Do forerunners in global value chains (GVCs) select supplier in knowledge collaboration in a different way from latecomers? There are many factors in the selection criteria in co-creating GVC value and enhancing a focal firm’s competitiveness. However, little has been revealed on how firms select their GVC suppliers from the knowledge embeddedness perspective. Furthermore, latecomers and forerunners have gaps in knowledge that may result in different weights on the same selection elements. Based on the knowledge embeddedness theory, we compare the selection criteria of a latecomer (Huawei) with a forerunner (Apple). Specifically, we identify 129 Apple or Huawei global suppliers in 2018 and collect 144,496 patents of these suppliers. Using the data of patents and the tracking of backward citations from 2013 to 2017, we find that, as a latecomer, Huawei depends more on criteria of structural hole positions in GVC knowledge network, knowledge base, and scientific knowledge than Apple does. We further conduct scenario analysis to understand Huawei’s decoupling possibility from GVCs under tech cold war.

全球价值链 (GVC) 的先行者在知识协作中选择供应商的方式是否与后来者不同？在共同创造全球价值链价值和提高焦点公司竞争力的选择标准中有许多因素。然而，关于企业如何从知识嵌入的角度选择其全球价值链供应商的信息很少。此外，后来者和先行者在知识上存在差距，这可能导致对相同选择元素的权重不同。基于知识嵌入理论，我们比较了后来者（华为）和先行者（苹果）的选择标准。具体而言，我们在 2018 年确定了 129 家苹果或华为全球供应商，并收集了这些供应商的 144,496 项专利。使用专利数据和 2013 年至 2017 年的反向引用跟踪，我们发现，作为后来者，与苹果相比，华为更多地依赖于 GVC 知识网络、知识库和科学知识中的结构空洞位置标准。我们进一步进行情景分析，了解科技冷战下华为与全球价值链脱钩的可能性。