Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology

166 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Benefiting from economic crisis? Strategic orientation effects, trade-offs, and configurations with resource availability on SME performance (2020, background): “, proximal and distal technological experience) (Nerkar and Roberts 2004), and cooperation between inventors with similar skill sets (Bonaccorsi and Thoma 2007).”
The Whole Is More Than the Sum of Its Parts— Or Is It? A Review of the Empirical Literature on Complementarities in Organizations (2010, background): “There are some studies that deal with complementarities among different types of knowledge, skills, and capabilities on the individual level (Bonaccorsi & Thoma, 2007; Mithas & Krishnan, 2008).”
Partner Geographic and Organizational Proximity and the Innovative Performance of Knowledge‐Creating Alliances (2014, unknown): “Patent family size, namely, the number of jurisdictions where a patent grant has been sought, has been shown to capture the extent to which firms invest money to protect their patented innovations (Lanjouw et al., 1998; Bonaccorsi and Thoma, 2007), thus providing useful information about the perceiv”
Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology (2012, background): “, 2004), and a number of authors use social network analysis and network indicators emanating from graph theory to investigate the characteristics and degree of interrelatedness of groups of researchers (Bonaccorsi and Thoma, 2007; Cantner and Graf, 2006).”