學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 台灣IC產業專利發明人的合作網絡機制
Innovation Mechanisms of the Patent-Based Inventor Networks in Taiwan IC Industry作者 官逸人
Guan, Yi Ren貢獻者 熊瑞梅
Hsung, Ray May
官逸人
Guan, Yi Ren關鍵詞 IC 產業
專利
發明人網絡
結構洞
地位訊號
流動型勞力市場
IC industry
patent
inventor network
structural holes
status signal
fluid labor market日期 2014 上傳時間 1-Apr-2015 10:13:12 (UTC+8) 摘要 IC(積體電路)產業是台灣過去三十多年來發展最完整、且在世界上最具有競爭力的創新型產業。研發與技術專利成長快速，也代表這個產業的技術創新成果。台灣IC 產業技術創新和專利的研究累積了一些成果，但較缺乏使用研發創新發明人網絡所做的分析。本研究使用IC 產業專利發明人網絡資料，從結構洞(structural holes)和地位訊號(status signal)這兩個過去西方半導體和生物科技等創新產業研究中，最能解釋創新行動者與網絡系統和創新表現理論機制的學術研究累積成果出發，並反省台灣特有IC 產業分工技術利基位置、流動型勞力市場，發展出專利發明人網絡對專利發明成果影響機制之模型。研究發現，分析結果支持發明人地位訊號、結構洞網絡理論機制有助於專利創新發明的假設。而比較特殊的例外是，上游的專利發明網絡，結構洞低的類型反而有比較好的專利創新。這是由於上游的IC設計產業技術特性，需仰賴同一團隊的人重複合作方能完成設計，所以大多與重疊的人合作，結構限制較高，因此呈現與結構洞理論不同的情況。此外，研究發現，流動並不一定帶來較佳的技術創新，台灣IC產業專利人才流動對於技術發展與創新的正面影響，較多是在上游的IC設計產業。 因此創新發明鑲嵌在台灣特有半導體的不同技術利基環境中，還必須考慮到不同產業位置的技術特性，與產業技術發展所在的階段，才能正確解釋台灣IC產業的創新發明機制。
The IC (integrated circuit) industry has been the most complete, competitive and innovative industry in Taiwan over the past three decades. The rapid growth of patents in this field demonstrates the marvelous outcomes of technological innovations. A huge amount of patent-based research has been accumulated in this industry, but only a little is related to the inventor network. Structural holes and status signal are two competing perspectives in explaining the dynamic mechanisms between innovative actors and network systems of the most innovative industries, semiconductor and biotechnology, in advanced countries. We use these two theories and network data of patent-based inventors to discuss the specific niche of vertical disintegration and fluid labor market in Taiwan IC industry, and develop models on mechanisms of how inventors’ networks affect the outcome of inventors’ patents. The findings reveal that the hypothesis on the effects of status signals and structural holes in inventors’ collaboration networks on the citations of inventors’ patents was supported. However, the patent inventions of the upstream IC design firms, the collaborative invention teams seem to be small or high structural constraints. Most of the patents of these newly growing firms in IC design industry are specialized in consumption products. The structural constraints are high, but the impact of is large. Besides, inventors’ fluidity would not necessarily create more influential patents. The fluidity of patent-based inventors was positive impact to the patent inventions, more was found in the IC designs company. The IC industry has been vertically differentiated into three sectors: the IC designs, the IC foundry, the package and test. In principle, these three sectors demand different levels of technology. The maturity of technological niches will affect the impacts of the patents.參考文獻 一、中文部分李淑蓮，2013，〈台積電法務長告訴你什麼是「高品質」的專利組合！〉。北美智權報編輯部，2月4日。田畠真弓，2007，《台灣高科技產業的跨國技術學習創新網絡機制－積體電路與液晶顯示器產業的比較》。台灣大學社會學研究所博士論文。田畠真弓、莊致嘉，2010，〈引進技術過程和發展：比較台灣與日本液晶顯示器產業〉，《台灣社會學》，20：145-184。吳修辰、江祥得，2002，〈全身掛滿專利權的台積電發明家：科技與人文結合的創意工程師章勳明〉。商業周刊 781 期。11月11日。吳琬瑜、孫珮瑜，2007，〈低調拳王，奇襲全球：台灣IC設計──世界不能沒有他們〉。天下雜誌，第383期，頁107-147。官逸人、熊瑞梅、林亦之，2012，〈台灣IC產業的創新機制：以2001年、2005年台灣IC產業專利的發明人網絡為例〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》，第24卷第1期：51-82。官逸人、熊瑞梅、林亦之，2013，〈形塑董監事專業化的機制：以台灣IC產業2003年上市公司為例〉。