ÐÏࡱá>þÿ Ÿ¡þÿÿÿžÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥ÁU ðR¿{®bjbjënën2°‰éa‰éaïu ÿÿÿÿÿÿ·""­­­­­ÿÿÿÿÁÁÁ8ù”$Á°Rl±±±±±åååóQõQõQõQõQõQõQ$T¶ÒV<�RQ­åååååR­­±±4jRiiiåÖ­±­±óQiåóQiii±ÿÿÿÿ Ú=ŠÕÿÿÿÿ»ißQ€R0°RiW×:~Wii¶/WLZW$­OÀååiåååååRRXååå°Rååååÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ~Wååååååååå"Q s: Research Policy Volume 48, Issue 6, July 2019 1. Title: Reconceptualizing the paradox of openness: How solvers navigate sharing-protecting tensions in crowdsourcing Authors: J. Nils Foege; Ghita Dragsdahl Lauritzen; Frank Tietze; Torsten Oliver Salge. Abstract: The paradox of openness describes the fundamental tension between knowledge sharing and knowledge protection in open innovation. While sharing is vital for value creation, protecting is critical for value appropriation. Prior research has examined this paradox of openness from the perspective of the seeking firm, focusing on the firm-level challenges of inbound open innovation. In this article, we complement that research by illuminating the tensions between sharing and protecting in individual-level outbound open innovation, where we argue that the paradox of openness is most prevalent, yet much less well understood. Drawing on the experience of individual participants, or solvers, in intermediated crowdsourcing contests, we analyze textual data from 2,149 answers to five open-ended narrative questions embedded in a large-scale solver survey, as well as 43 in-depth interviews of solvers. Our findings indicate that individual solvers face fundamental sharing-protecting tensions that carry considerable economic and psychological costs. We also document how solvers attempt to navigate the paradox of openness by employing three formal and four informal value appropriation practices. They build elaborate configurations of these practices, which they tailor to the idiosyncrasies of each contest. They also dynamically adjust these configurations over time, as the contest and the interaction with the seeker unfold. We end by outlining how these findings contribute to a more multifaceted conceptualization and a richer understanding of the paradox of openness. 2. Title: Trademarks’ relatedness to product and service innovation: A branding strategy approach Authors: Meindert Flikkema; Carolina Castaldi; Ard-Pieter de Man; Marcel Seip. Abstract: The use of trademark data in innovation studies is still limited because as yet no guidelines exist to ascertain which trademarks relate to innovation. This paper proposes that a branding strategy approach may help to identify innovation related trademarks. Companies use distinctive branding strategies for innovation and these branding strategies have important consequences for the design of new trademarks and their application scope. Based on a sample of Benelux and Community trademarks, we find that trademarks for brand creation relate more often to product innovation. In addition, we find negative effects of a trademark’s industry scope on its relatedness to product innovation, and of a trademark’s geographic scope on its relatedness to service innovation. Our findings bear several key implications for further research towards identifying innovation-related trademarks from a branding strategy perspective. 3. Title: Decision-makers’ underestimation of user innovation Authors: Philip Bradonjic; Nikolaus Franke; Christian Lüthje. Abstract: In the past few decades, much research has documented the importance of users as sources of innovations. Over the last 10 years, Research Policy alone has published 56 research articles investigating this phenomenon. We ask to what degree the findings of users as innovators have been absorbed by decision-makers responsible for new product development (managers) and by those who shape the contextual conditions for innovation (policy makers and public administration). A realistic perception of the sources of innovation is important as it constitutes the basis for a rational allocation of resources and thus indirectly impacts the innovation performance of companies and societies at large. In a large-scale survey of n = 1500 decision-makers, we found support for a substantial underestimation of users as a source of innovation: While the true proportion of user innovation among the most valuable 1678 innovations in nine industries is 54.4% (as established in existing research articles), decision-makers estimate it to be 21.7%. A content analysis of transfer media (450 academic textbooks, popular innovation books, and business articles) underscores this theory-practice gap: Of 3469 text paragraphs dealing with the sources of innovation, only 2.7% mention users as innovators. We develop six propositions on the reasons for and consequences of this underestimation that may serve as a starting point for future research and practical consequences. 