Making sense of innovation by R&D and non-R&D innovators in low technology contexts: A forgotten lesson for policymakers

This paper attempts to use an integrated theory based on the framework of a firm's internal and external sources of knowledge to analyze how R&D activities differ in innovation from non-R&D activities, especially in the context of low and medium-low tech (LMT) sectors where most of the firms are SMEs. Simultaneously, the paper also explores the key differences between R&D and non-R&D innovators. The empirical analysis is based on a representative panel of 2023 Spanish manufacturing firms from the Spanish Ministry of Industry for 2005 and 2006. Innovation in product and process is explained using non-R&D variables such as marketing, design or the hiring of tertiary degree employees. Only innovation in product is explained by R&D expenditures. Regarding innovation in process, the R&D variables work in a few specific cases. Therefore, innovation can be explained using non-R&D variables. The firms with more internal resources, those which conduct R&D activities, present a better absorptive capacity (AC) and this leads them to engage in cooperation agreements and to access external flows of knowledge. The paper has important implications for policymakers due to the fact that most policies for R&D are based just on R&D programmes.     

An analysis of firm-level innovation strategies in the US biotechnology industry

This study examines factors that may affect innovation strategies and performance of firms in the biotechnology industry. Specifically, differences between factors common to firms with high R&D intensity and those to firms with low R&D intensity are investigated. Biotechnology firms with relatively higher levels of R&D intensity attribute their innovation performance to research-based innovation factors and strategies such as strengthening their own research capabilities, entering into research collaborations with universities, industry leaders and other biotech firms, and licensing their technology. These strategies can be summarized as alignment within the industry. Firms with relatively lower R&D intensity have a hybrid focus—they invest in R&D but may also have products on the market. These firms attribute their innovation performance more so to production-based innovation factors and strategies such as gaining market access and maintaining connections with customers. Their strategy focuses on competitiveness, marketing, and distribution channels, while not ignoring the importance of a strong research base and the need to advance technologically. In a sense, strategies employed to achieve successful innovation reflect the stage of innovation in which a firm is operating for a particular product or process.     

Globalisation,industrial diversification and productivity growth in large European R&D companies

This paper aims to assess the impact of both geographic and industrial diversification of economic activities on the productivity performance of large European R&D Multinational Enterprises (MNEs). Based on the worldwide subsidiaries of these firms, we measure the performance of the firms according to their level of industrial diversification and globalisation that we proxy with the presence and importance of subsidiaries in the EU, North America and Asia–Pacific regions. The sample consists of large R&D firms that represent about 80 % of total European R&D. In general, the results indicate a positive impact from globalisation on firms’ R&D productivity, especially in the US, while a negative impact for industrial diversification is found.     

Over-investment in corporate R&D,risk, and stock returns

Large-size firms which significantly increase their R&D expenditures experience subsequently three-year-long negative abnormal stock returns on the magnitude of 56 basis-points per month. We find no robust evidence of significant event-induced abnormal returns for small-size sample firms or any systematic risk changes for the small- and large- size firms. We also find that the large-size sample firms generate relatively much larger cash flows (i.e., have significantly greater over-investment discretion) and have significantly larger (over-) valuation multiples than the small-size firms. Moreover, some of their operating performance measures show signs of deterioration instead of improvement following these R&D programs. These findings are consistent with the view that investors initially underestimate the over-investment in R&D by some large-size firms that appear to be overvalued and have high cash flows at the time of the investment, only to be disappointed later.     

