Multi-cluster R&D teams have the potential to generate breakthrough inventions because they can tap into the distinct knowledge of the different geographic hot spots in which team members are located. Having access to a variety of knowledge offers these teams great recombinatorial potential. To succeed, however, the geographically dispersed members must share and integrate the different local knowledge pools available to them. We argue that the density of intra-team co-patenting ties shapes intra-team knowledge sharing and integration and hence the extent teams benefit from the knowledge they can access. Whereas greater density of intra-cluster team ties (within a given location) hinders sharing and integration of locally tapped knowledge across locations, greater density of inter-cluster ties (across cluster locations) facilitates it. Our empirical analysis of 834 multi-cluster nanotechnology R&D teams shows that the technological distance (the difference in knowledge) between clusters in which inventors are located has an inverted-U relationship with the likelihood of the team generating a breakthrough. Further, we find that the density of multi-cluster team intra- vs. inter-cluster ties influences the effect of technological distance on the likelihood of breakthrough invention.
AggarwalV. A.HsuD. H.2014“Entrepreneurial exits and innovation.”Management Science, 60: 867–887.
2.
AhujaG.LampertC. M.2001“Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions.”Strategic Management Journal, 22: 521–543.
3.
AikenL. S.WestS. G.1991Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. New York, NY: Sage.
4.
AlcacerJ.ChungW.2007“Location strategies and knowledge spillovers.”Management Science, 53: 760–776.
5.
AlcacerJ.ZhaoM.2012“Local R&D strategies and multilocation firms: The role of internal linkages.”Management Science, 58: 1–20.
6.
AlcacerJ.ZhaoM.2013“Zooming in: A practical manual for identifying geographic clusters.” Working paper 14-042, Harvard Business School Strategy Unit.
7.
AllenT. J.1977Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
AlmeidaP.KogutB.1999“Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks.”Management Science, 45: 905–917.
10.
AralS.Van AlstyneM.2011“The diversity-bandwidth trade-off.”American Journal of Sociology, 117: 90–171.
11.
AudretschD.FeldmanM.1996“Innovative clusters and the industry life cycle.”Review of Industrial Organization, 11: 253–273.
12.
AustinJ. R.2003“Transactive memory in organizational groups: The effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance.”Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 866–878.
13.
AvenelE.FavierA. V.MaS.MangematinV.RieuC.2007“Diversification and hybridization in firm knowledge bases in nanotechnologies.”Research Policy, 36: 864–870.
14.
BalkundiP.HarrisonD. A.2006“Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effects on team viability and performance.”Academy of Management Journal, 49: 49–68.
15.
BennerM.WaldfogelJ.2007“Close to you? Bias and precision in patent-based measures of technological proximity.”Research Policy, 37: 1556–1567.
16.
BezrukovaK.JehnK. A.ZanuttoE. L.ThatcherS. M. B.2009“Do workgroup faultlines help or hurt? A moderated model of faultlines, team identification, and group performance.”Organization Science, 20: 35–50.
17.
BorgattiS. P.EverettM. G.JohnsonJ. C.2013Analyzing Social Networks. London, UK: Sage.
18.
BrandonD. P.HollingsheadA.2004“Transactive memory systems in organizations: Matching tasks, expertise, and people.”Organization Science, 15: 633–644.
19.
BrewerM. B.1991“The social self: On being the same and different at the same time.”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17: 475–482.
20.
CampbellD. T.1958“Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.”Behavioral Sciences, 3: 14–25.
21.
CarlileP. R.2004“Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries.”Organization Science, 15: 555–568.
22.
CarnabuciG.OpertiE.2013“Where do firms’ recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganizational networks, knowledge, and firms’ ability to innovate through technological recombination.”Strategic Management Journal, 34: 1591–1613.
23.
CartonA. M.CummingsJ. N.2012“A theory of subgroups in work teams.”Academy of Management Review, 37: 441–470.
24.
CataliniC.2018“Microgeography and the direction of inventive activity.”Management Science, 64: 4348–4364.
25.
CentolaD.MacyM.2007“Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties.”American Journal of Sociology, 113: 702–734.
26.
ChaiS.FreemanR. B.2019“Temporary colocation and collaborative discovery: Who confers at conferences.”Strategic Management Journal, 40: 2138–2164.
