Frontiers in Strategic Management

Open Access Peer Review International
Open Access

Optimizing Inventor Placement In Organizational Networks: A Framework For Assessing Core And Peripheral Contributions To Innovation Output

4 Department of Strategic and Global Management Colombo International Business Academy Colombo, Sri Lanka
4 Faculty of Organizational Development South Lanka Institute of Management Galle, Sri Lanka

Abstract

Organizational innovation is increasingly shaped by how firms position and mobilize heterogeneous inventors within internal collaboration networks. This paper develops an integrated analytical framework for optimizing inventor placement across core and peripheral network positions to enhance innovation output. Drawing on knowledge-based theory, network theory, and dynamic capability perspectives, the study synthesizes insights from organizational design, absorptive capacity, and recombinant innovation literature. The core argument is that inventor location within organizational networks significantly influences the efficiency, diversity, and impact of innovation outcomes.

The study conceptualizes core positions as structurally embedded nodes with high centrality and dense connectivity, facilitating exploitation and incremental innovation, while peripheral positions serve as exploratory spaces enabling novelty generation and knowledge recombination. By integrating these dual functions, the proposed framework explains how firms can dynamically allocate inventors based on task complexity, knowledge type, and innovation objectives.

Empirical and theoretical evidence from prior studies suggests that inventor mobility, structural embeddedness, and network positioning critically determine knowledge spillovers and innovation performance (Agarwal et al., 2009). Similarly, organizational restructuring and acquisitions influence inventor integration and innovation outcomes (Ahuja & Katila, 2001). The paper further proposes a multi-layer optimization model that aligns inventor capabilities with network topology to maximize innovation efficiency.

The findings contribute to strategic management literature by bridging micro-level inventor behavior with macro-level organizational design. The framework provides actionable implications for R&D managers seeking to balance exploration and exploitation through optimized network design.

How to Cite

Perera, D. N., & Fernando, D. I. (2026). Optimizing Inventor Placement In Organizational Networks: A Framework For Assessing Core And Peripheral Contributions To Innovation Output. Frontiers in Strategic Management, 3(02), 01–09. Retrieved from https://irjernet.com/index.php/fsm/article/view/421

