Government as network architect or facilitator? Structural versus relational intervention efficacy in innovation network

This study applies network intervention theory to conceptualize two governmental strategies: structural intervention and relational intervention. Our aim is to elucidate the mechanism through which government, acting as a network architect (through structural intervention that alters network connections) or as a facilitator (through relational intervention that builds trust and collaboration to induce connections), influences other actors and steers existing networks toward more effective structures or processes. Focusing on industry-university-research (IUR) innovation networks characterized by goal heterogeneity, this study examines the efficacy of government network interventions. Using survey data from manufacturing enterprises in China, we found that goal heterogeneity positively affects cooperative innovation performance. Moreover, interactions involving inter-organizational resources, knowledge, and information serve a mediatory function in this relationship. While the government’s structural and relational interventions function complementarily in networks dominated by resource interaction, they exhibit mutually offsetting or weakening substitutive effects in networks dominated by knowledge and information interactions. This study extends the application of network intervention theory to the domain of innovation network studies, and evidence from China confirms the complex dynamics of governmental network intervention. The findings reveal both synergistic and conflicting effects between intervention strategies and offer decision-making insights for governments in designing effective innovation policies.