4. Title: Scientific novelty and technological impact Authors: Reinhilde Veugelers; Jian Wang. Abstract: This paper explores the complex relationship between scientific novelty and technological impact. We measure novel science as publications which make new combinations of prior knowledge, as reflected in new combinations of journals in their references, and trace links between science and technology by scientific references in patent applications. We draw on all the Web of Science SCIE journal articles published in 2001 and all the patents in PATSTAT (October 2013 edition). We find that the small proportion of scientific publications which score on novelty, particularly the 1% highly novel scientific publications in their field, are significantly and sizably more likely to have direct technological impact than comparable non-novel publications. In addition to this superior likelihood of direct impact, novel science also has a higher probability for indirect technological impact, being more likely to be cited by other scientific publications which have technological impact. Among the set of scientific publications cited at least once by patents, there are no additional significant differences in the speed or the intensity of the technological impact between novel and non-novel scientific prior art, but the technological impact from novel science is significantly broader and reaching new technology fields previously not impacted by its scientific discipline. Novel science is also more likely to lead to patents which are themselves novel. 5. Title: The prevalence of publicly stimulated innovations –A comparison of Finland and Sweden, 1970–2013 Authors: Sara Torregrosa-Hetland; Antti Pelkonen; Juha Oksanen; Astrid Kander. Abstract: While the role played by the state in stimulating innovation in the private sector has been a prevalent interest in innovation research, studies analysing the impacts of public interventions have usually focused on individual policies, programs or projects. Public stimulation is hence often studied from a relatively restricted and temporarily confined perspective, leaving a macro-level and longer-term perspective unrecognized. This article provides further evidence on the matter by examining how many innovations in Finland and Sweden have been publicly stimulated through funding or research collaboration, over a period of more than four decades (1970–2013). Our main source is a new innovation database constructed following the Literature Based Innovation Output (LBIO) method, which gathers the most significant innovations of both countries for the study period, totalling approximately 4100 Swedish and 2600 Finnish innovations. Our results indicate that the public sector has played a very prominent role in stimulating private innovation in both countries, and with an increasing trend. This is especially true for Finland, where 35–55% of the innovations of the period have been stimulated by public funding and 25–65% by collaboration with public research. In Sweden, the share of publicly stimulated innovations has been somewhat lower and erratic, but has increased over time. 6. Title: The economic microgeography of diversity and specialization externalities – firm-level evidence from Swedish cities Authors: Martin Andersson; Johan P Larsson; Joakim Wernberg. Abstract: We employ finely geo-coded firm-level panel data to assess the long-standing question whether agglomeration economies derive from specialization (within-industry), diversity (between-industry) or overall density. Rather than treating the city as a single unit, we focus our analysis on how the inner industry structures of cities influence firm-level productivity. Our results illustrate the co-existence of several externalities that differ in their spatial distribution and attenuation within cities. First, we find robust positive effects of neighborhood-level specialization on TFP as well as a small effect of diversity at the same fine spatial level. These effects are highly localized and dissipate beyond the immediate within-city neighborhood level. Second, we also find that firms benefit from the overall density of the wider city. The results emphasize the relevance of “opening up” cities to study the workings of their inner organization and support the idea that location in a within-city industry cluster in a diversified and dense city boosts productivity. 7. Title: Abandoning innovation activities and performance: The moderating role of openness Authors: Christos Tsinopoulos; Ji Yan; Carlos M.P. Sousa. Abstract: Firms are encouraged to continually initiate innovation activities as part of their new product development processes and to be open to the use of external knowledge sources. Yet, many are abandoned. Openness to external knowledge sources and the experience of abandoning innovation activities are, therefore, becoming a part of an organization’s reality and innovation strategy. In this paper, we aim to explore how the experience of having abandoned an innovation activity can affect innovation performance and the role two key dimensions of openness, external search breadth and formal innovation collaboration breadth, play. Using data from the UK Innovation Survey, we find that the experience of having abandoned an innovation activity leads to improved innovation performance and that this is negatively moderated by the two dimensions of openness. When external search breadth is high, i.e. when an organization engages with a higher number of different types of knowledge sources, the link between abandoning innovation activities and innovation performance weakens. Similarly, when formal innovation collaboration breadth is high, i.e. the breadth of a firm’s formal collaboration relationships is high, the link between abandoning innovation activities and innovation performance also weakens. We conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of our findings. 