Page - (000042) - in Knowledge and Networks

32 the kind of activities that characterized their niche as they emerged at the outset as a secondary market for innovation . Whereas all the above- mentioned mediators broker networks characterized by a hub-and-spoke structure in which the mediating fi rm is the connector but the network of individual solvers (people) lacks connectivity, another model of open networks entails networks of solver fi rms (not people) that collaborate relative to customized demand. In this latter system one fi rm receives customized orders from seeker fi rms and subsequently coordinates expertise amongst solver fi rms in ephem- eral networks. Firms coalesce temporarily in projects to combine expertise to solve a problem; networks dissolve following completion of projects, and form anew with new memberships relative to the required expertise. This type of solver network is exemplifi ed by the Agile Web, a virtual corporation established in 1995 and consti- tuted by 20 small-to-medium-sized manufacturing fi rms that were selected from a population of over 700 prescreened fi rms in northeastern Pennsylvania; by 1999 it obtained over 50 million dollars in orders (Sheridan, 1993 , 1996 ). In 2000, G5 Technologies, a company in New Jersey, acquired the Agile Web to enhance its array of collaborative business services and internet-based software technologies; as a subsidiary, the Agile Web remained intact, providing collaborative product design and manufacturing solutions (PR Newswire Association LLC, 2000 ). Similarly, KICMS is an association established in South Korea in 2004 that coordi- nates collaboration on research among large numbers of SMEs (around 4000), while also providing consulting services and assistance to the SMEs in developing markets (Lee, Park, Yoon, & Park, 2010 ). To date, then, there are fi rms that access innovative expertise among individual people (not fi rms) in a hub-and-spoke approach in which there is no collaboration among solvers, and there are fi rms that access expertise among fi rms (not people) that engage in collaborative problem solving and temporarily coalesce in networks. The former case represents a lucrative model for fi rms that contracts with people, not fi rms, but is hardly a source of remunerative, living-wage jobs; each contest has one or a few winners and often thousands of losers who self-fund, and moreover, sign away their intellectual property rights when submitting their contributions. The latter case represents an effective organizational model to meet economic (not social) goals, and the customized orders reach fi rms, not individual people. Consider, then, the possibility of combining elements of each of these types of knowledge networks to constitute a hybrid system that serves social as well as economic goals. Making Use of New Knowledge Networks to Develop Social Knowledges I am interested in the proactive construction of one type of activity: mediators, which may be non-profi t and at least partially government funded, that could con- nect fi rms as well as other organizations (e.g., government-funded and non-profi t N. Ettlinger