Knowledge innovation increasingly relies on complex network structures, and network research has provided many insights for innovation. However, in the field of innovation management, current research on the impact of knowledge networks on innovation performance mainly focuses on static local characteristics of networks, neglecting their global structural features. Based on an exploration of the fractal characteristics of knowledge networks, this study constructs a theoretical model linking the fractal characteristics of enterprise knowledge networks to innovation performance. Additionally, it investigates the moderating role of the quantity of knowledge elements in the relationship between the fractal dimensions of knowledge networks and innovation performance. Hypotheses are tested using patent data submitted by Huawei in China between 1995 and 2021. The results show that small-scale fractal dimensions have a significantly negative effect on innovation performance, while large-scale fractal dimensions have a positive effect on innovation performance. Moreover, an increase in the quantity of knowledge elements weakens these effects.
BreschiS., LissoniF., & MalerbaF. (2003). Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32(1), 69–87.
2.
CapponiG., MartinelliA., & NuvolariA. (2022). Breakthrough innovations and where to find them. Research Policy, 51(1), 104376.
3.
CarpenterM. P., NarinF., & WoolfP. (1981). Citation rates to technologically important patents. World Patent Information, 3(4), 160–163.
4.
CilliersP. (2002). Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. Routledge.
5.
CowanR., & JonardN. (2004). Network structure and the diffusion of knowledge. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 28(8), 1557–1575.
6.
DaneE. (2010). Reconsidering the trade-off between expertise and flexibility: A cognitive entrenchment perspective. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 579–603.
FlemingL., & SorensonO. (2001). Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data. Research Policy, 30(7), 1019–1039.
10.
GuanJ., & LiuN. (2016). Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy. Research Policy, 45(1), 97–112.
11.
HuoD., MotohashiK., & GongH. (2019). Team diversity as dissimilarity and variety in organizational innovation. Research Policy, 48(6), 1564–1572.
12.
JiaX. X., & LiJ. F. (2019). Study on the impact of collaboration networks and knowledge networks on the innovation performance of domestic agricultural and forestry universities. Science and Technology Management Research, 39(14), 146–157.
KogutB., & ZanderU. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–397.
15.
KupperL. L., & KleinbaumD. G. (1978). Applied regression analysis and other multivariate methods. Duxbury.
16.
LiY. Y., & LinR. H. (2020). The impact of knowledge network structure and cross-border search on organizational breakthrough innovation: Analysis of patents in the U.S. artificial intelligence technology field. Science and Technology Management Research, 40(23), 204.
17.
LiuJ. M., MinC., & YanX. R. (2022). The impact of collaboration networks and knowledge networks on patent innovation in AI enterprises. Library Tribune, 9, 132.
18.
MaR. K., TaoX. L., LiS. M., & WangY. T. (2021). Knowledge element network search and the formation of breakthrough technological inventions. Studies in Science of Science, 39(5), 794.
19.
MannucciP. V., & YongK. (2018). The differential impact of knowledge depth and knowledge breadth on creativity over individual careers. Academy of Management Journal, 61(5), 1741–1763.
20.
MarchJ. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
21.
SavinoT., Messeni PetruzzelliA., & AlbinoV. (2017). Search and recombination process to innovate: A review of the empirical evidence and a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(1), 54–75.
22.
SchillingM. A., & PhelpsC. C. (2007). Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Management Science, 53(7), 1113–1126.
23.
SimonH. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.* In GarudR., KumaraswamyA., & LangloisR.-N. (Eds.), Managing in the modular age (2003, pp. 15–38). Blackwell Publishing.
24.
SodaG., SteaD., & PedersenT. (2019). Network structure, collaborative context, and individual creativity. Journal of Management, 45(4), 1739–1765.
25.
SongC., HavlinS., & MakseH. A. (2005). Self-similarity of complex networks. Nature, 433(7024), 392–395.
26.
TrajtenbergM. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172–187.
27.
TushmanM. L., & O’ReillyC. A.III. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–29.
28.
UzziB., & SpiroJ. (2005). Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. American Journal of Sociology, 111(2), 447–504.
29.
WangC., RodanS., FruinM., & XuX. (2014). Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 484–514.
30.
WangJ. T., & YangJ. M. (2013). A review of fractal research methods for complex networks. Complex Systems and Complexity Science, 10(4), 1–7.
31.
WeitzmanM. L. (1998). Recombinant growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2), 331–360.
32.
YayavaramS., & AhujaG. (2008). Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 333–362.
33.
ZhangY. Y., & LiuD. J. (2023). The impact of external R&D cooperation on enterprise innovation performance—From the perspective of knowledge networks. East China Economic Management, 37(4), 110–119.