8. Title: Incumbent actors, guided search paths, and landmark projects in infra-system transitions: Re-thinking Strategic Niche Management with a case study of French tramway diffusion (1971–2016) Authors: Bruno Turnheim; Frank W. Geels. Abstract: This paper concerns the emergence and diffusion of radical innovations in the context of sustainability transitions. We confront the typical understanding in the Strategic Niche Management framework with an in-depth longitudinal case study of French modern tramways (1971–2016), which represents a particular technology class: local infrastructure systems. The case confirms the relevance of existing SNM-concepts, but also points to three pattern deviations: 1) incumbent actors from neighbouring regimes can play a leading role in the development of radical alternatives, 2) the early formulation of highly specific visions can effectively guide search paths (as opposed to a usual prescription about more open-ended approaches to foster innovative variety creation), and 3) particularly influential projects (which we call ‘landmark projects’) can decisively accelerate innovation developments. Exploring a greater variety of diffusion and transition patterns (based on temporal interactions of causal mechanisms and varying roles played by different actors) is a fruitful way forward for sustainability transitions research. 9. Title: Taking leaps of faith: Evaluation criteria and resource commitments for early-stage inventions Authors: Phillip H. Kim; Reddi Kotha; Sebastian P.L. Fourné; Kristof Coussement. Abstract: Successfully developed academic inventions have the potential to spawn new technological domains, form the basis of thriving business ventures, and improve the well-being of society. However, evaluating whether an early-stage scientific invention truly has such potential is extremely difficult, and financially backing such inventions is highly risky. And yet, organizations and their evaluators still back some of these inventions with resources for further development. We investigate this puzzle to pinpoint how and why evaluators decide to offer resource commitments at early stages, despite the red flags raised using standard evaluation criteria. Many academic inventions need these initial resources to dispel concerns regarding their commercial feasibility, so evaluators need to take a leap of faith with their support to prematurely avoid eliminating high-potential opportunities. We tested our theory using text analysis on nearly 700 invention evaluation reports written by a university’s technology transfer experts. Our results revealed that evaluators backed inventions based on their feasibility (overcoming doubt and assessing maturity) and desirability (background familiarity and scientific complexity). Using the context of the research laboratory, our study insights can be applied to many management situations in which early-stage opportunities are assessed for resource commitments under high uncertainty. 10. Title: Invention characteristics and the degree of exclusivity of university licenses: The case of two leading French research universities Authors: S1la Öcalan-Özel; Julien Pénin. Abstract: This paper examines the determinants of university exclusive versus non-exclusive licenses. We specifically focus on the effect of the characteristics of the licensed invention (i.e. stage of development, specificity and appropriability). We rely on a unique and original dataset of 91 inventions contained in 62 intellectual property licensing contracts executed in the period of 2005–2014 by two leading French research universities. We cannot find a significant relation between the characteristics of the invention and the degree of exclusivity. In particular, as opposed to theoretical predictions, embryonic inventions are not significantly linked to more exclusive licenses and generic inventions are not significantly linked to non-exclusive licenses. Furthermore, inventions that are both generic and embryonic are not significantly linked to exclusive licenses per field of use. These results, although still exploratory, contribute to feed the discussion about the performance of university-industry technology transfer since they suggest that performance might be improved by taking more into account the characteristics of the licensed invention. 11. Title: Governments as partners: The role of alliances in U.S. cleantech startup innovation Authors: Claudia Doblinger; Kavita Surana; Laura Diaz Anadon. Abstract: Accelerating innovation in clean energy technologies is a policy priority for governments around the world aiming to mitigate climate change and to provide affordable energy. Most research has focused on the role of governments financing R&D and steering market demand, but there is a more limited understanding of the role of direct government interactions with startups across all sectors. We propose and evaluate the value-creation mechanisms of network resources from different types of partners for startups, highlighting the unique resources of government partners for cleantech startups. We develop and analyze a novel dataset