Real options game models of R&D competition between asymmetric firms with spillovers

Using real options game models, we consider the characterization of strategic equilibria associated with an asymmetric Research and Development (R&D) race between an incumbent firm and an entrant firm in the development of a new innovative product under market and technological uncertainties. The random arrival time of the discovery of the patent protected innovative product is modeled as a Poisson process. Input spillovers on the R&D effort are modeled by the change in the leader’s hazard rate of success of innovation upon the follower’s entry into the R&D race. Asymmetry between the two competing firms include sunk costs of investment, stochastic revenue flow rates generated from the product, and hazard rates of arrival of success of R&D efforts of the two firms. Under asymmetric duopoly, we obtain the complete characterization of the three types of Markov perfect equilibria (sequential leader–follower, preemption and simultaneous entry) of the firms’ optimal R&D entry decisions with respect to various sets of model parameters. Our model shows that under positive input spillover, preemptive equilibrium does not occur in the R&D race due to the presence of dominant second mover advantage. The two firms choose optimally to enter simultaneously if the sunk cost asymmetry is relatively small; otherwise, sequential equilibrium would occur. When the initial hazard rate is low relative to the level of input spillover, simultaneous entry would occur as an optimal decision, signifying another scenario of dominant second mover advantage. On the other hand, when the initial hazard rate is sufficiently high so that the first mover advantage becomes more significant, simultaneous equilibrium does not occur even under high level of positive input spillover.     

Short-term R&D bias,competition on cost rather than innovation,and time to market

Mounting evidence indicates that capital markets often apply short-term pressure on firms to gain short-term results by focusing primarily on reported financial performance. As a result of short termism, it has been argued that companies are likely to cut expenditure on R&D which might otherwise improve longer-term performance. As there is a growing consensus that R&D is critically important to both organizational and national performance, short termism may have significant detrimental organizational consequences. One implication arising from a short-term R&D bias, and examined in this paper, is its effect on market time reduction. Arguments are examined that suggest a dominant R&D strategy is to reduce product time to market. Concerns have been expressed, however, that such a strategy is applicable in specific circumstances only. A review of the literature suggests that analyst and shareholder bias against high-risk, long-term research in favor of lower-risk, short-term product R&D influences organizations to reduce the time it takes to get a product to market when the emphasis in the marketplace is on cost competition rather than product innovation. The findings of the study suggest that when the emphasis on competition on cost rather than innovation is low, short-term R&D bias does not affect market time. In contrast, when the emphasis on competition on cost rather than innovation is high, the results indicate that short-term R&D bias positively influences market time reduction. The study concludes with suggestions for further research.     

The differential effects of public R&D support on firm R&D: Theory and evidence from multi-country data

This paper aims to evaluate the effects of various forms of public research and development (R&D) support on firms’ incentives to invest in R&D. First, in order to identify potential channels through which public R&D support influences firm R&D, a formal model of firm R&D with public R&D support is developed and analyzed. Four potential channels are identified: the technological-competence-enhancing effect, the demand-creating effect, the R&D-cost-reducing effect and the (project) overlap (or duplication) effect. These multiple channels indicate that it is difficult to evaluate the aggregate effect of public R&D support and that there are differential effects of public R&D support on firm R&D, depending on various firm- or industry-specific characteristics. Second, the differential effects of public R&D support are empirically tested using unique firm-level data for nine industries across six countries. Public support tends to have a complementarity effect on private R&D for firms with low technological competence, for firms in industries with high technological opportunities and for firms facing intense market competition. In contrast, firms with high technological competence and firms that have enjoyed fast demand growth in recent years show a crowding-out effect, and firm size and age do not show any discernible differential effect.     

Internationalization of R&D and Operations in Dominant Product U.S. Firms

Abstract

An empirical study of a sample of 38 U.S. dominant product firms operating in manufacturing industries was undertaken to trace the patterns of internationalization of R&D and operations. First, the results of our analysis revealed that internationalization of R&D and operations were a significant part of the evolving internationalization strategies of the dominant product firms we studied. Second, while internationalization of operations was influenced by international configuration via global standardization, the internationalization of R&D was influenced by international configuration via national responsiveness and by competitive positioning via differentiation. Third, the results highlight the fact that the internationalization moves of dominant product firms are not all similar, but depend on the international configuration and competitive positioning pursued by the firms.     