References

Agarwal, R., Ganco, M., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2009). Reputations for toughness in patent enforcement: Implicationsfor knowledge spillovers via inventor mobility. Strategic Management Journal, 30(13), 1349–1374.
Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. (2001). Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: Alongitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 197–220.
Argote, L., McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative frameworkand review of emerging themes. Management Science, 49(4), 571–582.
Argyres, N. (1996). Evidence on the role of firm capabilities in vertical integration decisions. Strategic Manage-ment Journal, 17(2), 129–150.
Argyres, N. S., & Silverman, B. S. (2004). R&D, organization structure, and the development of corporate techno-logical knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8–9), 929–958.
Argyres, N., Rios, L. A., & Silverman, B. S. (2020). Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: For-mal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks. Strategic Management Journal, 41(11), 2015–2049.
Bakir, B., Ozdemir, M., & Karim, S. (2021). Acqui-hires: Redeployment and retention of human capital post-acquisition. Strategic Management Journal, 45(2), 203–395.
Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2000). Design rules: The power of modularity (Vol. 1). MIT Press.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Barsky, N. P. (1999). A core/periphery structure in a corporate budgeting process. Connect, 22(2), 22–29.
Baumann, O., Schmidt, J., & Stieglitz, N. (2019). Effective search in rugged performance landscapes: A reviewand outlook. Journal of Management, 45(1), 285–318.
Billinger, S., Srikanth, K., Stieglitz, N., & Schumacher, T. R. (2021). Exploration and exploitation in complex sea-rch tasks: How feedback influences whether and where human agents search. Strategic Management Jour-nal, 42(2), 361–385.
Billinger, S., Stieglitz, N., & Schumacher, T. R. (2014). Search on rugged landscapes: An experimental study.Organization Science, 25(1), 93–108.
Burt, R. S. (1976). Positions in networks. Social Forces, 55(1), 93–122.
Carnabuci, G., & Operti, E. (2013). Where do firms' recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganizationalnetworks, knowledge, and firms' ability to innovate through technological recombination. Strategic Manage-ment Journal, 34(13), 1591–1613.
Cattani, G., & Ferriani, S. (2008). A core/periphery perspective on individual creative performance: Social net-works and cinematic achievements in the Hollywood film industry. Organization Science, 19(6), 824–844.
Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., & Allison, P. D. (2014). Insiders, outsiders, and the struggle for consecration in culturalfields: A core-periphery perspective. American Sociological Review, 79(2), 258–281.
Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., & Colucci, M. (2015). Creativity in social networks. In The Oxford handbook of creativeindustries (Vol. 2, pp. 75–95). Oxford University Press.
Chattopadhyay, S., & Bercovitz, J. (2020). When one door closes, another door opens… for some: Evidence fromthe post-TRIPS Indian pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 41(6), 988–1022.
Chattopadhyay, S., HonorΓ©, F., & Won, S. (2025). Free range startups? Market scope, academic founders, and therole of general knowledge in AI. Strategic Management Journal, 46(4), 1027–1079.
Chattopadhyay, S., Karim, S., & Capron, L. (2024). Addressing the paradox of innovation-sourcing acquisitions:Unpacking the roles of firm and individual absorptive capacity. Working Paper. University of Illinois.
Chattopadhyay, S., Won, S., & Bidwell, M. (2024). Dynamic demands versus durable skills: Career dilemmas inpharmaceutical R&D. Working Paper. University of Illinois.
Coff, R. W. (1997). Human assets and management dilemmas: Coping with hazards on the road to resource-based theory. The Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 374–402.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1991). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation.Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.
Coleman, J. S., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. (1966). Medical innovation: A diffusion study. Bobbs-Merrill Company.
Csaszar, F. A., & Siggelkow, N. (2010). How much to copy? Determinants of effective imitation breadth. Organi-zation Science, 21(3), 661–676.
Csermely, P., London, A., Wu, L., & Uzzi, B. (2013). Structure and dynamics of core/periphery networks. Journalof Complex Networks, 1, 93–123.
Dahlander, L., & Frederiksen, L. (2012). The core and cosmopolitans: A relational view of innovation in usercommunities. Organization Science, 23(4), 988–1007.
Dubinsky, Y., Rubin, J., Berger, T., Duszynski, S., Becker, M., & Czarnecki, K. (2013). An exploratory study ofcloning in industrial software product lines. In 2013 17th European conference on software maintenance andreengineering (pp. 25–34). IEEE.
Ethiraj, S. K. (2007). Allocation of inventive effort in complex product systems. Strategic Management Journal,28(6), 563–584.
Ethiraj, S. K., & Levinthal, D. (2004). Bounded rationality and the search for organizational architecture: An evo-lutionary perspective on the design of organizations and their evolvability. Administrative Science Quarterly,49(3), 404–437.
Fabrizio, K. R. (2009). Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation. Research policy, 38(2), 255–267.
Fang, C., Lee, J., & Schilling, M. A. (2010). Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design:The isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organization Science, 21(3), 625–642.
Ferriani, S., Cattani, G., & Baden-Fuller, C. (2009). The relational antecedents of project-entrepreneurship: Net-work centrality, team composition and project performance. Research Policy, 38(10), 1545–1558.
Fleming, L. (2001). Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science, 47(1), 117–132.
Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2001). Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data.Research Policy, 30(7), 1019–1039.
Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2004). Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management Journal,25(8–9), 909–928.
Fonti, F., & Maoret, M. (2016). The direct and indirect effects of core and peripheral social capital on organiza-tional performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37(8), 1765–1786.
Galeotti, A., Goyal, S., & Kamphorst, J. (2006). Network formation with heterogeneous players. Games and Eco-nomic Behavior, 54(2), 353–372.
Gofman, M., & Jin, Z. (2024). Artificial intelligence, education, and entrepreneurship. The Journal of Finance,79(1), 631–667.
GΓ³mez-SolΓ³rzano, M., Tortoriello, M., & Soda, G. (2019). Instrumental and affective ties within the laboratory:The impact of informal cliques on innovative productivity. Strategic Management Journal, 40(10), 1593–1609.
Graham, B. S. (2017). An econometric model of network formation with degree heterogeneity. Econometrica,85(4), 1033–1063.
Grimpe, C., & Sofka, W. (2009). Search patterns and absorptive capacity: Low-and high-technology sectors inEuropean countries. Research Policy, 38(3), 495–506.
Hambrick, D. C., & Finkelstein, S. (1987). Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizationaloutcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior 9, 369–406.
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamiccapabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850.
Hess, A. M., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2011). When are assets complementary? Star scientists, strategic alliances, andinnovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 32(8), 895–909.
Heydari, B., Heydari, P., & Mosleh, M. (2015). Efficient network structures with separable heterogeneous connec-tion costs. Economics Letters, 134, 82–85.
Heydari, B., Mosleh, M., & Dalili, K. (2020). Not all bridges connect: Integration in multi-community net-works. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 44(4), 199–220.