27.
ChungW.AlcacerJ.2002“Knowledge seeking and location choice of foreign direct investment in the United States.”Management Science, 48: 1534–1554.
28.
ChungY.JacksonS. E.2013“The internal and external networks of knowledge-intensive teams: The role of task routineness.”Journal of Management, 39: 442–468.
29.
CohenW. M.LevinthalD. A.1990“Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 128–152.
30.
ColemanJ. S.1988“Social capital in the creation of human capital.”American Journal of Sociology, 94: S95–S120.
31.
CramtonC. D.2001“The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration.”Organization Science, 12: 346–371.
32.
CrawfordE. RLePineJ. A.2013“A configural theory of team processes: Accounting for the structure of taskwork and teamwork.”Academy of Management Review, 38: 32–48.
33.
DarbyM. R.ZuckerL. G.2003“Grilichesian breakthroughs: Inventions of methods of inventing and firm entry in nanotechnology.” NBER working paper 9825.
34.
DarbyM. R.ZuckerL. G.2005“Socio-economic impact of nanoscale science: Initial results and Nanobank.” NBER working paper 11181.
35.
de VaanM.VedresB.StarkD.2015“Game changer: The topology of creativity.”American Journal of Sociology, 120: 1144–1194.
36.
DokkoG.KaneA. A.TortorielloM.2014“One of us or one of my friends: How social identity and tie strength shape the creative generativity of boundary-spanning ties.”Organization Studies, 35: 703–726.
37.
DoughertyD.1992“Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms.”Organization Science, 3: 179–202.
38.
FlemingL.2001“Recombinant uncertainty in technological search.”Management Science, 47: 117–132.
39.
FlemingL.KingC.IIIJudaA. I.2007“Small worlds and regional innovation.”Organization Science, 18: 938–954.
FlemingL.SorensonO.2004“Science as a map in technological search.”Strategic Management Journal, 25: 909–928.
42.
FunkR.2014“Making the most of where you are: Geography, networks, and innovation in organizations.”Academy of Management Journal, 57: 193–222.
43.
FurmanJ. L.KyleM. K.CockburnI. M.HendersonR. M.2006“Public & private spillovers, location and the productivity of pharmaceutical research.”Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, 79: 1–24.
44.
GardnerH. K.GinoF.StaatsB. R.2012“Dynamically integrating knowledge in teams: Transforming resources into performance.”Academy of Management Journal, 55: 998–1022.
45.
GibsonC. B.GibbsJ. L.2006“Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 51: 451–495.
46.
GranovetterM.2005“The impact of social structure on economic outcomes.”The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19: 33–50.
47.
GrayB.RenH.2014“The importance of joint schemas and brokers in promoting collaboration for innovation.” In AnsellC.TorfingJ. (eds.), Public Innovation Through Collaboration and Design. New York, NY: Routledge.
48.
HaansR. F. J.PietersC.HeZ. L.2016“Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U-and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research.”Strategic Management Journal, 37: 1177–1195.
49.
HallB. H.2005“A note on the bias in Herfindahl-type measures based on count data.”Revue D’economie Industrielle, 110: 149–156.
50.
HallB. H.JaffeA. B.TrajtenbergM.2001“The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools.” NBER working paper 8498.
51.
HamiltonD. L.ShermanS. J.CastelliL.2002“A group by any other name: The role of entitativity in group perception.”European Review of Social Psychology, 12: 139–166.
52.
HanJ.ShipilovA. V.GreveH. R.2017“Unequal bedfellows: Gender role-based deference in multiplex ties between Korean business groups.”Academy of Management Journal, 60: 1531–1553.
53.
HansenM. T.1999“The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 82–111.
54.
HansenM. T.LøvåsB.2004“How do multinational companies leverage technological competencies? Moving from single to interdependent explanations.”Strategic Management Journal, 25: 801–822.
55.
HarveyS.2014“Creative synthesis: Exploring the process of extraordinary group creativity.”Academy of Management Review, 39: 324–343.
56.
HindsP. J.MortensenM.2005“Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication.”Organization Science, 16: 290–307.
57.
HoetkerG.2007“The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues.”Strategic Management Journal, 28: 331–343.
58.
