This paper investigates the impact of returnee entrepreneurs and their knowledge spillovers on innovation in high-tech firms in China. Using panel data for 1,318 high-tech firms in Beijing Zhongguancun Science Park (ZSP) we find that returnee entrepreneurs create a significant spillover effect that promotes innovation in other local high-tech firms. The extent of this spillover effect is positively moderated by the non-returnee firm's absorptive capacity approximated by the skill level of employees. Multinational enterprises' R&D activities positively affect the innovation intensity of non-returnee firms only when these local firms possess the sufficient level of absorptive capacity. Our findings have important policy and managerial implications for policy-makers and practitioners.

My investigations based on wide cross-section analysis of 5128 firms in Czech Republic (1998-2006) present some evidence of their behaviour in field of innovations. Business sector relationship to technological change is characterized by following findings (ceteris paribus): 1) Size of a firm (given by capital, employees and total sales) has ambiguous relation to total number of R&D workers. 2) There is negative relationship between concentration and number of R&D workers. 3) Competition is positively associated with intensive using of intellectual property rights (given by intangible assets). 4) Benefits of in-house R&D that is represented by total number of R&D workers come with multiplicative relation towards total sales. 5) Companies owned by foreigners substantially contribute to total R&D activity in Czech Republic and there is some evidence of technological transfer.

當管理策略的發展開始從既有的「純競爭策略」，逐漸轉變為一種陰陽相依、競合相倚的觀念時，這種「陰」與「陽」同時存在或交替出現的「競合策略」便成為管理學者爭相研究的焦點。然而，即使有關於競合的理論與研究不勝枚舉，但是能以知識為探討的立足點，來瞭解廠商間創新研發競合關係的研究並不多見。再者，過去有關區域創新或是產業聚落的研究，多半強調合作創新，顯少討論區域內的競爭。進一步而言，對於區域內廠商在創新研發方面同時「競合並存」的研究，特別是針對「競爭導向的合作」與「合作導向的競爭」兩種創新競合的情境下，廠商間的知識分享與知識保護的情形，更是付之闕如。因此，本研究的目的，即在回應這些文獻缺口，對於廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，其知識互動的實際作為，做一深入的探究。 本研究在研究方法上採用多重個案研究方法，以全球最著名的區域創新系統之一台灣中部地區的工具機群聚為主要的研究場域。在研究的過程中，以兩階段的深度訪談，針對中部地區的工具機暨零組件產業之競合關係進行瞭解，並找出兩個特殊的創新研發競合案例。進一步地，針對此兩案例中廠商的創新研發「競合關係」與知識互動的實際作為，做深入的比較與分析。 本研究經歸納彙整研究命題後，進一步得到以下結論： 一、第三方單位在區域內廠商之創新研發競合關係與知識互動中扮演重要的角色，包括中介協調、主動催生與管理計畫、技術移轉與檢測驗證等。 二、廠商在不同的「競合關係」情境下，會因營運範疇相似度的不同，而有不同的知識分享類型與交流管道。在營運範疇相似度高的情況下，會以基礎理論知識來進行分享，且以正式的討論會議為主要的知識交流管道；在營運範疇相似度度低的情況下，會以應用層面的技術知識進行分享，在知識交流的管道上不僅會有正式的討論會議，還會透過非正式的方式進行交流。 三、廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，會因未來競爭的可能性與營業秘密的考量，而採取不同的知識分享方式，包括選擇性分享、不願意分享以及主動進行分享等。 四、廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，儘管知識保護的緣由不同，都會以契約內的保密協議做為最主要的知識保護方式。 在學術研究方面，本研究不同於以往的文獻從「市場」或是「資源」的角度來探究「競合關係」，而是以創新研發中最根本的要素–「知識」，來探究創新研發的「競合關係」。其次，不僅瞭解到第三方單位是促成競爭廠商形成合作研發聯盟的重要推手，亦從廠商不同的競合情境下，其知識互動的作為，整理出「知識互動的影響因素」。因此，本研究在學術研究上做出以下的貢獻： 一、過往競合方面的研究，主要是以一般性的策略領域為主，本研究則特別針對廠商在「創新研發」上的「競合」行為來加以探討。 二、過往的競合理論對於市場與資源的定義不夠完整與明確，且認為市場與資源是分別影響競爭與合作的不同要素。本研究更細緻地以「知識」的層次來加以探討，發現「知識」對廠商間的競合行為有很大的影響；此外，知識層次的觀點亦會使市場與資源間的界限變得模糊。 三、過往的競合理論概括性地提出既競爭又合作的概念，本研究進一步地提供「競爭導向的合作」（競中帶合）與「合作導向的競爭」（合中帶競）兩種情境的實證研究結果。 四、過往的研究較少提出第三方單位在競合關係中扮演的角色，本研究藉由實證並提出區域內廠商在進行創新研發競合關係時，第三方單位的主要角色與重要性。 五、過往區域創新系統或產業群聚的研究以探討廠商間的合作為主，本研究再加入「競爭」的要素做為研究廠商創新研發「競合關係」的基礎。 整體而言，本研究將「競中帶合」與「合中帶競」做清楚的定義，進一步地以知識作為廠商進行創新研發競合的根本要素，並提出第三方單位的重要性。在實務上，提供知識互動的影響因素作為廠商進行競合與知識互動時的參考依據。 / Management strategy has gradually transformed from “pure competition” to the coexistence of competition and cooperation, also known as co-opetition, where “co-opetition strategy” has become a popular research focus for scholars who study management. Scholars, upon observing such trend where “peace” and “warfare”- or “yin” and “yang”- exists either at the same time or occurs alternatively, begin to add the “cooperative” element (yang) into the traditional concept of “competition” (yin). Although immense theories and researches on the concept of co-opetition exist, researches that attempt to reveal the co-opetition relationship in the realm of R&D and Innovation among firms from the standpoint of knowledge have been scarce. Regional Innovation Systems is a field full of cooperation and competition, yet past research mostly focused on cooperation and innovation instead of discussing the competition among firms in the region. That is, few researches focused on discussing the cooperation and competition coexisting at the same time in the realm of R&D and Innovation among firms. Moreover, researches that particularly discuss the situation of knowledge sharing and knowledge protection among firms from two R&D and Innovation co-opetition types of “Competition-dominated cooperation” and “Cooperation-dominated competition” relegate said situations to the category of things unknown. Therefore, this research aims to fill the gap in such literature by conducting deep explorations into knowledge interaction among firms in one region, particularly from two R&D and Innovation co-opetition types. This research adopts a multi-case study method while the main field of research focuses on one of the most renowned global Regional Innovation Systems: the machinery cluster in central Taiwan. During the process of the research, a two-stage, in-depth interview was conducted to understand the co-opetition relationship among the machine tool and component firms in the central Taiwan, and has identified two special case studies of R&D and Innovation co-operation. Furthermore, this research focus on the R&D and Innovation co-opetition relationship among firms and their practices of knowledge interaction in these two cases, and conducts in-depth comparisons and analysis. By conducting two-stage in-depth interviews, this study summarizes the research propositions and further obtains the following conclusions: 1.Third party plays an important role in R&D and innovation co-opetition knowledge interaction among firms in the same region, including the roles of intermediary coordination, taking the initiative to spawn and manage projects, and transferring, testing and verification of technology. 2.In different “co-opetition” types, the types of knowledge sharing and exchange channels among firms are different according to how similar they are in operational scope. In the case of high similarity in operational scope, basic and theoretical knowledge is shared, and formal meetings are the main channel of knowledge exchange. In the case of low similarity in operational scope, technical and applied knowledge is shared, and the channels of knowledge exchange do not only have formal meetings, but also communicate informally. 3.In different “R&D and innovation co-opetition” types, firms will take different approaches in sharing knowledge (either being selective, not willing, or actively sharing) due to future competition possibilities and trade secrets. 4.Firms differ in their reasons for knowledge protection in different “R&D and innovation co-opetition” types, but will mostly rely on confidential agreements within their contracts as the main measure for knowledge protection. While past academic research mostly explores "co-opetition relationship" from the perspective of "market" or "resource", this research explores R&D and innovation co-opetition with the most essential element, “knowledge”. Not only is it understood that third-party units are important promoters of competitive firms in forming R&D alliances, "the influencing factors of knowledge interaction" from the perspective of their knowledge interaction under different co-opetition types is concluded. Therefore, this research aims to produce the following contributions in the academic field: 1.Past co-opetition researches mostly focus on generic and strategical fields, this research focuses particularly on bahviors of “co-opetition in R&D and innovation” among firms. 2.Past co-opetition theories’ definitions on markets and resources are insufficient and imprecise, for they describe markets and resources as different factors that affect competition and cooperation. This research offers a finer exploration from the aspect of “knowledge”. This research finds that “knowledge” has an immense impact on co-opetition behaviors. In addition, the knowledge-level viewpoint further blurs the boundary between markets and resources. 3.Past co-opetition theories offered the generic concept of simultaneous competition and cooperation This research further provides empirical research results of two scenarios: "competition-dominated cooperation" and "cooperation-dominated competition". 4.Past researches seldom discuss the role that third parties play in co-opetition. This research states the importance of third parties in the firms’ “co-opetition relationships” through empirical evidence when it comes to R&D and innovation in the region. 5.Past researches of regional innovation systems or clusters primarily focus on cooperation between firms, this research adds the factor of “competition” as a research basis for understanding firms’ co-opetition relationships in and R&D and innovation. Overall, this research clearly defines "competition-dominated cooperation" and "cooperation-dominated competition", and views “knowledge” as a fundamental element of R&D and innovation co-opetition, putting forward the importance of third-party units. In practice, provide the influential factors of knowledge interaction as a reference for firms to conduct co-opetition and knowledge interaction.

