近年來國內中小企業逐步以群聚的形式進行廠商之間的合作，藉此匯集必要的資源與能力以進行創新。而這些中小企業的合作形式不完全是學理上的群聚，比較是類似Rosenfeld (1997)或Uzzi (1996, 1997)所述的網絡合作結構。因此本研究將有異於之前的產業群聚的研究概念，除保留其創新的研究觀點(Baptista & Swann, 1998)之外，採用組織理論的網絡結構結合雙元結構理論來分析網絡合作廠商的行為表現及創新成效。

本研究有效問卷為54份，採用PLS對研究模型進行分析。研究結果顯示：
(1)越處於友誼網絡中心的廠商，越能展現組織公民行為(利他行為)。此結果說明台灣中小企業廠商講究人情味，當朋友有難會義不容辭幫忙。雖說朋友間情義相挺基本上是不求回報的，但在人非聖賢的情況下，此種利他行為的背後，往往含有一絲「利己」的動機，亦即期待著回報(我這次幫你，下次你也會幫我)。越處於網絡中心的廠商，顯現其越握有資源與能力並受到大家的依賴。在具備利己動機及利他能力的條件下，中心廠商越能展現組織公民行為。(2)組織公民行為與創新策略呈現顯著的正向關係。廠商透過展現組織公民行為，而得以獲得他人之回饋(資源)，此紓解中組織內部資源稀有性的限制，使廠商能更自主地採取探索型或利用型創新策略。另外，研究結果亦顯示探索型創新策略高於利用型策略；展現組織公民行為的廠商，往往是網絡中的領頭羊，面對世界各國的高度競爭，必須知道何去何從，才能領導夥伴創造新營收，因此對於這些領導廠商來說，探索型創新策略顯得相對重要。(3)探索性創新策略對廠商績效有顯著的正向效果。在國際化浪潮席捲世界的速度愈形加劇之際，廠商如仍繼續墨守成本競爭的舊思維將難以生存。值此改變的關鍵時刻，廠商若能因應時代掌握先機，順利探索出新產品或服務將得以永續經營。

In recent years, the small-and-median enterprises (SMEs ) gradually cluster together to gain the necessary resources and capacity for innovation. The forms of cluster is not entirely an academic cluster, more like the words “network” Rosenfeld (1997) or Uzzi (1996) talk about. Therefore, this study will be different from the previous concept of industrial cluster and use the network structure of organizational theory and ambidexterity theory to analysis how do SMEs gain the resources by showing organizational citizenship behavior (altruism) in the network. Finally, examine the effect of innovation.

Based on a sample of 54 firms, we find that: (1) The centrality of firms is positively related to the organizational citizenship behavior (altruism). (2) Organizational citizenship behavior is positively related to the innovation strategies .It means that firms could get more feedback from others(resources) by showing organizational citizenship behavior and then could do more innovation. (3)The explore strategies of innovation have a significant positive effects to the performance.

