimensions. In particular, the relationship with
yarn suppliers was long term, frequent and intense in terms of
knowledge exchange. These were the same suppliers of yarns
when the company operated in the hosiery sector, who had
decided to develop new yarns specifically for seamless
technology. For this reason, they often cooperated with the
company during this period; knowledge exchanged was very
intense because R&D departments of suppliers and of the
company worked together to develop the new yarns.
Along with supplier relationships, cooperation developed
with other strategic actors of the network can also be defined
as strong. During the introduction stage, the company
employed some stylists to create a collection of finished
clothes (underwear, outwear and sportswear) to show the
invited customers what seamless technology was able to do. In
these years, the company decided to establish a fashion school
to train seamless experts (stylists, marketing managers, and
so on).
The marketing strategy adopted in this period was a typical
pull strategy. The marketing manager of the company was
convinced that to push the new technology, the end-user
customers had to pull it (justifying many co-marketing actions
with some famous brand names of underwear and prt-a
porter) and that the entire supply chain and all the actors
around it had to be ready to use the new technology. This is
the reason why the relationships developed in the introduction
stage were defined as strong with regard to temporal,
resource and social dimensions.
As the marketing manager of the company declared just
after the seamless launch on the market:
Seamless represents a radical innovation in knitting and outwear businesses
involving the entire supply chain. In order to grant success of this
innovation, our company has to develop a seamless culture, so all the
actors directly and indirectly involved in the supply chain have to be
involved. The success of our innovation depends on our ability to get into
the market as a group.
The enforcement of some cooperative relationships, especially
with some key customers (operating in different sectors:
underwear, sportswear, knitting and outwear) in the growing
stage brought about the development of some incremental
337
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
technologies. The aim of both users and producers in this
stage was to increase margins and consolidate the positioning
on the addressed market. This required the development of
machinery that was able to guarantee a higher quality of
finished products; this was the direction that the company
followed during this stage.
The relationships developed in the growing stage, similar to
those developed during the introduction stage, were strong
relationships. Most cooperative relationships developed after
the market launch on the market were consolidated (especially
the ones with strategic customers operating in underwear,
sportswear, knitting and outwear). The long-term nature,
frequency and intensity of knowledge exchange in these
relationships led to the improvement of the original
technology. As a result, the large number of technologies
developed in this stage derived from strong cooperation with
some strategic customers and with yarn suppliers.
During this growing stage, the relationship with distribution
was enforced to consolidate the companys pull strategy.
As the marketing manager of the company declared in this
stage:
Our company knows that, in order to push seamless on the consumer
market, we have to train distributors who actually dont know the real
advantages of seamless products and so they are not able to convince the
customer.
Based on this rationale, the company, together with some
customers (especially the ones producing underwear),
developed strong cooperation with distributors with the aim of
convincing them to promote seamless products supported by
strategic merchandizing actions.
The maturity stage is particularly interesting in terms of
network and technology evolution. As revealed by the analysis
of the network configuration, the number of involved actors
was greatly reduced but the relationships with some key
customers in this period were strengthened. Looking at the
innovation development, the situation is a bit different when
comparing the two main addressed markets. In terms of the
sportswear brands, the relationship with these customers
enforced bringing about the development of new, if marginal,
technologies. Because of the high costs of new technology
industrialization, the new products are now more
customer-driven than in the past: a new technology is
created on demand and only when the customer guarantees to
buy it. With regard to the knitting brands, it is interesting to
note how the higher interactions between user and producer,
often characterized by conflicts, brought about a downgrade in
technology. To satisfy the customer need to have clothing
manufactured faster and cheaper but with traditional yarns
and style, the new seamless machine launched in this sector
uses a linear versus circular technology, similar to that used
before the introduction of seamless technology.
According to the adopted frame, the relationships
developed in the maturity stage were different: those with
some strategic customers became stronger, while those with
others in the network became weaker.
On one hand, we can state that relationships with some
customers were strong in the maturity stage because they were
long-term (especially the ones with some sportswear
producers), frequent and intense in terms of knowledge
exchange. The selected customers continue to cooperate in
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
developing machines together with the R&D department of
the company, guiding the new product development process.
As a consequence of the intense knowledge exchange with the
customers, the new seamless machines seem to be designed
based on the customers needs.