of 657 U.S. cleantech startups and 2,015 alliances with governments, firms, research organizations, and not-for-profit organizations from 2008 to 2012 and analyze short-term firm outcomes from the different alliances. Our findings highlight the importance of governmental partners in technology development alliances to catalyze cleantech startup innovation (the patenting activity of cleantech startups increases by 73.7 percent with every additional governmental technology alliance when compared to those startups that did not engage in such alliances) and as quality signals to private sector investors for licensing alliances (private financing deals increase by 155 percent for every additional license from a government organization). Overall, these findings extend the alliance perspectives on innovation, contribute to the emerging research on entrepreneurial ecosystems, and underline the need to develop empirical evidence in different sectors. 12. Title: Does combining different types of collaboration always benefit firms? Collaboration, complementarity and product innovation in Norway Authors: Silje Haus-Reve; Rune Dahl Fitjar; Andrés Rodríguez-Pose. Abstract: Product innovation is widely thought to benefit from collaboration with both scientific and supply-chain partners. The combination of exploration and exploitation capacity, and of scientific and experience-based knowledge, are expected to yield multiplicative effects. However, the assumption that scientific and supply-chain collaboration are complementary and reinforce firm-level innovation has not been examined empirically. This paper tests this assumption on an unbalanced panel sample of 8337 firm observations in Norway, covering the period 2006–2010. The results of the econometric analysis go against the orthodoxy. They show that Norwegian firms do not benefit from doing “more of all” on their road to innovation. While individually both scientific and supply-chain collaboration improve the chances of firm-level innovation, there is a significant negative interaction between them. This implies that scientific and supply-chain collaboration, in contrast to what has been often highlighted, are substitutes rather than complements. The results are robust to the introduction of different controls and hold for all tested innovation outcomes: product innovation, new-to-market product innovation, and share of turnover from new products. 13. Title: Federal funding of doctoral recipients: What can be learned from linked data Authors: Wan-Ying Chang; Wei Cheng; Julia Lane; Bruce Weinberg. Abstract: This technical note describes the results of a pilot approach to link administrative and survey data to better describe the richness and complexity of the research enterprise. In particular, we demonstrate how multiple funding channels can be studied by bringing together two disparate datasets: UMETRICS, which is based on university payroll and financial records, and the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED), which is one of the most important US survey datasets about the doctoral workforce. We show how it is possible to link data on research funding and the doctorally qualified workforce to describe how many individuals are supported in different disciplines and by different agencies. We outline the potential for more work as the UMETRICS data expands to incorporate more linkages and more access is provided. 14. Title: Persistence of innovation and patterns of firm growth Authors: Dario Guarascio; Federico Tamagni. Abstract: In this work we exploit a long-in-time panel of Spanish manufacturing firms observed during the period 1990–2012 to examine the long-run contribution of innovation persistence to sales growth and market share dynamics. We examine two main research questions. First, do persistent innovators grow more than other firms? Second, do persistent innovators show more persistent growth patterns over time compared to other firms? We find negative answers to both questions: firms that persistently innovate over the first decade, do not grow more and do not display more persistent growth dynamics in the succeeding years, regardless of whether innovation persistence is defined in terms of R&D, patenting activity, or product or process innovation. These findings lend support to luck and random theories of firm growth, in turn challenging innovation persistence theories commonly suggesting that persistent innovators enjoy large and sustained comparative advantages. 15. Title: The influence of editorial decisions and the academic network on self-citations and journal impact factors Authors: Allen Wilhite; Eric A. Fong; Seth Wilhite. Abstract: There are many means by which editors can inappropriately manipulate journal impact factors, but questions remain as to whether these potentially inappropriate behaviors actually influence these scores to an empirically meaningful degree, and which academic disciplines are most culpable. In this manuscript, we propose a game-theoretic/information-asymmetry model that suggests manipulation is reinforced by a feedback loop that creates incentives for manipulation to spread and for disciplines to specialize in the type of manipulation used. We empirically investigate these hypotheses for four different manipulation strategies; coercive citation, self-serving review articles, editorials, and online queuing. Results show that all four of these techniques are effective, they inflate JIF scores and the h-index, and a significant part of that effect is due to inflated self-citations. We also find journals within disciplines tend to specialize in which technique they most frequently employ. Moreover, we show that disciplines are also interconnected, tied together by a journal cross-discipline content network and that disciplines that share more content also tend to rely more heavily on the same JIF influencing behaviors. Effective policy needs to change the editorial decision calculation by removing the benefits of manipulation; removing self-citations from journal metric calculations drastically reduces those benefits. 