Networks and strategic entrepreneurship: comments on Comparing alliance network structure across industries: observations and explanations and Strategic networks and entrepreneurial ventures

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/sej.32
• Date: 01 December 2007
• Published date: 01 December 2007
• Author: William Schulze

Copyright © 2008 Strategic Management Society

Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal

Strat. Entrepreneurship J., 1: 229–231 (2007)

Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/sej.32

DISCUSSANT COMMENTS

NETWORKS AND STRATEGIC ENTREPRENEURSHIP:

COMMENTS ON COMPARING ALLIANCE NETWORK

STRUCTURE ACROSS INDUSTRIES: OBSERVATIONS

AND EXPLANATIONS AND STRATEGIC NETWORKS

AND ENTREPRENEURIAL VENTURES

WILLIAM SCHULZE*

Department of Management, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.

While a growing body of research supports the notion that interorganizational networks play

an important role in shaping the competitive context and infl uencing a variety of outcomes

for growing and established fi rms alike, concerns about the boundaries and limitations of

the theory are rising. This commentary addresses the contributions of the aforementioned

articles while underscoring the various theoretical challenges that await those seeking to

apply network theory to the nascent fi eld of strategic entrepreneurship. Copyright © 2008

Strategic Management Society.

Network theory is an important topic in the fi elds

of strategy and entrepreneurship. Aldrich and Kim

(2007) note that network theory appeared 395 times

in Strategic Management Journal from 1997 to June

2007 and has been the topic of special issues in a

variety of leading research journals, including SMJ

(2000) and Academy of Management Journal (2004).

While the theory has been used to explore phenom-

ena at differing levels of analysis, a growing body

of research supports the notion that interorganiza-

tional networks play an important role in shaping

the competitive context and infl uencing a variety of

outcomes for growing and established fi rms alike

(Gulati, Nohria, and Zaheer, 2000).

Network theory has also captured the fascination

of entrepreneurship scholars. Responding, at least

in part, to Aldrich and Zimmer’s (1986) assertion

that social structures play a major role in deter-

mining who tries to become an entrepreneur and

who succeeds, entrepreneurship scholars have used

network theory to address core issues within their

fi eld. These include, but are not limited to, questions

concerning differential access to information (Gulati

et al., 2000), opportunity recognition (McMullen

and Shepherd, 2006), fi nance (Hsu, 2004), resources

(Rothaermel, 2001), and the technological capabili-

ties needed to compete in growing dynamic markets

(Calabrese, Baum, and Silverman, 2000). Work on

the embeddedness of economic transactions, as well

as kinks in the diffusion of different types of infor-

mation, has, as Stuart and Sorenson note, served

to greatly inform research about concentration in

patterns of innovation, as well as economic devel-

opment and growth (Stuart and Sorenson, 2003;

Sorenson, Rivkin, and Fleming, 2006; Zucker,

Darby, and Armstrong, 1998). Finally, the theory

has been productively used to address questions

concerning the differential ability of entrepreneurs

Keywords: Social networks; network structure; alliances;

entrepreneurship

*Correspondence to: William Schulze, Department of Manage-

ment, 1645 East Campus Center Drive, Salt Lake City, UT

84112-9304, U.S.A.

E-mail: william.schulze@business.utah.edu