《產業與管理論壇》，第15卷第2期：4-29。林亦之，2010，《台灣IC產業技術的追趕到創新：組織間網絡的分析》。東海大學博士論文。林亦之、熊瑞梅，2012，〈台灣IC產業組織間技術網絡的槓桿機制：後進追趕與創新擴散〉，《戰略管理》，第1期：72-98。林宜諄，2004，〈聯華電子 專利要被侵犯才有價值〉。遠見雜誌第222期。12月號 。胡國強、楊富量、李世文，2005，《南科IC產業論壇研討會論文集》。發表於「南科IC產業論壇研討會」。台南：南部科學園區管理局。2005年8月3日。徐進鈺，1999，〈流動的鑲嵌：新竹科學工業園區的勞動力市場與高科技發展〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》35：75-118。許瓊文，2003，〈研究機構形成產業創新機制〉，收錄於《產業科技與工研院：看得見的腦》。頁69-104。新竹：工業技術研究院。陳東升，2008，《積體網路：台灣高科技產業的社會學分析》。台北：群學。黃日燦，2013a，〈黃日燦看併購／茂矽 辛苦求變一場空〉。經濟日報，5月30日。 黃日燦，2013b，〈黃日燦看併購／合縱連橫 打開聯電輝煌併購史〉。經濟日報，4月25日。 黃意丹，2012，《國際化技術發展策略群組的網路、資源與績效-以專利後引證資料分析台灣IC設計產業》。台灣大學國際企業學研究所博士論文。楊伶雯，2011，〈旺宏專利實力台灣第一、全球排名十八 台積電全球排第23〉。 NOWnews今日新聞，11月1日.。蕭文康，2014，〈台灣半導體產值 今年將衝破2兆〉。蘋果日報，9月05日。二、英文部分Ahuja, Gautam, 2000, “Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study.” Administrative Science Quarterly 45(3): 425-455.Allison, John R., Mark A. Lemley, Kimberly A. Moore, and R. Derek Trunkey, 2004, “Valuable Patents.” Georgetown Law Journal 92: 435.Burt, Ronald S., 1992, Structural Holes. Cambridge , MA: Harvard University Press.Burt, Ronald S., 1997, “The Contingent Value of Social Capital. “ Administrative Science Quarterly 42:339-65.Burt, Ronald S., 2001, “Structural Holes Versus Network Closure as Social Capital. “ In Social Capital: Theory and Research, edited by N. Lin, K. Cook and R. S. Burt. Hawthorn, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Burt, Ronald S., 2004, “Structural Holes and Good Ideas.” American Journal of Sociology 110: 349-399.Burt, Ronald S., and Jennifer Merluzzi, 2014, “Embedded Brokerage: Hubs Versus Locals. “ Pre-print chapter in Research in the Sociology of Organizations, edited by Stephen P. Borgatti, Daniel J. Brass, Daniel S. Halgin, Giuseppe Labianca, and Ajay Mehra. Cambridge, MA: Emerald Group Publishing.Camarinha-Matos, L. M., and Afsarmanesh, H., 2005, “Collaborative Networks: A New Scientific Discipline. “ Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 16(4-5):439-452.Cohen, Wesley M. and Daniel A. Levinthal, 1990, “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 128–152.Collins, Randall, 1998, The Sociology of Philosophies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.DiMaggio, Paul, 1992, “Nadel’s Paradox Revisited: Relational and Cultural Aspects of Organizational Structure.” Pp. 118–142 in Networks and Organizations, edited by Nitin Nohria and Robert G. Eccles. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Erickson ,Bonnie H. 2001. “Good Networks and Good Jobs: The Value of Social Capital to Employers and Employees.” Pp. 127-158 in Nan Lin, Karen Cook, and Ronald S. Burt,(eds.), Social Capital: Theory and Research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Erickson ,Bonnie H. 2009. “The Context Challenge: Generalizing Social Capital Processes Across Two Different Settings..” Pp. 93-114 in Ray-May Hsung, Nan Lin, and Ronald L.Breiger(eds.), Contexts of Social Capital: Social Networks in Markets, Communities, and Families. New York: Routledge.Feenstra, Robert C. and Gary G. Hamilton. 