16. Title: The impact of foreign technological innovation on domestic employment via the industry mix Authors: Luisa Gagliardi Abstract: This paper analyses how differences in the industry composition of British local labour markets moderate the impact of foreign technological competition in manufacturing on domestic employment, both overall and across subsamples of workers with different skill levels (high, intermediate and low). To this scope, it exploits both variations across industries in the exposure to the introduction of new technologies, and information on how such industries are combined in shaping the industrial structure of each place. The analysis shows that places that specialise in industries undergoing substantial technological competition due to foreign innovation experience a reduction in total employment that is 4.5% larger than places less exposed based on their initial industry mix. This negative performance is mainly explained by a decrease in the employment opportunities for intermediate-skilled workers. Limited support is found for successful adaptation trajectories over time across British local labour markets. 17. Title: Exploration versus exploitation in technology firms: The role of compensation structure for R&D workforce Authors: Victor Cui; Waverly W. Ding; Yoshio Yanadori. Abstract: We investigate the relationship between a firm’s compensation structure and the extent to which its innovation is more exploration versus exploitation oriented. Specifically, we assess two aspects of a firm’s compensation design—horizontal dispersion within job levels and vertical tournament incentives between job levels. A six-year panel of compensation records of 671,028 employees working at 81 U.S.-based high technology firms between 1997 and 2002 are used to construct measures that characterize a firm's pay structure, which are linked to these firms’ patents filed in the U.S. We find that firms with higher-powered tournament incentives in vertical compensation structure report higher fraction of innovation directed towards exploration. Horizontal pay dispersion, on the other hand, shows a negative relationship with the exploration in firms where R&D employees’ age variance is low. In firms where R&D employees’ age variance is high, the negative relationship between horizontal pay dispersion and exploration is muted. 18. Title: Glass ceilings in research: Evidence from a national program in Uruguay Authors: Daniel Bukstein; Néstor Gandelman. Abstract: Female researchers have lower probability than male researchers of being accepted into the largest national research support program in Uruguay. Age, scientific productivity, teaching activities and previous applications explains 5.2 percentage points of the 7.1 point gender acceptance probability gap. The remaining 1.9% can be attributed to gender discrimination. This phenomenon is stronger at the top 2 levels (out of 4) of the program evidencing glass ceilings. Results are robust to issues of simultaneity (research productivity affecting probability of being accepted and vice versa), joint determination and correlation of variables and productivity effects at early stages of career development. The paper tests four hypotheses that are likely to produce a glass ceiling in any R&D incentive schemes: male overrepresentation in the initial setup of the program, male overrepresentation on evaluation committees and two types of field-level effects (a pure composition effect without discrimination and differentiated discriminatory effects by fields). We show evidence of gender bias in the initial setup of the program and bias in the gender structure of committees. Nevertheless, these hypotheses have little quantitative power to explain the glass ceiling. The pure field composition effect is also not important. We find solid evidence of glass ceilings in the three areas where women are most active: health-related sciences, natural sciences and humanities. On the other hand, we find no such effects in social sciences, agricultural sciences or engineering. 