How do firm characteristics affect behavioural additionalities of public R&D subsidies? Evidence for the Austrian transport sector

Interest of STI policies to influence the innovation behaviour of firms has been increased considerably. This gives rise to the notion of behavioural additionality, broadening traditional evaluation concepts of input and output additionality. Though there is empirical work measuring behavioural additionalities, we know little about what role distinct firm characteristics play for their occurrence. The objective is to estimate how distinct firm characteristics influence the realisation of behavioural additionalities. We use survey data on 155 firms, considering the behavioural additionalities stimulated by the Austrian R&D funding scheme in the field of intelligent transport systems in 2006. We focus on three different forms of behavioural additionality—project additionality, scale additionality and cooperation additionality—and employ binary regression models to address this question. Results indicate that R&D related firm characteristics significantly affect the realisation of behavioural additionality. R&D intensive firms are less likely to substantiate behavioural additionalities, while small, young and technologically specialised firms more likely realise behavioural additionalities. From a policy perspective, it may be concluded that direct R&D promotion of firms with a high R&D intensity may be misallocated. Attention of public support should be shifted to smaller, technologically specialised firms with lower R&D experience. The findings deliver important insights into interactions of public R&D support and R&D behaviour of firms operating in the Austrian transport sector, bearing significant implications for future policy designs.     

The effect of R&D novelty and openness decision on firms' catch-up performance: Empirical evidence from China

This paper explores the strategic dimensions of R&D decisions toward novelty and openness in explaining the performance of latecomer firms in a developing economy. A structural equation model of R&D decision-making is formulated using survey data from 279 Chinese firms. The dimension of R&D novelty is defined as the degree of technological newness found in firms' R&D projects, while R&D openness describes the degree to which technologies are acquired from external sources. Our results indicate that firms' R&D decisions regarding novelty and openness are associated with demand opportunities, market competition, technological capability, and external networks. Greater R&D novelty contributes positively to innovative output but does not affect sales growth. Greater R&D openness contributes positively to sales growth but negatively to innovative output.     

Learning from R&D outsourcing vs. learning by R&D outsourcing

We analyze how research and development (R&D) outsourcing influences product innovation. We propose a separation between learning from R&D outsourcing, whereby the firm improves its ability to innovate by using outsourced R&D directly in new products, from learning by R&D outsourcing, whereby the firm indirectly uses outsourced R&D by integrating it with internal R&D to create new products. Building on the knowledge-based view, we argue that learning from R&D outsourcing is likely to have an inverse U-shaped relationship with product innovation, because the initial benefits of using outsourced component R&D knowledge to innovate products is eventually outweighed by the hollowing out of the firm's ability to innovate. In contrast, we propose that learning by R&D outsourcing is likely to have a U-shaped relationship with product innovation, because the initial challenges of integrating internal and external R&D are eventually overcome, resulting in more innovations. Finally, we distinguish between domestic and foreign R&D outsourcing and propose a liability of foreignness in R&D outsourcing as it has a lower impact on new products than domestic R&D outsourcing. The empirical analysis shows that outsourced R&D has an inverted U-shaped relationship with the number of new products, while the interaction between outsourced R&D and internal R&D has a U-shaped relationship with the number of new products. It also shows that domestic outsourced R&D has a higher positive impact on the number of new products than foreign outsourced R&D.     

The negative impact of R&D capitalization: A value relevance approach

Abstract

Accounting for R&D costs is an open issue. SFAS N°2 mandates that all R&D costs must be immediately expensed. IAS 38 requires capitalization of R&D costs if they meet certain criteria. Recent research papers show the value relevance of capitalized R&D. We test the value relevance of R&D reporting in a sample of 197 French firms between 1993 and 2002. The French context provides an interesting field for R&D value relevance studies because both accounting treatments of R&D costs (expensing and capitalization) are allowed. Unlike previous studies, we find that capitalized R&D is negatively associated with stock prices and returns. This negative coefficient on capitalized R&D implies that investors are concerned with and react negatively to capitalization of R&D. We also find that the firms choosing to capitalize (successful) R&D are smaller, more highly leveraged, less profitable and have less growth opportunities. Taking into account these characteristics, our robustness checks confirm that capitalized R&D is not associated with higher prices and is related to lower returns.     