2006. Emergent Economics, Divergent Paths: Economic Organization and International Trade in South Korea and Taiwan.Cambridge University Press.Gargiulo, M., and M. Benassi, 2000, “Trapped in Your Own Net: Network Cohesion, Structural Holes, and The Adaptation of Social Capital.” Organization Science 11: 183–196.Guimera, Roger, Brian Uzzi, Jarrett Spiro, and Luis A. Nunes Amaral, 2005, “Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance. ", Science, 308:697-702.Herzog, H.W. and A.M. Schlottmann , 1984, “Labor Force Mobility in the United States: Migration, Unemployment, and Remigration. “ International Regional Science Review, Vol.9,No.1,pp.43-48Ibarra, H., and L. Smith-Lovin, 1997, “New Directions in Social Network Research on Gender and Organizational Careers.” Pp.361–383 in S. Jackson and C. Cooper(eds.), Handbook for Future Research in Organizational Behavior. Sussex, U.K.: Wiley.Mathews, John A. and Dong-Sung Cho, 2000, Tiger Technology: The Creation of a Semiconductor Industry in East Asia. Cambridge University Press.Mizruchi, Mark ,1996, “What Do Interlocks Do? An Analysis, Critique, and Assessment of Research on Interlocking Directorates.” Annual Review of Sociology 22: 271-98.Moody, James, 2004, “The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohssion form 1963-1999.” American Socilogical Review 69-213-238.Padgett, John F. and Christopher K. Ansell , 1993, “Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400–1434.” American Journal of Sociology 98:1259–1319.Podolny, Joel M., 1993, “A Status-Based Model of Market Competition.” American Journal of Sociology 98(4): 829-872. Podolny, Joel M. and Toby E. Stuart, 1995, “A Role-Based Ecology of Technological Change.” American Journal of Sociology 100(5): 1224-1260.Podolny, Joel M., Toby E. Stuart, and Michael T. Hannan, 1996, “Networks, Knowledge, and Niches: Competition in the Worldwide Semiconductor Industry, 1984-1991.” American Journal of Sociology 102(3): 659-689.Podolny, Joel M., 2005, Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition. Princeton Univerisyt Press.Podolny, Joel M., and J. N. Baron, 1997, “Relationships and Resources: Social Networks and Mobility in The Workplace.” American Sociological Review 62: 673–693.Podolny, Joel M., Toby E. Stuart, and Michael T. Hannan, 1996, “Networks, Knowledge, and Niches: Competition in the Worldwide Semiconductor Industry, 1984-1991,” American Journal of Sociology 102(3): 659-689.Powell, Walter W., Douglas R. White, Kenneth W. Koput, and Jason Owen-Smith, 2005, “Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences.” American Journal of Sociology 110(4): 1132-1205.Powell, Walter W., Kenneth W. Koput, and Laurel Smith-Doerr, 1996, “Interorganizational Collaboration and The Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology.” Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 116-145.Rycroft, R. W., 2003, “Technology-based Globalization Indicators: The Centrality of Innovation Network Data.” Technology in Society 25(3): 299-317.Saxenian, AnnaLee ,1994 , Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon. Valley and Route 128., Harvard University Press,Camgridge,MA.Saxenian, AnnaLee, 2005, “Braincirculation and Capitalist Dynamics: Chinese Chip Making and the Silicon Valley-Hsinchu-Shanghai Triangle,” Pp. 325-351, in The Economic Sociology of Capitalism, edited. by Victor Nee and Richard Swedberg. Princeton University Press.Soda, G., A. Usai, and A. Zaheer, 2004, “Network Memory: The Influence of Past and Current Networks on Performance.” Academy of Management Journal 47: 893–906.Tsai, Wenpin, 2000, “Social Capital, Strategic Relatedness and the Formation