19. Title: Team diversity as dissimilarity and variety in organizational innovation Authors: Dong Huo; Kazuyuki Motohashi; Han Gong. Abstract: How team composition exactly influences innovation outcomes remains a complex and unsolved puzzle in the literature on creativity and innovation. Our study differentiates two types of team technology-related diversity—technological dissimilarity and technological variety, and investigates their influences on the impact of an invention created by a team. Analyses of over half million U.S. utility patents in the 1991–2005 period invented by teams reveal that technological variety of team inventors has a positive effect on invention impact, and that technological dissimilarity between team inventors plays both positive and negative roles, eliciting an inverted U-shaped effect. In addition, we find that the positive effect of dissimilarity is significantly reduced after controlling for variety. Theoretical and practical implications of our findings are discussed. 20. Title: Less than expected—The minor role of foreign firms in upgrading domestic suppliers—The case of Vietnam Authors: Thi Xuan Thu Nguyen; Javier Revilla Diez. Abstract: Vietnam is an important case for studying the impact of foreign firms’ backward linkages on local firms’ productivity. As an emerging economy Vietnam became the second most popular FDI destination after China in Pacific Asia since 2014. Our empirical analysis for Vietnam as a whole demonstrates a significant difference in the productivity growth between domestic suppliers who have a direct linkage with foreign firms and non-suppliers. This is also true for the Southeast Region (SE) with Ho-Chi-Minh City as economic center. However, in the Red River Delta (RRD), that difference is not statistically significant. Based on in-depth interviews with domestic suppliers, we reveal that in the RRD, effects of foreign firms on the productivity upgrading of domestic suppliers are indirect and limited while internal factors like absorptive capacity are more important for the productivity growth. These regional differences can be traced back to different regional specializations which still persist from the pre-reform era. 21. Title: Greater adaptivity or greater control? Adaptation of IOR portfolios in response to technological change Authors: Tim de Leeuw; Victor Gilsing; Geert Duysters. Abstract: This paper addresses the question of how firms accomplish the strategic task of adapting their entire set of IORs (interorganizational relationships) to changing environmental conditions. To study this, we move beyond the focus on collaboration with individual partners (the dyadic perspective) that has been the dominant emphasis in the literature until now. Instead, we view the firms’ portfolios through the lens of the different modes of IOR engaged in (licensing agreements, non-equity alliances, venture capital investments, minority investments, joint ventures, and mergers & and acquisitions). We study the role of environmental change within the high-tech setting of the bio-pharmaceutical industry and distinguish between industry technological change and firm-specific technological change. In doing so, we rely on prospect theory to theorize how firms’ perceptions of environmental change in terms of a looming loss or a potential gain affect their risk-bearing, how this leads them to adjust their IOR portfolio diversity, and how these adjustments get implemented at the mode level. Whereas most of our hypotheses were confirmed by the study, a key unexpected finding was that firms respond to both types of technological change through stronger forms of adaptation !"$%'(+,-./1:íÜʹʹʪ¹™ŠyjVNA3hÌ"èhU<¬5OJQJ^Jh·uD5OJQJ^Jo(hÌ"èhÌ"èo(&hÌ"èhÌ"è5CJOJQJ^JaJo(h*85CJOJQJ^JaJ hUL5CJOJQJ^JaJo(h 2e5CJOJQJ^JaJ hÝå5CJOJQJ^JaJo(h(«5CJOJQJ^JaJ h(«5CJOJQJ^JaJo(#hÌ"èhÌ"è5CJOJQJ^JaJ h$-Ó5CJOJQJ^JaJo(#h(«h(«5CJOJQJ^JaJ./0§þ23•äˆ‰ÇÄÅû$á â M!œ!'÷÷òíííèèãããèÞÞÙèÔÔÔÏÊÊÏgdÐpsgd)w¤gd$?Ãgd(«gdToŸgdßl$gd%j,gdU<¬gdÌ"è$a$gdt4:¦§¯°½¾ØÙæçüýþ  12346<=”•ž¯°ÂÃÕÖñäÖËñÀñÀñÀñÀ³Ö¥˜ŠrÖdrñTdrñÀñÀñÀhvI¼hßl$5OJQJ^Jo(hßl$hßl$5OJQJ^Jhßl$5OJQJ^Jo(hjŒ5OJQJo(hiht4OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^JhihjŒOJQJ^Jo(ht45OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jhicy5OJQJ^JhÌ"èhU<¬5OJQJ^JhjŒ5OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«5OJQJ^J Öâãäí‰Š‹Œ’“ÆÇÏÐàáñòŠñæÖȺ­Ÿ”‡yrd‡ñTd‡ñæñæñæTdF­h» )hToŸOJQJ^Jo(hvI¼hToŸ5OJQJ^Jo(hToŸhToŸ5OJQJ^J hToŸhToŸhÌ"èhÒ`Œ5OJQJ^JhToŸ5OJQJ^Jo(h%j,5OJQJo(hihU<¬OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jhihßl$OJQJ^Jo(hßl$hßl$5OJQJ^JhvI¼hßl$5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^JŠŒÃÄÅÆÈÎÏúû"#$-.à á â ã öéÜÑĶ¨›}¨›rr}¨déVK>hÐps5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(hvI¼h%j,OJQJ^Jo(h» )h$?ÃOJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^JhvI¼h$?Ã5OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«5OJQJ^Jh$?Ã5OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh$?Ã5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh%j,5OJQJ^Jhs/Ê5OJQJ^Jo(h%j,5OJQJo(hihaNOJQJ^Jh(«h(«OJQJ^Jh".‚OJQJ^Jã å ë ì L!M!U!V!m!n!}!~!‹!Œ!š!›!œ!¥!¦!'''''#'$'ñãÖȺãÖȯȯȯȯŸ‘ƒvh]PñBPhr7Ahr7A5OJQJ^Jhr7A5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(hvI¼h)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jh}Onh)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^JhvI¼h)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^JhvI¼hÐps5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^JhÐps5OJQJ^Jo(hÐpshÐps5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh)w¤5OJQJ^J''˜'Õ',,n,¨,!2"2ç23ƒ7„7í7>8ß=à=à>2?