On the other hand, relationships with the rest of the network
became weaker, especially in terms of frequency (the
cooperation is now more sporadic) and in terms of knowledge
exchange. Only the relationships with some stylists remain
(they sometimes are invited by the company to develop new
collections), but those with the other actors in the network are
mostly absent.
The evolution of the network relationships also emerges
from the words of the new marketing director of the company,
reported hereby:
While during the launch the network around the company was very
articulated, actually we decided to revise it. Cooperations with the main
brands of knitting underwear and sportswear are still alive, but they involve
only some selected customers, really interested in the development of new
technologies. We dont invest anymore in new technologies if the brand is
not really interested in them.
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
As a conclusion of the analysis of the network evolution and of
its impact on innovation performances along its life cycle, we
can posit that:
H3. The strength of business relationships, both with the
customers and with other actors of the network, is
crucial to support innovative performance of the firm,
especially in the maturity stage.
6. Conclusions
This paper contributes to business networks literature, filling
the gaps in information about how the relationships among the
actors involved in a network can evolve over time, influencing
the evolution of technology itself.
The longitudinal study supports the idea that interactions
among the actors within the business networks heavily
influence the evolution of technology (Kaplan and Tripsas,
2008).
The cognitive model elaborated by Kaplan and Tripsas
(2008) emphasizes that it is the interaction of the cognition of
multiple actors in the market that shapes the evolution of
technology. Additionally, it argues that the emergence of a
collective technological frame is a contested process and that
diversity and contestation among frames can help explain why
and which alternatives appear during the era of ferment of a
technology life cycle, and why a dominant design is not always
achieved (Klepper and Simons, 1997; Utterback, 1994).
In our case study, the role of interactions among the actors
involved in the business network in influencing the technology
evolution is quite clear. In the introduction stage, the
cooperation between user and producer had a positive impact
on innovation development. The first prototypes and the
dominant design that emerged were derived mainly from the
strong cooperation between the two actors and were heavily
influenced by the strength of the relationship.
This was also partially confirmed in the following growing
stage, where the cooperation between users and producer
brought about the development of various new versions of the
basic technology.
338
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
What appears to be interesting is the impact that the
dissolving of the network, in the final stage of innovation
evolution, had on new technology development. The conflicts
emerging during this period brought, on one hand (with
regard to the sportswear applications), the development of
new interesting customer-based solutions and, on the another
hand (with regard to the knitting applications), the downgrade
of technology, back to the traditional solutions.
As a result, we can posit that our study supports the
cognitive approach to technology development, confirming
how the evolution of relationships affects innovative
performances of the firm leading the network (McEvily and
Zaheer, 1999). In particular, the paper contributes to better
defining how relationships developed within the network
affect innovative performances.
Our results partially confirm what the literature says about
the states of network evolution and innovation capabilities. In
particular, our results confirm that the leveraging of a dual
network architecture is a distinctive relational capability that
allows the lead firm in an alliance network to gain and sustain
competitive advantage based on a dynamic innovative
capability (Capaldo, 2007). If we look at the evolution of
innovation through its life cycle, the role of dual relationships
is not so clearly associated with a positive innovative
performance. In our case study, the strengthening of the
relationships with some customers in the maturity stage
brought about a downgrade in innovation performances. This
may be due to the emergence of some conflicts and goals
misalignment (Corsaro and Snehota, 2011).
Another interesting result refers to the evolution of the
network as a whole. While literature supports the idea that
over time, a strong ties network architecture exerts a negative
impact on the innovative capability of the lead firm in an
alliance network (by promoting a vicious circle in which
reducing numbers of contacts results in a small, homogenous
and closed network), our case study shows a benefit from the
strengthening of network ties (Capaldo, 2007). In the
maturity stage, indeed, when the network ties become weaker,
innovation performances evolve negatively.
Although the longitudinal case study reported in the paper
refers to a period of about 10 years, our findings refer only to
a single case study in a specific sector and, hence, they cannot
be generalized. Therefore, the ambiguous findings about the
impact of interactions on innovation evolution need to be
supported in the future by other case studies, perhaps referring
to companies and networks operating in other sectors.