Questo lavoro intende analizzare la correlazione tra innovazione delle imprese e capital sociale, misurato da indicatori classici (come la partecipazione politica e le attività nel tempo libero) e da indicatori maggiormente legati alla dimensione aziendale (come accordi e cooperazioni). L’analisi viene fatta sia per l’Italia che per il Regno Unito attraverso l’uso della Community Innovation Survey 4, la survey europea sull’innovazione e la R&S nelle imprese per i dati su innovazione e capital sociale aziendale. Inoltre vengono utilizzate l’Indagine Multiscopo 2000 per l’Italia e l’Indice di Deprivazione per l’Inghilterra come misure di capitale sociale classico. Infine viene proposta una comparazione dei risultati per i due paesi per l’analisi sul capitale sociale aziendale. Questa comparazione è riletta alla luce di più generali considerazioni sui due differenti sistemi produttivi ed economici. / This work would try to test the correlation between innovation in firms and social capital, measured by classic indicators (like political participation, leisure and activities) and more corporate indicators (like agreements and collaborations). The analysis is carried out for Italy and UK and we use the Community Innovation Survey 4, the European survey on innovation and R&D in the firms, for the data on innovation and corporate social capital. We use the Multipurpose Survey 2000 for Italy and the Index of Deprivation for England like measures of classic social capital. We further try a comparison of the results between the two countries for the analysis on corporate social capital. This comparison is finally referred to more general issues like the two different productive and economic systems.