of Intraorganizational Linkages.” Strategic Management Journal 21(9): 925-939.Uzzi, Brain and Jarrett Spiro, 2005, “Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem.” American Journal of Sociology 111(2): 447-504.Wuchty, Stefan, Ben Jones, and Brian Uzzi., 2007, “Science Commentary: Why Do Team-Authored Papers Get Cited More? “ Science, September, 317: 1496-1498.Xiao, Zhixing and Anne S. Tsui, 2007, “When Brokers May Not Work: The Cultural Contingency of Social Capital in Chinese High-tech Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 52: 1-31. 描述 博士
國立政治大學
社會學研究所
94254503
103資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0942545031 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 熊瑞梅 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Hsung, Ray May en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 官逸人 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Guan, Yi Ren en_US dc.creator (作者) 官逸人 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Guan, Yi Ren en_US dc.date (日期) 2014 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Apr-2015 10:13:12 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Apr-2015 10:13:12 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Apr-2015 10:13:12 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0942545031 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/74308 - dc.description (描述) 博士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 社會學研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 94254503 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 103 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) IC(積體電路)產業是台灣過去三十多年來發展最完整、且在世界上最具有競爭力的創新型產業。研發與技術專利成長快速，也代表這個產業的技術創新成果。台灣IC 產業技術創新和專利的研究累積了一些成果，但較缺乏使用研發創新發明人網絡所做的分析。本研究使用IC 產業專利發明人網絡資料，從結構洞(structural holes)和地位訊號(status signal)這兩個過去西方半導體和生物科技等創新產業研究中，最能解釋創新行動者與網絡系統和創新表現理論機制的學術研究累積成果出發，並反省台灣特有IC 產業分工技術利基位置、流動型勞力市場，發展出專利發明人網絡對專利發明成果影響機制之模型。研究發現，分析結果支持發明人地位訊號、結構洞網絡理論機制有助於專利創新發明的假設。而比較特殊的例外是，上游的專利發明網絡，結構洞低的類型反而有比較好的專利創新。這是由於上游的IC設計產業技術特性，需仰賴同一團隊的人重複合作方能完成設計，所以大多與重疊的人合作，結構限制較高，因此呈現與結構洞理論不同的情況。此外，研究發現，流動並不一定帶來較佳的技術創新，台灣IC產業專利人才流動對於技術發展與創新的正面影響，較多是在上游的IC設計產業。 因此創新發明鑲嵌在台灣特有半導體的不同技術利基環境中，還必須考慮到不同產業位置的技術特性，與產業技術發展所在的階段，才能正確解釋台灣IC產業的創新發明機制。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) The IC (integrated circuit) industry has been the most complete, competitive and innovative industry in Taiwan over the past three decades. The rapid growth of patents in this field demonstrates the marvelous outcomes of technological innovations. A huge amount of patent-based research has been accumulated in this industry, but only a little is related to the inventor network. Structural holes and status signal are two competing perspectives in explaining the dynamic mechanisms between innovative actors and network systems of the most innovative industries, semiconductor and biotechnology, in advanced countries. We use these two theories and network data of patent-based inventors to discuss the specific niche of vertical disintegration and fluid labor market in Taiwan IC industry, and develop models on mechanisms of how inventors’ networks affect the outcome of inventors’ patents. The findings reveal that the hypothesis on the effects of status signals and structural holes in inventors’ collaboration networks on the citations of inventors’ patents was