The ambiguous results emerging with reference to the
maturity stage (that sometimes the enforcement of the
relationships with customers may affect negatively
innovation performances) suggest an interesting direction
for future research. To understand if this statement can be
confirmed, it may be interesting to further investigate the
features of these relationships, going beyond the framework
we decided to use. In addition to temporal, resource and
social dimensions, other dimensions that affect innovation
performances of network relationships may emerge. Based
on this consideration, we can propose that a quantitative
research study, involving a higher number of companies
operating in different businesses and investigating the
relationship among different features of network
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
relationships and companys innovation performances, may
provide an interesting contribution to business network
research.
Another interesting research implication is associated with
the development of H2, where we state that in the maturity
stage, strong relationships with customers are not enough to
positively influence innovation performances if they are not
supported by strong relationships among the various actors of
the network. Our aim in future research to verify this
hypothesis is to more deeply analyse (perhaps using a
quantitative methodology) the interactive effect of both
relationships with customers and relationships with the
network on innovative performances of the leading company.
Although limited by the evidence, this paper and future
research supporting (or not supporting) our findings could
provide important guidelines on how to manage the
relationships emerging within a business network to influence
new technology development. The identification of a pattern
in the evolution of business relationships and the consequent
evolution of technologies may suggest which kind of
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
relationships are more effective in terms of innovation
performances.
Our findings show that strong relationships with customers
and with the network surrounding a company positively affect
innovative performances of the leading company during the
introduction stage, while the effect of strong relationships with
customers may be ambiguous in maturity stages. This may
confirm to companies that investing in developing strong
relationships and cooperative strategies in the initial steps of
innovation life cycles represents a good strategy for assuring
the success of a new product on the market. Because one of
the investigated dimensions of tie strength relationships was
knowledge exchange, this could be encouraging to those
companies that are usually afraid of cooperative relationships
because they think that knowledge exchange could threaten
innovation itself.
To give more specific guidelines to the companies interested
in improving their innovative performances through network
development, quantitative research to investigate additional
features of business relationships will be necessary.
References
hlstrm, P. and Karlsson, C. (2009), Longitudinal field
studies, in Karlsson, C., (Ed.), Researching Operations
Management, Routledge, New York and London,
pp. 196-235.
Ahuja, G. (2000), Collaboration networks, structural holes,
and innovation: a longitudinal study, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 425-455.
Anderson, J.C. (1995), Relationships in business markets:
exchange episodes, value creation and their empirical
assessment, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 346-350.
Anderson, P. and Tushman, M.L. (1990), Technological
discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclical model of
technological change, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 604-633.
Barley, S.R. (1990), Images of imaging: notes on doing
longitudinal field work, Organization Science, Vol. 1 No. 3,
pp. 185-197.
339
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
Berg, C. (1974), Samrdssystemet: en klinisk undreskning i
ett vxande fretag (The Participation System: A Clinical
Study of a Growing Company: In Swedish), EFI,
Stockholm.
Berghman, L., Matthyssens, P. and Vandenbempt, K. (2012),
Value innovation, deliberate learning mechanisms and
information from supply chain partners, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 27-39.
Bjrk, J. and Magnusson, M. (2009), Where do good
innovation ideas come from? Exploring the influence of
network connectivity on innovation idea quality, Journal of
Product Innovation Management, Vol. 26 No. 6,
pp. 662-670.
Brito, C.M. (2001), Towards and institutional theory of the
dynamics of industrial networks, Journal of Business and
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 150-166.
Burt, R.S. (2004), Structural holes and good ideas,
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 110 No. 2, pp. 349-399.
Cant, C., Corsaro, D. and Snehota, I. (2012), Roles of
actors in combining resources into complex solutions,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 139-150.
Capaldo, A. (2007), Network structure and innovation: the
leveraging of dual network as a distinctive relationla
capability, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 6,
pp. 585-608.
Castaldo, S. and Verona, G. (1998), Lo Sviluppo Dei Nuovi
Prodotti. Teoria ed Analisi Empiriche in Una Prospettiva
Cognitiva, Egea, Milano.
Chesbrough, H.W. (2003), The era of open innovation,
MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 35-41.
Chesbrough, H.W. (2005), Open Innovation, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Corsaro, D. and Snehota, I. (2011), Alignment and
misalignment in business relationships, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 1042-1054.
Danneels, E. (2002), The dynamics of product innovation
and firm competences, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 23 No. 12, pp. 1095-1121.
