Influence activity and the organization of research and development

The organizational design of research and development conditions the incentives of the researchers of the research project. In particular, the organizational form determines the allocation of effort of the researcher between time spent on research and time spent lobbying m anagement. Researchers prefer to spend their time on research. However, the researchers only get utility from performing research if the project is approved for its full duration. Spending time lobbying management for the continuation of the researcher’s project increases the probability that the management observes a favorable signal about the project. Organizing a research joint venture increases the flexibility of the organizational form with respect to the continuation decision. For low correlation between the signals of the partners about the expected profitability of the project, we find that the organization of a research joint venture reduces influence activity by the researchers and increases expected profits of the partners. For high correlation between the signals, internal research projects lower influence activity by the researchers. We try to relate the correlation of the partners signals to the characteristics of basic research versus more applied research projects, and find that the model is consistent with the observation that research joint ventures seem involved in more basic research projects compared to internal R&D departments, which concentrate on more applied research.Research joint ventures, influence activity, signal jamming, incomplete contracts

Are external technology sourcing strategies substitutes or complements? The case of embodied versus disembodied technology acquisition

This paper analyzes the choice between different external technology sourcing activities of a firm. On the one hand, the firm can acquire new technology which is embodied in personnel. On the other hand, the firm can obtain new technology disembodied through a licensing agreement or by outsourcing the technology development from an R&D contractor. Building on Cassiman and Veugelers (2006), we test whether embodied and disembodied technology acquisitions are complementary activities or rather behave as substitute technology acquisition alternatives. We find that while internal and external technology acquisition are complementary innovation activities, the actual choice of external technology sourcing between embodied or disembodied modes is substitutive for smaller firms. The evidence for larger firms suggests that different external technology sourcing activities are complementary, but in this case the results are suggestive although not strongly significant.Embodied & disembodied technology acquisition; complementarity; substitutability;

R&D cooperation between firms and universities: some empirical evidence from Belgian manufacturing.

This paper presents an econometric analysis of firm and industry characteristics conducive to cooperation with universities, using Community Innovation Survey data for Belgium. We find that large firms are more likely to have cooperative agreements with universities. These agreements are formed whenever risk is not an important obstacle to innovation and typically serve to share costs. Consistent with the open science paradigm, we find no evidence for the importance of the capacity to appropriate the returns from innovation for explaining cooperative agreements with universities. We do argue that cooperating with universities is complementary to other innovation activities such as performing own R&D, sourcing public information and cooperative agreements with suppliers and customers. Therefore, the decision to cooperate with universities cannot be analyzed in isolation from the overall innovation strategy of the firm.Agreements; Belgium; Characteristics; Classification; Community; Cooperation; Cooperation with universities; Costs; Data; Decision; Firms; Industry; Industry-science links; Information; Innovation; Innovation strategy; Manufacturing; Open; R&D; Risk; Science; Sourcing; Strategy; Suppliers; University;

Innovation and the export-productivity link

In this paper, we explore the relationship between innovation activity, productivity, and exports, using a panel of Spanish manufacturing firms for 1990-1998. Our results -based on non-parametric tests- suggest that firm innovation status is critical in explaining the positive export-productivity association documented in prior research. For the sample of small innovating firms, we find no significant differences in productivity levels between exporters and non-exporters. Especially product innovation seems to explain this positive association between exports and productivity. For small non-innovating firms with the low and medium productivity levels, however, exporting firms continue to exhibit higher productivity than non-exporting firms.Innovation; productivity; exports; industry dynamics;

R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence

This paper provides some first empirical evidence on the relationship between R&D spillovers and R&D cooperation. The results suggest disentangling different aspects of know-how flows. Firms which rate incoming spillovers more importantly and who can limit outgoing spillovers by a more effective protection of know-how, are more likely to cooperate in R&D. Our analysis also finds that cooperating firms have higher incoming spillovers and higher protection of know- how, indicating that cooperation may serve as a vehicle to manage information flows. Our results thus suggest that on the one hand the information sharing and coordination aspects of incoming spillovers are crucial in understanding cooperation, while on the other hand, protection against outgoing spillovers is important for firms to engage in stable cooperative agreements by reducing free-rider problems. Distinguishing different types of cooperative partners reveals that while managing outgoing spillovers is less critical in alliances with non-commercial research partners than between vertically related partners, the incoming spillovers seem to be more critical in understanding the former type of R&D cooperation.Research and development, cooperation, spillovers