supported. However, the patent inventions of the upstream IC design firms, the collaborative invention teams seem to be small or high structural constraints. Most of the patents of these newly growing firms in IC design industry are specialized in consumption products. The structural constraints are high, but the impact of is large. Besides, inventors’ fluidity would not necessarily create more influential patents. The fluidity of patent-based inventors was positive impact to the patent inventions, more was found in the IC designs company. The IC industry has been vertically differentiated into three sectors: the IC designs, the IC foundry, the package and test. In principle, these three sectors demand different levels of technology. The maturity of technological niches will affect the impacts of the patents. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 前言 1第二章 文獻探討 5 第一節 結構洞與發明 7 第二節 地位訊號─明星(star)論與發明 13 第三節 專利知識的流動與發明 16 第四節 產業技術利基位置與發明 21 第五節 研究架構 25第三章 研究方法 26 第一節 資料來源 26 第二節 研究變項說明 28第四章 研究結果 35 第一節 IC產業公司間的專利合作與知識交流 35 第二節 IC產業發明人專利合作變項概況描述 44 第三節 影響專利發明人研發創新成果的迴歸模型分析 64 第四節 發明人公司流動經驗、發明網絡位置與研發創新成果的類型分析 90第五章 結論與討論 105附錄 110參考文獻 129 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2087974 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0942545031 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) IC 產業 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專利 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 發明人網絡 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 結構洞 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 地位訊號 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 流動型勞力市場 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) IC industry en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) patent en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) inventor network en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) structural holes en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) status signal en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) fluid labor market en_US dc.title (題名) 台灣IC產業專利發明人的合作網絡機制 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Innovation Mechanisms of the Patent-Based Inventor Networks in Taiwan IC Industry en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文部分李淑蓮，2013，〈台積電法務長告訴你什麼是「高品質」的專利組合！〉。北美智權報編輯部，2月4日。田畠真弓，2007，《台灣高科技產業的跨國技術學習創新網絡機制－積體電路與液晶顯示器產業的比較》。台灣大學社會學研究所博士論文。田畠真弓、莊致嘉，2010，〈引進技術過程和發展：比較台灣與日本液晶顯示器產業〉，《台灣社會學》，20：145-184。吳修辰、江祥得，2002，〈全身掛滿專利權的台積電發明家：科技與人文結合的創意工程師章勳明〉。商業周刊 781 期。11月11日。吳琬瑜、孫珮瑜，2007，〈低調拳王，奇襲全球：台灣IC設計──世界不能沒有他們〉。天下雜誌，第383期，頁107-147。官逸人、熊瑞梅、林亦之，2012，〈台灣IC產業的創新機制：以2001年、2005年台灣IC產業專利的發明人網絡為例〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》，第24卷第1期：51-82。官逸人、熊瑞梅、林亦之，2013，〈形塑董監事專業化的機制：以台灣IC產業2003年上市公司為例〉。《產業與管理論壇》，第15卷第2期：4-29。林亦之，2010，《台灣IC產業技術的追趕到創新：組織間網絡的分析》。東海大學博士論文。林亦之、熊瑞梅，2012，〈台灣IC產業組織間技術網絡的槓桿機制：後進追趕與創新擴散〉，《戰略管理》，第1期：72-98。林宜諄，2004，〈聯華電子 專利要被侵犯才有價值〉。遠見雜誌第222期。12月號 。胡國強、楊富量、李世文，2005，《南科IC產業論壇研討會論文集》。發表於「南科IC產業論壇研討會」。台南：南部科學園區管理局。2005年8月3日。徐進鈺，1999，〈流動的鑲嵌：新竹科學工業園區的勞動力市場與高科技發展〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》35：75-118。許瓊文，2003，〈研究機構形成產業創新機制〉，收錄於《產業科技與工研院：看得見的腦》。頁69-104。新竹：工業技術研究院。陳東升，2008，《積體網路：台灣高科技產業的社會學分析》。台北：群學。黃日燦，2013a，〈黃日燦看併購／茂矽 辛苦求變一場空〉。經濟日報，5月30日。 黃日燦，2013b，〈黃日燦看併購／合縱連橫 打開聯電輝煌併購史〉。經濟日報，4月25日。 黃意丹，2012，《國際化技術發展策略群組的網路、資源與績效-以專利後引證資料分析台灣IC設計產業》。