Degbey, W. and Pelto, E. (2013), Cross-border M&A as a
trigger for network change in the Russina bakery industry,
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 3,
pp. 178-189.
Doz, Y., Olk, P. and Ring, P. (2000), Formation processes of
R&D consortia: which path to take? Where does it lead?,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 345-367.
Eggert, A., Ulaga, W. and Schultz, F. (2006), Value creation
in the relationship life cycle: a quasi-longitudinal analysis,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 20-27.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), Building theories from case study
research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Martin, J.A. (2000), Dynamic
capabilities: what are they?, Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 21 Nos 10/11, pp. 1105-1121.
Ford, D. (1980), The development of buyer-seller
relationships in industrial markets, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 5/6, pp. 339-353.
Granovetter, M. (1973), The strength of weak ties,
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp. 1360-1380.
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
Hakansson, H. (1982), International Marketing and Purchasing
of Industrial Goods: An Interaction Approach, Wiley,
Chichester, New York, NY, Brisbane, Toronto.
Hakansson, H. (1987), Industrial Technological Development: A
Network Approach, Croom Helm, London.
Helfat, C.E. and Peteraf, M.A. (2003), The dynamic
resource-based view: capability lifecycles, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 10, pp. 997-1010.
Ibarra, H. (1993), Network centrality, power, and innovation
involvement: determinants of technical and administrative
roles, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 3,
pp. 471-501.
Inkpen, A.C. and Tsang, E.W. (2005), Social capital,
networks, and knowledge transfer, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 146-165.
Jick, T.D. (1979), Mixing qualitative and quantitative
methods: triangulation in action, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 602-611.
Kaplan, S. and Tripsas, M. (2008), Thinking about
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
technology: applying a cognitive lens to technical change,
Research Policy, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 790-805.
Klepper, S. and Simons, K.L. (1997), Technological
extinctions of industrial firm: an inquiry into their nature
and causes, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 6 No. 2,
pp. 379-460.
Koka, B.R., Madhavan, R. and Prescott, J.E. (2006),
Environmental effects on patterns of network change, The
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 3,
pp. 721-737.
Koza, M.P. and Lewin, A.Y. (1999), The coevolution of
network alliances: a longitudinal analysis of an international
professional service network, Organization Science, Vol. 10
No. 5, pp. 638-653.
Leonard Barton, D. (1995), Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building
and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation, Harvard Business
School Press, Boston, MA.
McEvily, B. and Zaheer, A. (1999), Bridging ties: a source of
firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 12, pp. 1133-1156.
Mason, K. (2012), A commentary on the role of actors in
combining resources into complex solutions, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 151-152.
Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H. (1982), The longitudinal
analysis of organizations: a methodological perspective,
Management Science, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 1013-1034.
Mller, K. and Rajala, A. (2007), Rise of strategic nets new
modes of value creation, Industrial Marketing Management,
Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 895-908.
Mller, K. and Svahn, S. (2006), Role of knowledge in value
creation in business nets, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 985-1007.
Munksgaard, K. and Freytag, P. (2011), Complementor
involvement in product development, Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 286-298.
Nonaka (2000), A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: a new
perspective on the theory of the firm, Industrial and
Corporate Change, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-20.
Nonaka, I. (2007), The knowledge-creating company,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 85 Nos 7/8, pp. 162-171.
340
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge-Creating
Company. How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of
Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
berg, C. and Grundstrm, C. (2009), Challenges and
opportunities in innovative firms network development,
International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 13
No. 4, pp. 593-613.
Olander, H., Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., Blomqvist, K. and
Ritala, P. (2010), The dynamics of relational and
contractual governance mechanisms in knowledge sharing
of collaborative R&D projects, Knowledge and Process
Management, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 188-204.
Pisano, G.P. and Verganti, R. (2008), Which kind of
cooperation is right for you?, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 86 No. 12, pp. 78-86.
Powell, W.W. and Grodal, S. (2005), Networks of innovators,
in Fagerberg, J., Mowery, DC and Nelson, R.R. (Eds), Oxford
Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
pp. 56-85.
Provan, K., Fish, A. and Sydow, J. (2007),
Interorganizational networks at the network level: a review
of the empirical literature on whole networks, Journal of
Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 479-516.
Quitens, L. and Matthyssens, P. (2010), Involving the
process dimensions of time in case-based research,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 91-99.