+D,D‹DÉD K KúõõúúððúúëëúúææúúááúúÜÜúúgdóSågdÿ_gdLz¥gd)ggd|ÿgdr7Agd)w¤$'—'˜' '¡'±'²'Â'Ã'Ó'Ô'Õ'Þ'ß',,,,,,,m,ñãÕÇñ¼ñ¼ñ¼¬žƒuj]OA]ñh|ÿh|ÿ5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh)w¤5OJQJ^Jh|ÿ5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(hvI¼h)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jh}Onh)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^JhvI¼h)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^JhvI¼hvI¼5OJQJ^Jhr7Ahr7A5OJQJ^JhvI¼hr7A5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^Jm,n,w,‹,Œ,“,”,¦,§,¨,±,², 2!2"2#2%2+2,2æ2ç2ï2ð2þ2ÿ23ñãÕÊÕÊÕʺ¬ž‘ƒxk]OkÕAOkÕÊÕhvI¼h)g5OJQJ^Jh)gh)g5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh)w¤5OJQJ^Jh)g5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(hvI¼h)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jh}Onh)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^JhvI¼h)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^Jh|ÿh|ÿ5OJQJ^JhvI¼h|ÿ5OJQJ^J33333‚7ƒ7„7…7‡77Ž7ì7í7ö78888(8)8<8=8>8G8H8Þ=ß=à=â=ä=ôäÖÈ»­¢•‡yl^Py^ô^ô^ô^ôäÖÈ»­¢•‡hvI¼hLz¥5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^JhLz¥5OJQJ^Jo(hLz¥hLz¥5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh)w¤5OJQJ^JhR5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(hvI¼h)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jhih)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^JhvI¼h)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jä=ê=ë=Þ>à>ò>??.?0?2?D?F?*D+D,D.D0D6D7DŠDñäÖÈñÖ½Ö½­Ÿ‘„vk^PB^ÖhóSåhóSå5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh)w¤5OJQJ^JhóSå5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(h}Onh)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jhih)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^JhvI¼h)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^JhvI¼hÿ_5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^Jhÿ_5OJQJ^Jo(hÿ_hÿ_5OJQJ^JŠD‹D“D”D¥D¦D´DµDÇDÈDÉDÒDÓDK K K KKKKšK›K£K¤K³K´KñãÕǼǼǼ¬žƒuj]Oã]ÇñãAǼhÑ9‘h[5OJQJ^JhÌ"èh)w¤5OJQJ^JhóSå5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(h[h)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h(«h(«OJQJ^Jh}Onh)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^Jh[h)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^Jh[h[5OJQJ^JhóSåhóSå5OJQJ^Jh[hóSå5OJQJ^J K›KÞKËPÌP$QdQŸT TáT UÜXÝXSY‡Y,_-_“_¬_¯c°c%d\drhshÆhòhúúõõúúõõððõõëëõõõõõõõõõõõægd„7agd îgdmwˆgd)w¤gdóSå´KÅKÆKÜKÝKÞKçKèKÊPËPÌPÎPÐPÖP×P#Q$Q-Q;QhÒrÛhÄe=5OJQJ^Jo(hÄe=5OJQJ^Jo(h$?ÃhÄe=5OJQJ^JhÌ"èhÄe=5OJQJ^Jhß5OJQJ^Jo(h)w¤5OJQJo(h(«h(«OJQJ^JhMKXh)w¤OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^Jh)w¤5OJQJ^Jo(h$?Ãh)w¤5OJQJ^J"hÒrÛh)w¤5OJQJ\^JaJAxJxVxWxfxgxvxwxxxx‚x‚}¬l®m®n®p®q®s®t®v®w®z®{®ñãØãØãØȺ¬ŸŸ‡ƒ‡ƒ‡ƒ‡ƒhÚyGjhÚyGUh(«hj<OJQJ^Jo(Uh(«h(«OJQJ^Jh}OnhÄe=OJQJ^Jo(h$?ÃhÄe=5OJQJ^Jh$?ÃhÄe=5OJQJ^Jo(h(«5OJQJ^Jh(«h(«5OJQJ^JhmwˆhÄe=5OJQJ^Jthan theoretically anticipated. Firms adapt to industry technological change through an increase in the diversity of their portfolio of IORs and by churning it up, which leads to a loosening of control at the individual mode level but greater adaptivity at the portfolio level. When facing firm-specific change instead, they adapt by reducing portfolio diversity, while cutting back on collaboration across five out of the six modes. Our findings both contribute to the literature on organizational adaptation, interfirm collaboration, and IOR portfolios and provide a greater behavioral understanding of network change.     0182P°‚. °ÆA!°"°# $ %°°S°à ©Ééԁ;¼AžlK@¿yã^Ééԁ;¼AžlK@¿yã^Ééԁ;¼AžlK@¿yã^s2ÀÐàð 0@P`p€ÀÐàð2(Øè 0@P`p€ÀÐàð 0@P`p€ÀÐàð 0@P`p€ÀÐàð 0@P`p€ÀÐàð 0@P`p€ÀÐàð 0@P`p€8XøV~ °ÀЀàð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@àð 0@PJ_HmH nHsH tHJ`ñÿJ ck‡e $1$a$ CJKH_HaJmH nHsH tH$A òÿ¡$ Øž¤‹µk=„W[SOBióÿ³B nfhˆ&”öÅœâ]®6ïšÒ¨ƒÒN=¼âìInÀ¡¼“a7‰‘²qb&>!"èh [ü¢+Lxêz)ã°óWÃVßOgá%¬Å¢|8Mă#±/øÙ8€è'Øþ=¼žQÁU*áÓCŒ`CÔW{’D6à¹/Ò[ŽœYLßôÚ%¿+ÔünÎ+{…\Ío–sMß/»~±Ði•BcAXô“/=x Eçé'5¾ö&\¼h»4daž©Ï,yE\}†)–lŸaò‹ë•R¯^®·*¹z¹ÙËyV-WoWZ¹N¥]íô:m¿Vï=tCöšå¶WéÖr•b»ó*I¿VÏU½R©éU›µ®×|˜nc`å‰|¤±€ð*^ÛÿÿÿPK! ѐŸ¶'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.rels„M Â0„÷‚wooÓº‘&݈ЭÔ„ä5 6?$Qìí ®,.‡a¾™i»—Éc2Þ1hª:é•qšÁm¸ìŽ@RN‰Ù;d°`‚Žo7íg‘K(M&$R(.1˜r'J“œÐŠTù€®8£Vä"£¦AÈ»ÐH÷u} ñ›|Å$½b{Õ–Pšÿ³ý8‰g/]þQAsÙ…(¢ÆÌà#›ªLÊ[ººÄßÿÿPK-!éÞ¿ÿ[Content_Types].xmlPK-!¥Ö§çÀ6 0_rels/.relsPK-!ky–ƒŠtheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!þœïfÙ”Ötheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐŸ¶'ã theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]Þ ýu°ÿÿÿÿ :ÖŠã $'m,3ä=ŠD´K¡TáX’_fd(osAx{®?ABCDFGHIJLMNOPRST' Kòh{®@EKQð@ð @ñÿÿÿ€€€÷ðH ðð0ð( ð ðð’ðð0ð( ð ððB ðS ð¿Ëÿ ?ð:K¸½¿ÄÅÎÏØàæèï÷üž¦§¯ºÂÄÇÞâ× à â ê ý   [mu}ƒ„‹”š7@1?¨±ÄÊËÓ€#‹#ö)þ) **ÿ+ ,/ / //"/(/2/Ÿ>Î>×>¤A©AªA³A¿AÅAŸI©IðJùJK KbOiO~O…O¢U«UV VáWëWŸY¥YRZZZÖ^Þ^à^æ^ç^ð^†e‰e”ee—iši»i¿iámëmQnVn_nfnnnvnõnouttuŠuïuñuòuôuõu÷uøuúuþuÿ_`ïuþu3ïuñuòuôuõu÷uøuúuþu!"$(,-00:§°þ2=”žãî‡ “ Æ Ð   ÃÏú#.àìLV›¦$—¡Ôß##m#w#§#²# ),)æ)ð)**‚.Ž.ì.ö.=/H/Þ4ë4o5y5˜5£5*:+:+:7:Š:”:È:Ó:AAšA¤AÝAèAÊF×F#G-GcGnGžJ«JàJêJ KKÛNèNRO\O†O‘O+U,U,U8U’UœU«U¶U®Y»Y$Z.Z[ZfZq^~^Å^Ï^ñ^ü^"e/ewee¨e³ei'ii—iÀiËiÌmÙm@nJnwn‚nîuþu„q04e’†n[G],-¾oÃņØð`<|ö÷O";0RI1%†RrSui‹¢WÂI†= {uò,† Uz*¢mù ˜r=°Ç-9hÅs»–eme†.~ñþ {R†v ¬4†1L2Q —"†i AHA†åoG>ÝU†ß`å1_%V“ÇNH{†÷qÃìUû3†d]-©Z:KKKKn;„q0†<«?*­ 7Տ:Aú¥^Bå ƒl{ œ2HÊ(û#!©qŸ÷m4-cqRrS˜4>¾P]üsaO-Â?†ýYnÏb~i‹(˜ì)ibôô>!]È.†` RV:g&>!†Þ}N!ÔL†Ñ2Ë"â0R†Å\€|†MD-%;åblrBR]“a 6Ji¢ ÃávjÖ`†[JO 5J90†RY ø:[Æ k 3q-r†jx 8I˜ Tpæ kÖ|†2~— Óáy† kñ ?I‚†µ * «? = †¬#? ?*­ @£4leÚ dw" †¯ šZûgÍKD Ñ2Ë^E õ-H—x €wÈôT„ bS &½xË -Z“yð ßwö IÖ>†:-þ Šu KKKKdw" qîX†-h‚ K^R® ¶^‹VxBÄ ƒ=#†/y¯pur †Ž²® †‘'FfÆx-ZùdÄy‹(˜û)Fk{Z†fV¼Ü-ºp—'ºE†¬4Ô!