台灣大學國際企業學研究所博士論文。楊伶雯，2011，〈旺宏專利實力台灣第一、全球排名十八 台積電全球排第23〉。 NOWnews今日新聞，11月1日.。蕭文康，2014，〈台灣半導體產值 今年將衝破2兆〉。蘋果日報，9月05日。二、英文部分Ahuja, Gautam, 2000, “Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study.” Administrative Science Quarterly 45(3): 425-455.Allison, John R., Mark A. Lemley, Kimberly A. Moore, and R. Derek Trunkey, 2004, “Valuable Patents.” Georgetown Law Journal 92: 435.Burt, Ronald S., 1992, Structural Holes. Cambridge , MA: Harvard University Press.Burt, Ronald S., 1997, “The Contingent Value of Social Capital. “ Administrative Science Quarterly 42:339-65.Burt, Ronald S., 2001, “Structural Holes Versus Network Closure as Social Capital. “ In Social Capital: Theory and Research, edited by N. Lin, K. Cook and R. S. Burt. Hawthorn, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Burt, Ronald S., 2004, “Structural Holes and Good Ideas.” American Journal of Sociology 110: 349-399.Burt, Ronald S., and Jennifer Merluzzi, 2014, “Embedded Brokerage: Hubs Versus Locals. “ Pre-print chapter in Research in the Sociology of Organizations, edited by Stephen P. Borgatti, Daniel J. Brass, Daniel S. Halgin, Giuseppe Labianca, and Ajay Mehra. Cambridge, MA: Emerald Group Publishing.Camarinha-Matos, L. M., and Afsarmanesh, H., 2005, “Collaborative Networks: A New Scientific Discipline. “ Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 16(4-5):439-452.Cohen, Wesley M. and Daniel A. Levinthal, 1990, “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 128–152.Collins, Randall, 1998, The Sociology of Philosophies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.DiMaggio, Paul, 1992, “Nadel’s Paradox Revisited: Relational and Cultural Aspects of Organizational Structure.” Pp. 118–142 in Networks and Organizations, edited by Nitin Nohria and Robert G. Eccles. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Erickson ,Bonnie H. 2001. “Good Networks and Good Jobs: The Value of Social Capital to Employers and Employees.” Pp. 127-158 in Nan Lin, Karen Cook, and Ronald S. Burt,(eds.), Social Capital: Theory and Research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Erickson ,Bonnie H. 2009. “The Context Challenge: Generalizing Social Capital Processes Across Two Different Settings..” Pp. 93-114 in Ray-May Hsung, Nan Lin, and Ronald L.Breiger(eds.), Contexts of Social Capital: Social Networks in Markets, Communities, and Families. New York: Routledge.Feenstra, Robert C. and Gary G. Hamilton. 2006. Emergent Economics, Divergent Paths: Economic Organization and International Trade in South Korea and Taiwan.Cambridge University Press.Gargiulo, M., and M. Benassi, 2000, “Trapped in Your Own Net: Network Cohesion, Structural Holes, and The Adaptation of Social Capital.” Organization Science 11: 183–196.Guimera, Roger, Brian Uzzi, Jarrett Spiro, and Luis A. Nunes Amaral, 2005, “Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance. ", Science, 308:697-702.Herzog, H.W. and A.M. Schlottmann , 1984, “Labor Force Mobility in the United States: Migration, Unemployment, and Remigration. “ International Regional Science Review, Vol.9,No.1,pp.43-48Ibarra, H., and L. Smith-Lovin, 1997, “New Directions in Social Network Research on Gender and Organizational Careers.” Pp.361–383 in S. Jackson and C. Cooper(eds.), Handbook for Future Research in Organizational Behavior. Sussex, U.K.: Wiley.Mathews, John A. and Dong-Sung Cho, 2000, Tiger Technology: The Creation of a Semiconductor Industry in East Asia. Cambridge University Press.Mizruchi, Mark ,1996, “What Do Interlocks Do? An Analysis, Critique, and Assessment of Research on Interlocking Directorates.” Annual Review of Sociology 22: 271-98.Moody, James, 2004, “The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohssion form 1963-1999.” American Socilogical Review 69-213-238.Padgett, John F. and Christopher K. Ansell , 1993, “Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400–1434.” American Journal of Sociology 98:1259–1319.Podolny, Joel M., 1993, “A Status-Based Model of Market Competition.” American Journal of Sociology 98(4): 829-872. Podolny, Joel M. and Toby E. Stuart, 1995, “A Role-Based Ecology of Technological Change.” American Journal of Sociology 100(5): 1224-1260.Podolny, Joel M., Toby E. Stuart, and Michael T. Hannan, 1996, “Networks, Knowledge, and Niches: Competition in the Worldwide Semiconductor Industry, 1984-1991.” American Journal of Sociology 102(3): 659-689.Podolny, Joel M., 2005, Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition. Princeton Univerisyt Press.Podolny, Joel M., and J. N. Baron, 1997, “Relationships and Resources: Social Networks and Mobility in The Workplace.” American Sociological Review 62: 673–693.Podolny, Joel M., Toby E. Stuart, and Michael T. Hannan, 1996, “Networks, Knowledge, and Niches: Competition in the Worldwide Semiconductor Industry, 1984-1991,” American Journal of Sociology 102(3): 659-689.Powell, Walter W., Douglas R. White, Kenneth W. Koput, and Jason Owen-Smith, 2005, “Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences.” American Journal of Sociology 110(4): 1132-1205.Powell, Walter W., Kenneth W. Koput, and Laurel Smith-Doerr, 1996, “Interorganizational Collaboration and The Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology.” Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 116-145.Rycroft, R. W., 2003, “Technology-based Globalization Indicators: The Centrality of Innovation Network Data.” Technology in Society 25(3): 299-317.Saxenian, AnnaLee ,1994 , Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon. Valley and Route 128., Harvard University Press,Camgridge,MA.Saxenian, AnnaLee, 2005, “Braincirculation and Capitalist Dynamics: Chinese Chip Making and the Silicon Valley-Hsinchu-Shanghai Triangle,” Pp. 325-351, in The Economic Sociology of Capitalism, edited. by Victor Nee and Richard Swedberg. Princeton University Press.Soda, G., A. Usai, and A. Zaheer, 2004, “Network Memory: The Influence of Past and Current Networks on Performance.” Academy of Management Journal 47: 893–906.Tsai, Wenpin, 2000, “Social Capital, Strategic Relatedness and the Formation of Intraorganizational Linkages.” Strategic Management Journal 21(9): 925-939.Uzzi, Brain and Jarrett Spiro, 2005, “Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem.” American Journal of Sociology 111(2): 447-504.Wuchty, Stefan, Ben Jones, and Brian Uzzi., 2007, “Science Commentary: Why Do Team-Authored Papers Get Cited More? “ Science, September, 317: 1496-1498.Xiao, Zhixing and Anne S. Tsui, 2007, “When Brokers May Not Work: The Cultural Contingency of Social Capital in Chinese High-tech Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 52: 1-31. zh_TW