Catalan competitiveness: Science and business

Science has been shown to be an important driver of economic growth and performance. In this chapter we take a careful look at a key ingredient of this driver for Catalonia: the link between science and business. We argue that the Catalan innovation system faces three important challenges in order to better connect science to business: 1) the need for a sufficient supply of high quality science; 2) the need for a sufficient demand for science by companies, and 3) the ability to connect science and business, i.e., science needs different channels to connect with business and requires coordinated efforts between the different players in the innovation system. We find that the science landscape at Catalan (Spanish) scientific institutions has improved considerably in the last decade. Demand for science by Catalan firms, on the contrary, is still very weak. Nevertheless, we do find that industry and universities use a large variety of channels for knowledge interaction. In addition, we show that the three large Catalan universities have very different profiles in their interactions with industry. However, our analysis does indicate that there is currently a lack of basic information about the Catalan innovation system to help inform and direct such important policy measures. Some coordination on recording this information systematically would improve matters considerably.Competitiveness; Catalonia; Science; Business;

R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence.

This paper provides some first empirical evidence on the relationship between R&D spillovers and R&D cooperation. The results suggest disentangling different aspects of know-how flows. Firms which rate incoming spillovers more importantly and who can limit outgoing spillovers by a more effective protection of know-how, are more likely to cooperate in R&D. Our analysis also finds that cooperating firms have higher incoming spillovers and higher protection of know-how, indicating that cooperation may serve as a vehicle to manage information flows. Our results thus suggest that on the one hand the information sharing and coordination aspects of incoming spillovers are crucial in understanding cooperation, while on the other hand, protection against outgoing spillovers is important for firms to engage in stable cooperative agreements by reducing free-rider problems. Distinguishing different types of cooperative partners reveals that while managing outgoing spillovers is less critical in alliances with non-commercial research partners than between vertically related partners, the incoming spillovers seem to be more critical in understanding the former type of R&D cooperation.Cooperation; R&D; R&D cooperation; Spillovers;

Importance of international linkages for local know-how flows. Some econometric evidence from Belgium.

External knowledge is an important input for the innovation process of firms. Increasingly, this knowledge is likely to originate from outside of their national borders. This explains the preoccupation of policymakers with stimulating local technology transfers coming from international firms. We find that firms that have access to the international technology market are more likely to transfer technology to the local economy. In doing so, we qualify the traditional assertion that multinational firms are more likely to transfer technology to the local economy. Once controlled for the superior access to the international technology market that multinationals enjoy, we find that these firms are not more likely to transfer technology to the local economy compared to exporting or local firms that have access to the international technology market. In summary, the main result of this paper is that it is not so much the international character of the firms, but rather their access to the international technology market that is important for generating external knowledge transfers to the local economy.

Complementarity in the innovation strategy: Internal R&D, external technology acquisition, and cooperation in R&D.

Successful innovation depends on the development and integration of new knowledge in the innovation process. In order to successfully innovate, the firm will combine different innovation activities. In addition to doing own research and development, firms typically are engaged in the acquisition of knowledge on the technology market and cooperate actively in R&D with other firms and research organizations. In this paper we show that there exist important complementarities between the different innovation activities. We test complementarity between the innovation activities both directly, through the productivity approach, and indirectly, through the adoption approach. Using data from the Community Innovation Survey on Belgian manufacturing firms, we show that firms that are only engaged in a single innovation strategy, either internal R&D activities or sourcing technology externally, introduced fewer new and substantially improved products compared to firms which combine internal and external sourcing. This result is consistent with complementarity between own R&D and external technology sourcing activities. In the adoption approach we show that the different innovation activities are strongly positively correlated and identify common drivers, resulting in the perceived complementarity between these innovation activities. An important finding is that a more basic R&D base which may serve as an absorptive capacity and a capacity to strategically protect intellectual property are important common drivers for the different innovation activitiesManagement; Innovation strategy

Are external technology acquisition strategies substitutes or complements: The case of embodied and disembodied technology acquisition?.

International; Subsidiaries; Technology diffusion; Technology; Strategy; Working;