~Qœ2H`ô?I‚‡be†˜@œÂFK-<"ŸˆlÝqÒu®Ëy/†x{øš]^ž~76=&†Ÿ³Í` [¢ ëRH&<Ñ^êØOC!†ùd{Õ/Ì"ïªþ[ëµhÜ2†™dª‰¥t†€wÈ8I˜ (fÜtl(†‚þÈ}¸t¶a9û~ð8— Ú7l±†4ö";ûg)n†Ép7v}gÓXd|•š&žH‰w¯Aâgb÷uáD\*í)#Jb”LåD† )rÞ}†—W•GL$L†rÁQHœ+VÝò„/xCz.›^M~;¦|p%€FZPS7l±pS°#†¬±<>)†¢Sóávj†¥h5h 5†+a«l[µx• xCz‡be˜yFdxLÒy†ÈRAj>´nécR%V“†h¥a9Åó !`†ª}<œqõ}Q =¬7y]‚óRŽ-†É.¾zfÖ7¡½ ôe ­o[KH,~†HmPM~† MgÉ=Õj†Ö>m©?[%†­'w…Jo8‡Lòy2\gQwez+™¾P]74™`A®émÞ!†|zè©Z:½*úÇB!†g;cq‘QQ£HûNK^R+a¥X„T aNŠGAP†y8”½xË †ÿS¹ãdëŽÏz†¸J„VZq†êT\ ~†ÜaV'Po†_m4áiÅwÁÃTkPBÇ` RQ1èýYn†pur Äp}†Àá ureP†&>!¬Z[FxX)!ÇB!x{øEC!©T‹K†ØOC!±vÚ>b(P!ä+]!é3îl „!NRÝQémÞ!ØJ#†g-í!òf³dÊ[z"·U&z†6'"´ZY†Q —"jI _†™m³"ä+]!Ý&»"û)†Õ/Ì"|zès\ÿ"=VÑG†§~#ã)9~†ŽK#» è+†I3#¬#? ƒ=#øi\;ØJ#p%€sHˆ#Áí†2K‹#¦|#RY †pS°#PBÇ¢9õ#üsa†D $É°yJ!4$â`„%†qG$÷EP$ÿ"e<�@VŒ$:*­$þ[ë†p½$¢]'†©?[%3eá?Z]%â`„%vd†I1%¥lYK-,ª%Ò,½=†­lÍ%ÐzÜ@ÓXñ%Ü!0†E&pOQÐbS &Øb*&Tâ(6=&­'w«RH&2\¤qP&nYvC†­tˆ&݉&¢]'÷EP$†tWˆ'~d:(éR·'ñkL†í>ß'׍5ÛLß'”tAz†ÂW (R‰@†~d:(ã _(iT~tl(ëx¹,†dM´(úTâ(ÉpIê(Óé]†a#ù(Áj¹`†<>)^E †çW)!,©f†˜Ø)­lÍ%†í)MQ{Œ"*Ú^ói†²LE*^lÍXÑNE*N9†È^Ñ*›:8T†ª[?+‚v+Œýo†(S…+QHœ+Î`»+q¥f» è+{pˆ¢C,@½I†ñ#,¡Dq[mK,+@p‘qb,ˆd&dè Ÿ,Ö>m†ëx¹,¯ {uò,˜@œQ>,-÷m4-rtÌHÂFK-óRŽ-œJëN†2@—-çgGc†Åš-X*ˆy†¼Ü->o.-Dt†îtÂ.¦–z]È.¥X„†<}7/d|•†Ëy/dS}†ò„/: o=tjÝ/0ÞU0{zúOÜ!0ÈRAN+0gY|†5J90Ï$Œ}†;1š0ô©EFw2 þZ†>2"OÊM29!"e¼W°2¯f\µhÜ2NÜ~øw×3ui‹†+æ3DjìUû3ÅóX@£4‡;¿4åd5†ºpÇ4@L†5h 5‡^B^† -A5¦PV5åd5tWˆ'׍5ÎÂ5MD-†BÌ5IìD†ÇVï5 -A5“a 6”`dñ#6ghCH†81„6‰&7͇6ça†r!Ÿ6Q1膦@é6Xxî6)1:t‰&7˜XÐ\£~74\ƒ7bD9T=rÞ7€´Gr F8c©]†…Jo8û~ð8ïª ó8šÔB†N9?OiêQß9¯A:ÐKx_†s›:KKKKÎ3ù:±!‹q÷O";¬4MJJ O;øi\;Ù%§|c;÷qÆvIu;ªRUÆ;ž~7†[UïU¼`fR>í>ß'IÖ>R]†±vÚ>lrBØMT?<#iq!{’?P[5=†TFž?­tˆ&Ÿ?½*ú†O-Â?ØMT?‘Sá? U|3eá?½-X{É8ç?½@}Ć*.}@˜Ø)†Ï-‡@ºT¥`†R‰@g†ÐzÜ@Z]%HAg;†:Añs6Ay8”†DOAhu†(µA²LE*†&EÎANa†½.ÔANŠ†‘a†$,&D]”LåD|1ïq†IìDbl#gå>E½\†ô©EZÕvûn¸E‚v+†—'ºEí#öc†hFs™]†=bDF¦^^n†¬Z[F“yð Ð’FÊ"…o+w~G¼ L`ó#—Gº{9=€´G=VÑG’oÈt†{s Hõ-H¦PV5p@HåoG†ghCH'\L†š&žH½tŒe¥HoaQÔ!~Q…ÁY#%­Q@gKU†NRÝQ ÞQî ìQqG$ªR)b;R«,¦q†š0hR‡L†ßZwRþ {R;1š0†±y{RìiŽRÀá †(UõRÞ$AtxcSº#Sw/Ê=FZPS8TS)b;R†ÏTSó#—G3%€SÀ{«S‡;¿4†Üg/T˜4>›:8Tµgn†bD9T]z[TÎ ²mƒ¢TD $þ`ÂTÿS¹ï,!UÏrdi†@gKUÞU0 g€U‚þ³UxcS>ÝUC;ŒrXYYVáD¶^‹V4öOÊV©J$WûWûWÅ6…XÊM2:3œXàq•Y†Õ¬XÎ3ù:†±OµXº#S^lÍX\<ðjgÓXQ>,- qîXª}<ÅóX_/,J´ZYƒ¢T†ã`-Y<MYv †àq•Yv^mC†…ÁY< Z…&xFk{ZÍKD  þZHp†Ì [Üenxø:[†=ö^Í` [Œ0’[(>Y†¯f\Í?\Iê(†½\úMö˜XÐ\~Ðf<1/Õ\Ås»†¬7y]Â>aQs™]Øð†c©]Hv¿I†Óé]vIu;š]^ph$^‡^B^ß`.›^†=ö^å1_ÐKx_¶a9†jI _l{ ó !`‘qb,†¼ L`èY`å ƒºT¥`”=Ö}Áj¹`‘QQ†ïU¼`§>Ö`_m†T a݉&Na[mK,†9a€‘q†˜…aÎÂ5†˜>‘asq¥y†3jÕaßZwRçaôT„ 3b@Ïz†ì)ibõU~b1µH†øU b§~#†%;åb@VŒ$03cD.£BçgGcg-í!†va€cÑ^ꆅÑc(µA†UÝcš0hR†í#öc©J$Wvd0q|”`dˆd&d›@ÒMòf³d,-¾Znüd¦|#†9!"e2K‹#¦g+eª/eµ * ^EeŽ²†æL\eå>E†–eme¥HgQweŠu ½tŒeduŒeFd†ú&fJiƒ,\f<}7/†¾zfs{Tq¥f3%€S!,©fqx{~ÐfXxî6ŠaÙf6Ýf< Z†bl#g¥^BLkQgäJ9r†g8|k=šZûgÇ-9hšK?OiÔuß<�MeBiÏrdiØb*&†Ïb~i±y{R4áiã`-YÚ^óiX–u†NFüi£~7DjtjÝ/v,…jÉ8ç?w¿jþ`ÂTÉ=Õjˆ4¶q\<ðjædkgÃTkZ l!{’?†klV:g†é3îl<|ö<IeùlJ+Lê^(mˆšK†ô.‘mz*¢mAâÎ ²mÚHnèY`µgn „!ûg)nfR>†¦^^nV݆, mnºkj>´nh#ÛngV'Po½ ô†Ê"…oÄ"™o6GP†e ­oh¥¶.´orÁšv½o Mg†Œýo]z[THpTFž?(Ap(S…++@pª[?+bEp=rÞ7¹C½p¤qP&†¡Dq„VZq• †<#iq±!‹qù ˜€‘qQ =†«,¦qÅwÁ#!©q{s Hˆ4¶qŠaÙfˆlÝq|1ïq6SŽ~Rðq3q-rIeùl†äJ9r+æ3†C;Œrn[G° ùrÏ-‡@†y0®sb(P!öês{fM-DtÄy†)1:to ývÞ$AtÅ6…Xð 0w?0w?0w?0w?ä.¢tª/e‰¥t(ApÈ}¸t’oÈt³U2…&xph$^Üenx[µx, mnfÆx&xn þxï0¨<�†=.y6Ýf†Ö+OyrgOX*ˆy‹xÓu†˜yd]-sq¥y7ÕÉ°yxLÒyîtÂ.Óáy];yw†òy‰w¯·U&zé*N{†”tAzr=°†WhKzjx ‡.TzJi¦–z@Ïz¶.´o†ŽÏz¸`ÈO†­%þz³qöwv{ÇNH{$,&Dé*N{‘Sá?MQ{ HR{͇6†jbS{½-X{qx{¦@é6mð{™dª†0q|ì~èvgY|öês† U|­[|çW)†\€|+w~G;¦|¦g+ekÖ|ä.¢t†y>Ø|BÌ5†dS}XYYVÄp}§R>Ï$Œ}dM´(ßMš}J<¿v†”=Ö}jbS{œqõ}\ ~ ô=†H,~03c†ã)9~WhKziT~¹;¸~j{Á~0¡N†NÜ~L s{TŸ<(>Y\*†4e’z+™jª{pË4\ƒ7“Ï(kàI†Áí—x †úMöjªªå©…[w°2 Rñ Ép j^ òNÿ_atißwbƱ.h j<ShªTO>s­r#ßl$ƒ}&‘m'»m(» )%j,ÐP.ÙI/É2†Z2'4t4.6ô6*8;I8CJ8Ë9Äe=K&>E!@JJ@r7AíECïnD·uDVFÚyG0 I4TJÇKUL%MaNÕ%SMKXGYãPYÂ^rO_5a„7aHc 2eµQf)gjMiÓckalTHlLmnnm}On[rÐps0@uI1vywicy‚X}/€".‚Wt„mwˆº=‰Ê=‰Ò`ŒjŒNJÑ9‘l’.~’v–9›=H›âJœÐ~œdUõ Ÿ=IŸFjŸToŸ4 ðM þ2¤)w¤¼¥Lz¥ ¨£c¨7«(«U<¬[¬óT°·r°€±ì±÷´õ^¶v¶Ñ\ºA¼vI¼|W½r¾´¿ðÃ$?â ɽ!Ês/Ê Íà8Î*Ъ-Ñå_Ñ$-ÓÿfÖ><ÙçÛÒrÛòCà7"ãÝåóSå?5æÉçÌ"èGlèbJéhëÖ-ì¢í îÄ"îwñ Pó2øÔù—Yù  û“Eü`-ý|ÿïuñuÿ@€wnwnwnwnL56‚sýu˜@˜˜0@˜>˜€@˜X@ÿÿUnknownÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿGÿ.à[xÀ ÿTimes New Roman5€Symbol3. ÿ.à[xÀ ÿArial7. ÿ [ @ŸVerdana;†(‹[SOSimSunAÿàÿ$BŸCambria Math 1ˆ¤h;"Ûfsòu‡„gšUd <�ÖšUd <�ÖÁ-!),.:;?]}¨·ÇÉ    & 6"0000 0 0 00000ÿÿÿ ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿ=ÿ@ÿ\ÿ]ÿ^ÿàÿ([{·  0 0 00000ÿÿ;ÿ[ÿáÿåÿ ´œ‚€³u³u 2ƒQüýHPðÿ?¨ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÌ"è2!xx }ôx ÜÿÿuserLIB-x!%þu  Õâñi ӍðZ'™µ`¼¤¶IӍïZ'™µþÿ à…ŸòùOh«‘+'³Ù0Tˆœ¨¸ÄÔ äð   (4<DL¨userNormalLIB-x132Microsoft Office Word@*×&2@¢yþé\Ê@Zv!ŠÕ šUdþÿ ÕÍÕœ.“—+,ù®0´ X`t|„Œ ”œ¤¬¨ MicrosoftÖ<�³u   !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<�=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXþÿÿÿZ[\]^_`þÿÿÿbcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~€‚ƒ„…†‡ˆ‰Š‹ŒþÿÿÿŽ‘’“”þÿÿÿ–—˜™š›œþÿÿÿýÿÿÿýÿÿÿ þÿÿÿþÿÿÿþÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿRoot Entryÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÀFè%=ŠÕ¢€Data ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿY1Tableÿÿÿÿa~WWordDocumentÿÿÿÿ2°SummaryInformation(ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿDocumentSummaryInformation8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ•CompObjÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿnÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿþÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿþÿ ÿÿÿÿ ÀFMicrosoft Word 97-2003 Îĵµ MSWordDocWord.Document.8ô9²q