STRUCTURAL DETERMINANTS OF ENTERPRISE INNOVATION USING A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS APPROACH

Authors

  • Dan Zhang Faculty of Industrial Technology, Muban Chombueng Rajabhat University
  • Noppadol Amdee Faculty of Industrial Technology, Muban Chombueng Rajabhat University
  • Adisak Sangsongfa Faculty of Industrial Technology, Muban Chombueng Rajabhat University
  • Choat Inthawongse Faculty of Industrial Technology, Muban Chombueng Rajabhat University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14456/lsej.2025.26

Keywords:

enterprise innovation performance, social network analysis, knowledge interaction network, structural embeddedness

Abstract

This study employs Social Network Analysis (SNA) to investigate the structural mechanisms that influence Enterprise Innovation Performance (EIP) within an open innovation ecosystem. Based on expert judgment data, a Knowledge Interaction Network model was constructed. The results reveal 220 edges in the network, indicating complex relationships among the 20 factors. The network density is 0.703, and the average distance between nodes is 1.468, suggesting high interconnections and a significant impact on innovation performance. Quantitative analysis of key indicators, such as degree centrality, betweenness centrality, and closeness centrality, reveals a core-periphery network topology. The study finds that critical factors, such as Knowledge Absorption Efficiency (A2) and Cross-functional Collaboration (B3), occupy central positions and play pivotal roles in knowledge diffusion and cross-boundary integration. These core nodes not only facilitate knowledge flow and coordination but also emphasize that innovation performance depends not only on the presence of specific capabilities but also on their structural embeddedness within the network. This study advances the theoretical understanding of the capability-structure-performance mechanism in innovation management, offering practical guidance to enterprises seeking to enhance their innovation capabilities through strategic network positioning.

References

Bogers M, Chesbrough H, Strand R. Leveraging open innovation ecosystems for sustainable value creation: A network perspective. Technovation 2023;127:102829.

Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Johnson J. C. Analyzing Social Networks. SAGE Publications; 2013.

Burt RS. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press; 1992.

Chesbrough H, Bogers M. Explicating open innovation in global ecosystems: An interdisciplinary approach. Industrial Marketing Management 2024;96:15-28.

Cohen WM, Levinthal DA. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 1990;35(1):128-152.

Crossan MM, Apaydin M. A multi‐dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies 2010;47(6):1154-1191.

Faridian P, Neubaum DO. Network modularity and innovation: The role of social network analysis in measuring open innovation. Technovation 2019;82–83:13-24.

Freeman LC. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1978;1(3):215-239.

Giannopoulou E, Barlatier PJ, Enberg C. Knowledge management in innovation networks: The role of digital platforms and structural embeddedness. Journal of Knowledge Management 2024; 28(1):123-145.

Granovetter, M. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 1985;91(3):481-510.

Hsu CC, Sandford BA. The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation 2007;12(1):10.

Huggins R, Prokop D, Thompson P. The role of network centrality in the performance of open innovation networks. Journal of Technology Transfer 2020;45(5):1454-1473.

Inkpen AC, Tsang EW. Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review 2005;30(1):146–165.

Jansen JJP, Zietsma C. Open innovation ecosystems: The role of network embeddedness in managing innovation. Research Policy 2021;50(9):104274.

Kotlar J, Sieger P, De Massis A. Bridging and bonding: How family firms manage structural holes for innovation in their ecosystems. Journal of Management Studies 2024;61(2):365-395.

Laursen K, Salter A. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal 2006;27(2):131-150.

Provan KG, Fish A, Sydow J. Interorganizational networks at the network level: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Management 2007;33(3):479-516.

Tushman ML, O'Reilly CA. Organizational ambidexterity and innovation performance: A social network perspective. Strategic Management Journal 2023;44(8):1671-1696.

Uzzi B, Spiro J. Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. American Journal of Sociology 2005;111(2):447-504.

Vanhaverbeke W, Cloodt M. Network positions and knowledge flows in innovation ecosystems:

A systematic review. Innovation: Organization & Management 2022;24(3):276-299.

Wasserman S, Faust K. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press 1994.

Zahra SA, George G. Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review 2002;27(2):185-203.

Downloads

Published

2025-12-12

How to Cite

Zhang, D. ., Amdee, N., Sangsongfa , A. ., & Inthawongse, C. . (2025). STRUCTURAL DETERMINANTS OF ENTERPRISE INNOVATION USING A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS APPROACH. Life Sciences and Environment Journal, 26(2), 364–378. https://doi.org/10.14456/lsej.2025.26

Issue

Vol. 26 No. 2 (2025): July - December

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Life Sciences and Environment Journal

Creative Commons License

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

Each article is copyrighted © by its author(s) and is published under license from the author(s).