Cited by 1,747Innovation and Knowledge ManagementBusiness Strategy and InnovationEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 149 of the 151 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 155 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence

Open access
Pittaway, Luke, Robertson, Maxine, Munir, Kamal, Denyer, David, Neely, Andy·2004·International Journal of Management Reviews

Abstract

Recent work on competitiveness has emphasized the importance of business networking for innovativeness. Until recently, insights into the dynamics of this relationship have been fragmented. This paper presents a systematic review of research linking the networking behaviour of firms with their innovative capacity. We find that the principal benefits of networking as identified in the literature include: risk sharing; obtaining access to new markets and technologies; speeding products to market; pooling complementary skills; safeguarding property rights when complete or contingent contracts are not possible; and acting as a key vehicle for obtaining access to external knowledge. The evidence also illustrates that those firms which do not co‐operate and which do not formally or informally exchange knowledge limit their knowledge base long term and ultimately reduce their ability to enter into exchange relationships. At an institutional level, national systems of innovation play an important role in the diffusion of innovations in terms of the way in which they shape networking activity. The paper provides evidence suggesting that network relationships with suppliers, customers and intermediaries such as professional and trade associations are important factors affecting innovation performance and productivity. Where networks fail, it is due to inter‐firm conflict, displacement, lack of scale, external disruption and lack of infrastructure. The review identifies several gaps in the literature that need to be filled. For instance, there is a need for further exploration of the relationship between networking and different forms of innovation, such as process and organisational innovation. Similarly, we need better understanding of network dynamics and network configurations, as well as the role of third parties such as professional and trade associations. Our study highlights the need for interdisciplinary research in these areas.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00101.x

Cites

149 of 149 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

81 No full text of the sources · 51 No basis given · 29 Sources not found · 25 Not checked yet · 21 Own interpretation · 14 Own result · 4 Own method · 3 Partly supported · 2 Supported · 2 Supported so far · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 131 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 50
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 62
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 5
101 of 101
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Innovation is both about the generation and exploitation of new products, processes, services and business practices.

    “The study consequently assumed that innovation was both about the generation and exploitation of new products, processes, services and business practices.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Since the 1980s, little attempt has been made to systematically translate findings into a comprehensive review of current knowledge.

    “Despite the significant number of studies that have been conducted in this general area, since the 1980s, little attempt has been made to systematically translate these findings into a comprehensive review of current knowledge and there have been few attempts to link such knowledge with policy decision-making.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There have been few attempts to link knowledge about networking and innovation with policy decision-making.

    “Despite the significant number of studies that have been conducted in this general area, since the 1980s, little attempt has been made to systematically translate these findings into a comprehensive review of current knowledge and there have been few attempts to link such knowledge with policy decision-making.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Until recently insights into the dynamics of the relationship between networking and innovation have been fragmented.

    “Until recently insights into the dynamics of this relationship have been fragmented.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Managerial networking across contexts impacts on the adoption of good practice.

    “Managerial networking across contexts impacts on the adoption of good practice.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Networks are inherently dynamic.

    “By recognising that networks are inherently dynamic, research could benefit from adopting a longitudinal approach.”
6 of 6

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 151 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Baldwin and Clark, 2000, The Power of Modularity
  2. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<267::AID-SMJ89>3.0.CO;2-8 · DOI
  3. Bower D., 1996, Changing patterns of innovation in a process‐dominated industry, International Journal of Technology Management, 12, 209
  4. DTI, 2003, Innovation Report –‘Competing in the Global Economy: the Innovation Challenge’
  5. Pittaway L. Robertson M. Munir K. Denyer D.andNeely A.(2004). Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the literature.Advanced Institute of Management Research London http://www.aimresearch.org/aimforum.shtml

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 901–1,000 of 1,746

Metadata

Authors
Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., & Neely, A.
Affiliations
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • University of Warwick (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Cranfield University (GB)
  • London Business School (GB)
Venue
International Journal of Management Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-09
Volume
5-6
Issue
3-4
Pages
137-168
ISSN
  • 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2370
OpenAlex
W2128698837
Cited by
1,747
References
151
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 110 · 2021: 99 · 2020: 129 · 2019: 103 · 2018: 117 · 2017: 102 · 2016: 106 · 2015: 101 · 2014: 101 · 2013: 103 · 2012: 93
FWCI
15.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Management Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Institute of Management Research, College of Business Administration Seoul National University
  • Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategy and Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Keywords
business networking, innovation, inter-firm relationships, knowledge sharing, risk sharing, national innovation system, diffusion of innovations, supplier and customer relationships, innovation performance, network dynamics, complementary skills, property rights

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review