HomanA. C.van KnippenbergD.Van KleefG. A.De DreuC. K. W.2007“Interacting dimensions of diversity: Cross-categorization and the functioning of diverse work groups.”Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 11: 79–94.
59.
HuckmanR. S.StaatsB. R.UptonD. M.2009“Team familiarity, role experience, and performance: Evidence from Indian software services.”Management Science, 55: 85–100.
IbarraH.KilduffM.TsaiW.2005“Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research.”Organization Science, 16: 359–371.
62.
JaffeA. B.1986“Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value.”American Economic Review, 76: 984–1001.
63.
KaboF. W.Cotton-NesslerN.HwangY.LevensteinM. C.Owen-SmithJ.2014“Proximity effects on the dynamics and outcomes of scientific collaborations.”Research Policy, 43: 1469–1485.
64.
KaneA. A.2010“Unlocking knowledge transfer potential: Knowledge demonstrability and superordinate social identity.”Organization Science, 21: 643–660.
65.
Knorr-CetinaK.1999Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
66.
KothaR.GeorgeG.SrikanthK.2013“Bridging the mutual knowledge gap: Coordination and the commercialization of university science.”Academy of Management Journal, 56: 498–524.
67.
LahiriN.2010“Geographic distribution of R&D activity: How does it affect innovation quality?”Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1194–1209.
LauD. C.MurnighanJ. K.1998“Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups.”Academy of Management Review, 23: 325–340.
70.
LauD. C.MurnighanJ. K.2005“Interactions with groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. ”Academy of Management Journal, 48: 645–659.
71.
LeiponenA.HelfatC.2011“Location, decentralization, and knowledge sources for innovation.”Organization Science, 22: 641–658.
72.
LewisK.LangeD.GillisL.2005“Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer.”Organization Science, 16: 581–598.
73.
LindJ. T.MehlumH.2010“With or without U? The appropriate test for a U-shaped relationship.”Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 72: 109–118
74.
MakriM.HittM. A.LaneP. J.2010“Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions.”Strategic Management Journal, 31: 602–628.
75.
MartinR.SunleyP.2006“Path dependence and regional economic evolution.”Journal of Economic Geography, 6: 395–437.
76.
MaskellP.MalmbergA.2007“Myopia, knowledge development and cluster evolution.”Journal of Economic Geography, 7: 603–618.
77.
MathieuJ.MaynardT.RappT.GilsonL.2008“Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future.”Journal of Management, 34: 410–475.
78.
McCannB. T.FoltaT. B.2008“Location matters: Where we have been and where we might go in agglomeration research.”Journal of Management, 34: 532–565.
79.
McConnellA. R.ShermanS. J.HamiltonD. L.1997“Target entitativity: Implications for information processing about individual and group targets.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72: 750–762.
80.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M.2001“Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.”Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
81.
MellJ. N.DeChurchL. A.LeendersR. T. A.ContractorN.2020“Identity asymmetries: An experimental investigation of social identity and information exchange in multiteam systems.”Academy of Management Journal, 63: 1561–1590.
82.
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A.Jimenez-RodriguezM.WildmanJ.ShufflerM.2011“A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115: 214–225.
83.
MillerD. J.FernM. J.CardinalL. B.2007“The use of knowledge for technological innovation within diversified firms.”Academy of Management Journal, 50: 307–325.
NahapietJ.GhoshalS.1998“Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage.”Academy of Management Review, 23: 242–266.
86.
OhH.ChungM.LabiancaG.2004“Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties.”Academy of Management Journal, 47: 860–875.
87.
O’LearyM. B.MortensenM.2010“Go (Con)figure: Subgroups, imbalance, and isolates in geographically dispersed teams.”Organization Science, 21: 115–131.
88.
Penner-HahnJ.ShaverJ. M.2005“Does international research and development increase patent output? An analysis of Japanese pharmaceutical firms.”Strategic Management Journal, 26: 121–140.
89.
PetersL. S.2015“The continuing economic potential of nanotechnology.”Wiley Encyclopedia of Management, 1–18.
90.
PheneA.Fladmoe-LindquistK.MarshL.2006“Breakthrough innovations in the US biotechnology industry: The effects of technological space and geographic origin.”Strategic Management Journal, 27: 369–388.
91.