Adler, P. S. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40.
Baker, N. R., Green, S. G., & Bean, A. S. (1986). The need for strategic balance in R&D project portfolios. Research Management, 29(2), 38-43.
Baptista, R., & Swann, P. (1998). Do firms in clusters innovate more? Research Policy, 27(5), 527-542.
Barnard, C. I. (1968). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ Press.
Brass, D. J. (1995). A social network perspective on human resources management (Vol. 13): JAI Press.
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1994). The management of innovation. New York, USA: Oxford University Press Inc.
Burt, R. S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2), 339-365.
Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2009). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781-796.
Capaldo, A. (2007). Network structure and innovation: the leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability. Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 585-608.
Coleman, J. S. (1994). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
De Oliveira, J. (2008). Upgrading Clusters and Small Enterprises in Developing Countries: Environmental, Labour, Innovation and Social Issues. Burlington, VT, USA：Ashgate Publishing.
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. The Academy of Management Review 31(3), 659-669.
Drucker, P. F. (2002). The discipline of innovation. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 95-104.
Echols, A., & Tsai, W. (2005). Niche and performance: The moderating role of network embeddedness. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 219-238.
Ettlie, J. E., Bridges, W. P., & O'Keefe, R. D. (1984). Organization strategy and structural differences for radical versus incremental innovation. Management science, 30(6), 682-695.
Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C. (1997). Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 421-444.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: SimonandSchuster Inc.
Gemunden, H. G., Ritter, T., & Heydebreck, P. (1996). Network configuration and innovation success: An empirical analysis in German high-tech industries. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(5), 449-462.
Geroski, P. (1994). Market structure, corporate performance, and innovative activity. New York, USA: Oxford University Press Inc.
Ghemawat, P., & Ricart i Costa, J. (1993). The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 59-73.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226.
Giuliani, E., Pietrobelli, C., & Rabellotti, R. (2005). Upgrading in global value chains: lessons from Latin American clusters. World Development, 33(4), 549-573.
Gnyawali, D. R., & Madhavan, R. (2001). Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: A structural embeddedness perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 431-445.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 397-420.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706.
Hall, C. (2005). Rural wine and food tourism cluster and network development. Rural tourism and sustainable business. Tonawanda, NY, USA：Channel View Publications.
Hamdouch, A. (2008, May 14-16). Conceptualizing innovation clusters and networks. Paper presented at the International conference: Innovation networks, Tacoma-Seattle, Washington, USA.
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494.
Henderson, A. D. (1999). Firm strategy and age dependence: A contingent view of the liabilities of newness, adolescence, and obsolescence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 281-314.
Ibarra, H. (1993). Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. The Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 471-501.
Jansen, J. J. P., Tempelaar, M. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 797-811.
Kenis, P., & Knoke, D. (2002). How organizational field networks shape interorganizational tie-formation rates. The Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 275-293.
Krackhardt, D., & Porter, L. W. (1985). When friends leave: A structural analysis of the relationship between turnover and stayers' attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(2), 242-261.
Liu, X. (2008). Network embeddedness and local firms' strategic upgrading in the Global Manufacturing Network. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 8(3), 322-335.
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672.
Luo, J. D. (2005). Particularistic trust and general trust: A network analysis in Chinese organizations. Management and Organization Review, 1(3), 437-458.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
Neely, A., & Hii, J. (1998). Innovation and business performance: a literature review (pp. 30-39). The Judge Institute of Management Studies, University of Cambridge.
.
Organ, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 157-164.
Porter, M. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard business review, 76(6), 77-90.
Porter, M. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic development quarterly, 14(1), 15-34.
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Univ Pr.
Rosenfeld, S. (1997). Bringing business clusters into the mainstream of economic development. European Planning Studies, 5(1), 3-23.
Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386.
Sandee, H., & Rietveld, P. (2001). Upgrading traditional technologies in small-scale industry clusters: collaboration and innovation adoption in Indonesia. The Journal of Development Studies, 37(4), 150-172.
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). Information rules. Boston: Harvard business school press.
Simsek, Z. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of Management Studies, 46(4), 597-624.
Smith, C., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of applied psychology, 68(4), 653-663.
Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. The Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316-325.
Steinle, C., & Schiele, H. (2002). When do industries cluster? A proposal on how to assess an industry’s propensity to concentrate at a single region or nation. Research Policy, 31(6), 849-858.
Tambunan, T. (2005). Promoting Small and Medium Enterprises with a Clustering Approach: A Policy Experience from Indonesia. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(2), 138-155.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674-698.
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67.
Uzzi, B., & Gillespie, J. J. (2002). Knowledge spillover in corporate financing networks: Embeddedness and the firm's debt performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(7), 595-618.
Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge university press.
Wu, X., & Liu, X. (2009). Absorptive capacity, network embeddedness and local firm's knowledge acquisition in the Global Manufacturing Network. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3), 326-343.
Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. (2000). Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance:: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(2), 135-173.
Zahra, S. A., & Das, S. R. (1993). Innovation strategy and financial performance in manufacturing companies: an empirical study. Production and Operations Management, 2(1), 15-37.

羅家德. (2007). 社會網絡對離職意願之影響. 中山管理評論, 15(4), 885-919.