CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8,499Innovation and Knowledge ManagementBusiness Strategy and InnovationUniversity-Industry-Government Innovation Models

Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology

Powell, Walter W., Koput, Kenneth W., Smith-Doerr, Laurel·1996·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/2393988
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Walter W. Powell, Kenneth W. Koput, Laurel Smith-Doerr, Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 1 (Mar., 1996), pp. 116-145

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2393988

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Networking behaviour was identified as significantly boosting the innovation output and competitiveness of firms in a diverse range of industries.

    “Networking behaviour was identified as significantly boosting the innovation output and competitiveness of firms in a diverse range of industries (Ahuja, 2000;Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996).”

    From Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence (2004) · cites this paper as Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996

  • The locus of innovation is no longer the individual or the firm but increasingly the network in which a firm is embedded.

    “Indeed, the locus of innovation is no longer the individual or the firm but increasingly the network in which a firm is embedded (Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996).”

    From Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence (2004) · cites this paper as Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996

  • The principal benefits of networking identified in the literature include acting as a key vehicle for obtaining access to external knowledge.

    “and, acting as a key vehicle for obtaining access to external knowledge (Powell, Koput, and Smith-Doerr, 1996;Cooke, 1996).”

    From Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence (2004) · cites this paper as Powell, Koput, and Smith-Doerr, 1996

  • The degree to which firms learn about new opportunities is a function of the extent of their existing participation in networks.

    “The degree to which firms learn about new opportunities is a function of the extent of their existing participation in networks (Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996).”

    From Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence (2004) · cites this paper as Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
ORCID
Powell, Walter W.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1996-03
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
116
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2393988
OpenAlex
W1973459906
Cited by
8,499
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 177 · 2025: 170 · 2024: 154 · 2023: 205 · 2022: 247 · 2021: 261 · 2020: 327 · 2019: 319 · 2018: 350 · 2017: 392 · 2016: 381 · 2015: 424 · 2014: 458 · 2013: 484 · 2012: 502
FWCI
184.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
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 › University-Industry-Government Innovation Models
Keywords
inter-organizational collaboration, biotechnology industry, knowledge transfer, innovation networks, organizational learning

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.

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