Rampersad, G.C., Quester, P. and Troshani, I. (2010),
Managing innovation networks: exploratory evidence from
ICT, biotechnology and nanotechnology, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 793-805.
Rindfleisch, A. and Moorman, C. (2003), Interfirm
cooperation and customer orientation, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 421-426.
Ritala, P. and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. (2009), Whats in
it for me? Creating and appropriating value in
innovationrelated coopetition, Technovation, Vol. 29
No. 12, pp. 819-828.
Ritala, P., Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. and Ntti, S. (2012),
Coordination in innovation-generating business networks:
the case of Finnish mobile TV development, Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 324-334.
Rothwell, R. (1994), Industrial innovation: success, strategy,
trends, in Dogson, M. and Rothwell, R. (Eds), The
Handbook of Industrial Innovation, Edward Elgar,
Cheltenham.
Sividas, E. and Dwyer, F.R. (2000), An examination of
organizational factors influencing new product success in
internal and alliance-based processes, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 31-49.
Tsai, W. (2001), Knowledge transfer in intraorganizationa
networks: effects of network position and absorptive
capacity on business unit innovation and performance,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 5,
pp. 996-1004.
Turnbull, P., Ford, D. and Cunningham, M. (1996),
Interaction, relationships and networks in business
markets: an evolving perspective, Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 44-62.
Utterback, J.M. (1994), Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation,
HBS Press, Cambridge, MA.
 Business networks along innovation life cycle
Anna Paola Codini
Van de Ven, A.H. (1993), An assessment of perspectives on
strategic change, in Zan, L., Zambon, S. and
Pettigrew, A.M. (Eds), Perspectives on Strategic Change,
Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht, pp. 313-325.
Verona, G. and Ravasi, D. (2003), Unbundling dynamic
capabilities: an exploratory study of continous product
innovation, Industrial Corporate Change, Vol. 12 No. 3,
pp. 577-606.
Vicari, S. and Verona, G. (2000), La generazione del
vantaggio competitivo: recenti sviluppi e nuove implicazioni
per il resource-based management, Finanza Marketing e
Produzione, Vol. 2, pp. 7-38.
Von Hippel, E. (1988), The Sources of Innovation, Oxford
University Press, New York, NY.
Wang, C.L. and Ahmed, P.K. (2007), Dynamic capabilities:
a review and research agenda, International Journal of
Management Reviews, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 31-51.
Webster, F.E. Jr. (1994), Market Driven Management, John
Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Westerlund, M. and Rajala, R. (2010), Learning and
Downloaded by FUDAN UNIVERSITY At 02:07 02 May 2015 (PT)
innovation in inter-organizational network collaboration,
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 6,
pp. 435-442.
Winter, S.G. (2003), Understanding dynamic capabilities,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 10, pp. 991-995.
Wuyts, S., Dutta, S. and Stremersch, S. (2004), Portfolios of
interfirm agreements in technology-intensive markets:
consequences for innovation and profitability, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 88-100.
Yin, R. (1994), Case Study Research, Sage Publications,
Beverly Hills.
Zahara, S.A., Sapienza, H.J. and Davidsson, P. (2006),
Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review,
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
341
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 30 Number 3/4 2015 329 341
model and research agenda, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 917-955.
Zaheer, A. and Soda, G. (2009), The origins of structural
holes, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 54 No. 1,
pp. 1-31.
Further reading
Biggemann, S. (2012), The essential role of information
sharing in relationship development, Journal of Business
and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 521-526.
Chou, H. and Zolkiewski, J. (2010), The arrival of
technological changes at the business net: a learning
process, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing,
Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 433-453.
Low, B. and Johnston, W.J. (2013), Organizational network
legitimacy and its impact on knowledge networks: the case
of Chinas TD-SCDMA mobility technology, Journal of
Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 6,
pp. 468-477.
Rullani, E. (1992), Divisione del lavoro e reti di imprese: il
governo della complessita, in Belussi, F. (Ed.), Nuovi
Modelli di Impresa, Gerarchie Organizzative e Imprese Rete,
Angeli, Milano.
About the author
Anna Paola Codini is a Researcher and Aggregate Professor
at the University of Brescia, where she teaches Innovation
and Operations Management. Her research activity and
publications concern mainly innovation management. Anna
Paola Codini can be contacted at: anna.codini@unibs.it