This study explores how knowledge bridging facilitates the formation and sustainability of collaborative innovation ecosystems in interdisciplinary domains. As complex global challenges increasingly demand cross-sectoral and cross-disciplinary solutions, effective knowledge integration becomes vital. Through a combination of qualitative case studies and network analysis, the research identifies key mechanisms—including boundary-spanning roles, shared platforms, and co-creation processes—that enable diverse stakeholders such as academia, industry, and government to synergize knowledge. Findings reveal that dynamic knowledge flows, mutual trust, and institutional support are critical to fostering innovation and adaptability within these ecosystems. The study offers a strategic framework for designing and managing interdisciplinary collaborations aimed at driving innovation across complex knowledge frontiers.

Knowledge bridging, collaborative innovation, interdisciplinary ecosystems

Ahuja, G. 2000a. The duality of collaboration: Inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 317–343.

Ahuja, G. 2000b. Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 425–455.

Ahuja, G., Soda, G., & Zaheer, A. 2012. The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks. Organization Science, 23: 434–448.

Anand, J., Oriani, R., & Vassolo, R. S. 2010. Alliance activity as a dynamic capability in the face of a discontinuous technological change. Organization Science, 21: 1213–1232.

Anderson, P., & Tushman, M. L. 1990. Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 604–633.

Ansari, S., Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. 2016. The disruptor’s dilemma: TiVo and the US television ecosystem. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 1829–1853.

Arts, S., Cassiman, B., & Gomez, J. C. 2018. Text matching to measure patent similarity. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 62–84.

Balachandran, S., & Hernandez, E. 2018. Networks and innovation: Accounting for structural and institutional sources of recombination in brokerage triads. Organization Science, 29: 80–99.

Burt, R. 1992. Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Burt, R. S. 2004. Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110: 349–399.

Burt, R. S. (Ed.). 2021. Structural holes capstone, cautions, and enthusiasms, vol. 51. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Burt, R. S., & Knez, M. 1995. Kinds of third-party effects on trust. Rationality and Society, 7: 255–292.

Carson, S. J., Madhok, A., & Wu, T. 2006. Uncertainty, opportunism, and governance: The effects of volatility and ambiguity on formal and relational contracting. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 1058–1077.

Ceccagnoli, M., Higgins, M. J., & Kang, H. D. 2018. Corporate venture capital as a real option in the markets for technology. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 3355–3381.

Chen, H., Mehra, A., Tasselli, S., & Borgatti, S. P. 2022. Network dynamics and organizations: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 48: 1602–1660.

Clough, D. R., & Piezunka, H. 2020. Tie dissolution in market networks: A theory of vicarious performance feedback. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65: 972–1017.

Coleman, J. S. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94: 95–120.

Compagni, A., Mele, V., & Ravasi, D. 2015. How early implementations influence later adoptions of innovation: Social positioning and skill reproduction in the diffusion of robotic surgery. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 242–278.

Downing, S. T., Kang, J.-S., & Markman, G. D. 2019. What you don’t see can hurt you: Awareness cues to profile indirect competitors. Academy of Management Journal, 62: 1872–1900.

European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. 2020. Fighting cancer through research—How the EU is helping. Publications Office. Retrieved from https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/51412.

Fernandez, R. M., & Gould, R. V. 1994. A dilemma of state power: Brokerage and influence in the national health policy domain. American Journal of Sociology, 99: 1455–1491.

Furr, N. R., & Snow, D. C. 2015. Intergenerational hybrids: Spillbacks, spillforwards, and adapting to technology discontinuities. Organization Science, 26: 475–493.

GlobalData. 2023. October 20: Biologics emerge as dominating molecule type in solid tumor indication, says GlobalData. Retrieved from https://www.globaldata.com/media/pharma/biologics-emerge-dominating-molecule-type-solid-tumor-indication-says-globaldata/.

Gould, R. V., & Fernandez, R. M. 1989. Structures of mediation: A formal approach to brokerage in transaction networks. Sociological Methodology, 19: 89–126.

Gulati, R. 1995. Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 619–652.

Gulati, R. 1999. Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 397–420.

Gulati, R., Sytch, M., & Tatarynowicz, A. 2012. The rise and fall of small worlds: Exploring the dynamics of social structure. Organization Science, 23: 449–471.

Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. 1997. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 716–749.

Hintze, J. L., & Nelson, R. D. 1998. Violin plots: A box plot-density trace synergism. American Statistician, 52: 181–184.

Holmes, S., & Smart, P. 2009. Exploring open innovation practice in firm‐nonprofit engagements: A corporate social responsibility perspective. R & D Management, 39: 394–409.

Howard, M., Steensma, H. K., Lyles, M., & Dhanaraj, C. 2016. Learning to collaborate through collaboration: How allying with expert firms influences collaborative innovation within novice firms. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 2092–2103.

Howard, M. D., Withers, M. C., & Tihanyi, L. 2017. Knowledge dependence and the formation of director interlocks. Academy of Management Journal, 60: 1986–2013.

Htwe, N. N., Lim, S., & Kakinaka, M. 2020. The coevolution of trade agreements and investment treaties: Some evidence from network analysis. Social Networks, 61: 34–52.

IQVIA. 2023. Global oncology trends. Retrieved from https://www.iqvia.com/insights/the-iqvia-institute/reports-and-publications/reports/global-oncology-trends-2023.

Jaccard, P. 1900. Contribution au problème de l’immigration post-glaciare de la flore alpine. Bulletin de la Société Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles, 36: 87–130.

Kalish, Y. 2020. Stochastic actor-oriented models for the co-evolution of networks and behavior: An introduction and tutorial. Organizational Research Methods, 23: 511–534.

Kapoor, R., & Klueter, T. 2015. Decoding the adaptability–rigidity puzzle: Evidence from pharmaceutical incumbents’ pursuit of gene therapy and monoclonal antibodies. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 1180–1207.

Kapoor, R., & Klueter, T. 2020. Progress and setbacks: The two faces of technology emergence. Research Policy, 49: 103874.