Configuration of Technology Networks in the Wind Turbine Industry: A Comparative Study of Technology Management Models in European and Chinese Lead Firms

Stine Jessen Haakonsson, Julia Kirch Kirkegaard

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    Abstract

    Through a comparative analysis of technology management at the component level by wind turbine manufacturers from Europe and China, this article compares strategies of internalisation of core technology components by European and Chinese lead firms and outlines how different internalisation strategies impact the networks established by the two types of lead firms. Building on the concept of governance developed by the global value chain literature, the article identifies two different types of networks: European lead firms internalise core technology components and keep strong captive or relational ties with key component suppliers, whereas Chinese lead firms modularise and externalise core technology components, hence adopting a more flexible approach to technology management. The latter model mirrors a strategy of overcoming technological barriers by tapping into knowledge through global innovation networks. The article contributes to the network governance literature by introducing scales of component technology complexity and lead firm capabilities for understanding network constructs.
    Through a comparative analysis of technology management at the component level by wind turbine manufacturers from Europe and China, this article compares strategies of internalisation of core technology components by European and Chinese lead firms and outlines how different internalisation strategies impact the networks established by the two types of lead firms. Building on the concept of governance developed by the global value chain literature, the article identifies two different types of networks: European lead firms internalise core technology components and keep strong captive or relational ties with key component suppliers, whereas Chinese lead firms modularise and externalise core technology components, hence adopting a more flexible approach to technology management. The latter model mirrors a strategy of overcoming technological barriers by tapping into knowledge through global innovation networks. The article contributes to the network governance literature by introducing scales of component technology complexity and lead firm capabilities for understanding network constructs.
    LanguageEnglish
    JournalInternational Journal of Technology Management
    Volume70
    Issue number4
    Pages281–299
    ISSN0267-5730
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 2016

    Keywords

    • Global innovation networks
    • Technology management
    • Technology components
    • Wind turbines
    • Network governance
    • Lead firms strategies
    • Technology complexity
    • Europe
    • China
    • Internalisation
    • Externalisation
    • Network configuration
    • Technology networks
    • Wind energy
    • Wind power
    • Turbine manufacturing
    • Global value chain
    • Component suppliers

    Cite this

    @article{a9030bec8c294880a8748a2067dd3fd3,
    title = "Configuration of Technology Networks in the Wind Turbine Industry: A Comparative Study of Technology Management Models in European and Chinese Lead Firms",
    abstract = "Through a comparative analysis of technology management at the component level by wind turbine manufacturers from Europe and China, this article compares strategies of internalisation of core technology components by European and Chinese lead firms and outlines how different internalisation strategies impact the networks established by the two types of lead firms. Building on the concept of governance developed by the global value chain literature, the article identifies two different types of networks: European lead firms internalise core technology components and keep strong captive or relational ties with key component suppliers, whereas Chinese lead firms modularise and externalise core technology components, hence adopting a more flexible approach to technology management. The latter model mirrors a strategy of overcoming technological barriers by tapping into knowledge through global innovation networks. The article contributes to the network governance literature by introducing scales of component technology complexity and lead firm capabilities for understanding network constructs.",
    keywords = "Global innovation networks, Technology management, Technology components, Wind turbines, Network governance, Lead firms strategies, Technology complexity, Europe, China, Internalisation, Externalisation, Network configuration, Technology networks, Wind energy, Wind power, Turbine manufacturing, Global value chain, Component suppliers, Global innovation networks, Technology management, Technology components, Wind turbines, Network governance, Lead firms strategies, Technology complexity, Europe, China, Internalisation, Externalisation, Network configuration, Technology networks, Wind energy, Wind power, Turbine manufacturing, Global value chain, Component suppliers",
    author = "Haakonsson, {Stine Jessen} and Kirkegaard, {Julia Kirch}",
    year = "2016",
    doi = "10.1504/IJTM.2016.075892",
    language = "English",
    volume = "70",
    pages = "281–299",
    journal = "International Journal of Technology Management",
    issn = "0267-5730",
    publisher = "Inderscience Publishers",
    number = "4",

    }

    Configuration of Technology Networks in the Wind Turbine Industry : A Comparative Study of Technology Management Models in European and Chinese Lead Firms. / Haakonsson, Stine Jessen; Kirkegaard, Julia Kirch.

    In: International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 70, No. 4, 2016, p. 281–299.

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Configuration of Technology Networks in the Wind Turbine Industry

    T2 - International Journal of Technology Management

    AU - Haakonsson,Stine Jessen

    AU - Kirkegaard,Julia Kirch

    PY - 2016

    Y1 - 2016

    N2 - Through a comparative analysis of technology management at the component level by wind turbine manufacturers from Europe and China, this article compares strategies of internalisation of core technology components by European and Chinese lead firms and outlines how different internalisation strategies impact the networks established by the two types of lead firms. Building on the concept of governance developed by the global value chain literature, the article identifies two different types of networks: European lead firms internalise core technology components and keep strong captive or relational ties with key component suppliers, whereas Chinese lead firms modularise and externalise core technology components, hence adopting a more flexible approach to technology management. The latter model mirrors a strategy of overcoming technological barriers by tapping into knowledge through global innovation networks. The article contributes to the network governance literature by introducing scales of component technology complexity and lead firm capabilities for understanding network constructs.

    AB - Through a comparative analysis of technology management at the component level by wind turbine manufacturers from Europe and China, this article compares strategies of internalisation of core technology components by European and Chinese lead firms and outlines how different internalisation strategies impact the networks established by the two types of lead firms. Building on the concept of governance developed by the global value chain literature, the article identifies two different types of networks: European lead firms internalise core technology components and keep strong captive or relational ties with key component suppliers, whereas Chinese lead firms modularise and externalise core technology components, hence adopting a more flexible approach to technology management. The latter model mirrors a strategy of overcoming technological barriers by tapping into knowledge through global innovation networks. The article contributes to the network governance literature by introducing scales of component technology complexity and lead firm capabilities for understanding network constructs.

    KW - Global innovation networks

    KW - Technology management

    KW - Technology components

    KW - Wind turbines

    KW - Network governance

    KW - Lead firms strategies

    KW - Technology complexity

    KW - Europe

    KW - China

    KW - Internalisation

    KW - Externalisation

    KW - Network configuration

    KW - Technology networks

    KW - Wind energy

    KW - Wind power

    KW - Turbine manufacturing

    KW - Global value chain

    KW - Component suppliers

    KW - Global innovation networks

    KW - Technology management

    KW - Technology components

    KW - Wind turbines

    KW - Network governance

    KW - Lead firms strategies

    KW - Technology complexity

    KW - Europe

    KW - China

    KW - Internalisation

    KW - Externalisation

    KW - Network configuration

    KW - Technology networks

    KW - Wind energy

    KW - Wind power

    KW - Turbine manufacturing

    KW - Global value chain

    KW - Component suppliers

    UR - http://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=954921383830&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

    U2 - 10.1504/IJTM.2016.075892

    DO - 10.1504/IJTM.2016.075892

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 70

    SP - 281

    EP - 299

    JO - International Journal of Technology Management

    JF - International Journal of Technology Management

    SN - 0267-5730

    IS - 4

    ER -