PolzerJ. T.CrispC. B.JarvenpaaS. L.KimJ. W.2006“Extending the faultline model to geographically dispersed teams: How colocated subgroups can impair group functioning.”Academy of Management Journal, 49: 679–692.
92.
PouderR.St. JohnC. H.1996“Hot spots and blind spots: Geographical clusters of firms and innovation.”Academy of Management Review, 21: 1192–1225.
93.
PowellW. W.KoputK. W.Smith-DoerrL.1996“Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 116–145.
94.
ReagansR.ArgoteL.BrooksD.2005“Individual experience and experience working together: Predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together.”Management Science, 51: 869–881.
95.
ReagansR.McEvilyB.2003“Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 240–267.
96.
ReagansR.ZuckermanE.2001“Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams.”Organization Science, 12: 502–517.
97.
RenH.GrayB.HarrisonD. A.2015“Triggering faultline effects in teams: The importance of bridging friendship ties and breaching animosity ties.”Organization Science, 26: 390–404.
98.
RosenkopfL.AlmeidaP.2003“Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility.”Management Science, 49: 751–766.
99.
SawyerJ. E.HouletteM. A.YeagleyE. L.2006“Decision performance and diversity structure: Comparing faultlines in convergent, crosscut, and racially homogeneous groups.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99: 1–15.
100.
SaxenianA.1994Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
101.
SchillingM. A.PhelpsC. C.2007“Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation.”Management Science, 53: 1113–1126.
102.
SinghJ.2008“Distributed R&D, cross-regional knowledge integration and quality of innovative output.”Research Policy, 37: 77–96.
103.
SinghJ.FlemingL.2010“Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality?”Management Science, 56: 41–56.
104.
SoleD.EdmondsonA.2002“Situated knowledge and learning in dispersed teams.”British Journal of Management, 13: S17–S34.
105.
SorensenJ.StuartT. E.2000“Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 81–112.
106.
StuartT. E.PodolnyJ. M.1996“Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities.”Strategic Management Journal, 17: 21–38.
107.
TajfelH.1982“Social psychology of intergroup relations.”Annual Review of Psychology, 33: 1–39.
108.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C.1986“The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.” In WorchelS.AustinW. G. (eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations:7–24. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
109.
TaylorA.GreveH. R.2006“Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams.”Academy of Management Journal, 49: 723–740.
110.
Ter WalA. L.AlexyO.BlockJ.SandnerP. G.2016“The best of both worlds: The benefits of open-specialized and closed-diverse syndication networks for new ventures’ success.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 61: 393–432.
111.
TrajtenbergM.1990“A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations.”The Rand Journal of Economics, 172–187.
112.
TsaiW.GhoshalS.1998“Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks.”Academy of Management Journal, 41: 464–476.
113.
TuertscherP.GarudR.KumaraswamyA.2014“Justification and interlaced knowledge at ATLAS, CERN.”Organization Science, 25: 1579–1608.
114.
TzabbarD.2009“When does scientist recruitment affect technological repositioning?”Academy of Management Journal, 52: 873–896.
115.
TzabbarD.VestalA.2015“Bridging the social chasm in geographically distributed R&D teams: The moderating effects of relational strength and status asymmetry on the novelty of team innovation.”Organization Science, 26: 811–829.
116.
UzziB. D.1997“Social structure and competion in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 35–67.
117.
UzziB. D.LancasterR.2003“Relational embeddedness and learning: The case of bank loan managers and their clients.”Management Science, 49: 383–399.
118.
UzziB.SpiroJ.2005“Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem.”American Journal of Sociology, 111: 447–504.
119.
WangC.RodanS.FruinM.XuX.2014“Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation.”Academy of Management Journal, 57: 484–514.
120.
WilsonJ. M.Boyer O’LearyM.MetiuA.JettQ. R.2008“Perceived proximity in virtual work: Explaining the paradox of far-but-close.”Organization Studies, 29: 979–1002.
121.
ZuckerL. G.DarbyM. R.1996“Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry.”Proceedings from the National Academy of Sciences, 93: 12709–12716.
122.
ZuckerL. G.DarbyM. R.2009Nanobank Data Description, release 2.0 (beta-test). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for International Science, Technology, and Cultural Policy.
123.
ZuckerL. GDarbyM. R.2011COMETS Data Description, release 1.0. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for International Science, Technology, and Cultural Policy, July1.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