Mining the R&D innovation performance processes for high-tech firms based on rough set theory

The research and development (R&D) innovation of firms continues to be viewed as an important source of competitive advantage to academics and practitioners. To explore and extract the R&D innovation decision rules, it is important to understand how the R&D innovation rule-base works. However, many studies have not yet adequately induced and extracted the decision rule of R&D innovation and performance based on the characteristics and components of the original data rather than on post-determination models. The analysis of this study is grounded in the taxonomy of induction-related activities using a rough set theory approach or rule-based decision-making technique to infer R&D innovation decision rules and models linking R&D innovation to sales growth. The rules developed using rough set theory can be directly translated into a path-dependent flow network to infer decision paths and parameters. The flow network graph and cause-and-effect relationship of decision rules are heavily exploited in R&D innovation characteristics. In addition, an empirical case of R&D innovation performance will be illustrated to show that the rough sets model and the flow network graph are useful and efficient tools for building R&D innovation decision rules and providing predictions. We will then illustrate that integrating the flow network graph with rough set theory can fully reflect the characteristics of R&D innovation, and, through the established model, we can obtain a more reasonable result than with artificial influence.     

Exploring the impact of innovation strategy on R&D employees’ job satisfaction: A mathematical model and empirical research

This study develops a mathematical model to examine the effect of innovation strategy on R&D employee’s job satisfaction and to identify the optimal guidelines of innovation strategy, with conflict and organization performance being treated as the intermediary variables. The study further conducts an empirical survey to illustrate the contributions of this mathematical model. The results indicate that the product innovation has a greater influence on organizational performance, while the process innovation has a greater influence on conflict resolution among R&D employees. The mathematical and empirical results have provided an optimal guideline for determining the allocation of resources, which suggests that firms must focus on product innovation to gain the optimal R&D employee’s job satisfaction. In addition, the types of innovation policies along with rivals’ attitudes influence the advantages to be taken from a firm innovation strategy.     

Dynamics in research joint ventures and R&D collaborations

We investigate the short- and long-term effects of different types of R&D collaborations on firms, consumers, and the industry. To that end, we consider a differentiated-product market in which firms compete à la Bertrand and invest in process innovation in order to lower the production cost over time. Investments are stochastic and there can be cartelization or competition strategies among firms at the moment of making the decision on the amount to invest in R&D. Our results show that in equilibrium, the long-run welfare is larger under a research joint venture than under other environments. Discounted present value profits increase with the level of the spillover but there are asymmetries that depend on the firms’ asymmetry on marginal costs.     

Collaboration in Multi-Partner R&D Projects: The Impact of Partnering Scale and Scope

How can firms design collaboration structures for effective performance in R&D projects that involve multiple partners? To address this question, we examine the theoretical underpinnings of collaboration structures in multi-partner R&D projects—i.e., the scale and the scope of partnering efforts. Partnering scale captures the extent of resource interdependencies between a firm and its partners; partnering scope captures both the breadth and depth of the interdependencies between a firm and its partners. Using primary data from 147 multi-partner R&D projects, we develop and test hypotheses that examine the impact of partnering scale and scope decisions on partnering performance. Results indicate that partnering scale has a curvilinear relationship with partnering performance. That is, intermediate levels of partnering scale are associated with higher partnering performance, compared to low or high levels of partnering scale. However, we also find that the nature of this relationship is moderated by the sub-dimensions of partnering scope. Specifically, increase in partnering breadth appears to magnify the negative effect of partnering scale on performance. In contrast, increase in partnering depth appears to overcome this negative effect, allowing firms to operate at higher levels of partnering scale. Taken together, these results highlight the importance of adopting a comprehensive approach to designing collaboration structures for multi-partner R&D projects.     

The R&;D and productivity relationship of Korean listed firms

This study analyzes the relationship between R&D investment and the productivity of Korean R&D-engaged firms. An interdependent chain of equations including the propensity to invest, R&D investment and productivity are estimated in a multi-step procedure accounting for selectivity and simultaneity biases. Using Korean firm level panel data of listed firms from 1986 to 2002, we find four main empirical results. First, there is a two-way causal relationship between R&D investment and productivity for Korean listed firms. Second, Chaebol firms were associated with lower R&D growth as well as lower labor productivity growth in comparison to non-Chaebol firms. Third, there was a substantial reduction in growth rates both in R&D investment and labor productivity in 1997-1998, immediately following the Asian financial crisis. Fourth, considering the positive feedback effect from productivity growth to R&D growth, a decrease in R&D investment growth after the Asian financial crisis should have been harmful by further decreasing productivity growth.     

Governance and effects of public R&D subsidies: Evidence from China

This study examines the effects of public research and development (R&D) subsidies and the governance of such subsidies on firm productivity based on the analysis of a firm-level panel dataset between 1998 and 2007 in China. It is found that public R&D subsidies tend to support more productive firms and the productivity of these government-backed firms is improved further after they get the government support. Less attention is paid to the observable or measurable performance measurements in ex-ante project selection, and the ex-post effects are stronger when the governance of the public R&D subsidies becomes more decentralized due to an exogenous policy change. In other words, better decentralization of governance is associated with more pronounced effects of R&D subsidies. Identification concerns are addressed with various approaches to confirm the treatment effect of public R&D subsidies and the governance of such subsidies.     

Research collaboration and R&D outsourcing: Different R&D personnel requirements in SMEs

The literature on ‘open’ innovation emphasises the need to engage in external knowledge relations in order to innovate. Particularly for SMEs, research cooperation and R&D outsourcing can offer possibilities to complement the often limited internal research resources. However, they also bring in their wake requirements in terms of absorptive capacity and managerial skills of the internal R&D personnel.The paper focuses on the different requirements in terms of availability and training of research managers and R&D experts for research cooperation versus R&D outsourcing in SMEs. An empirical analysis of micro-level data provided by the OECD business R&D survey for Belgium reveals that the relation between R&D personnel requirements and research collaboration and R&D outsourcing depends upon the SME size. Therefore, to study this subject appropriately a distinction between very small, small, and medium-sized firms is relevant. Very small firms engage significantly less in research cooperation than medium-sized firms and the propensity to engage in research cooperation is positively associated with the share of PhD holders among the research managers and R&D experts. For R&D outsourcing a lower involvement is noted in medium-sized firms, and the propensity to outsource increases with the formal qualification level of the R&D personnel and with R&D training. Among the SME, small firms are most engaged in research cooperation and in R&D outsourcing. In the case of research cooperation they rely on highly qualified experts. For R&D outsourcing activities both the presence of research managers and R&D experts is important.     

Inside the black box of high-growth firms in a crisis-hit economy: corporate strategy,employee human capital and R&D capabilities

In an attempt to open the black box of high-growth firms within turbulent economic environments, this paper explores the role of corporate strategy, employee human capital and R&D capabilities in achieving exceptional growth performance in a crisis-hit economy. Relative and absolute growth measures based on both employment and sales are computed utilizing survey data on 1500 firms in the midst of the Greek crisis. Our findings indicate that adopting a geographical diversification strategy significantly increases the likelihood of becoming a fast-growing firm, irrespective of the growth metric used. Entering in diverse product markets and taking advantage of R&D capabilities appear to additionally contribute to relative employment change in HGFs of smaller size. Based on the absolute employment growth indicator, we provide some evidence that HGFs of larger size are able to grow fast through product diversification, acquiring other firms or by investing on training low-skilled employees. Nevertheless, hiring already highly educated persons seems to matter only for sales HGFs, while research collaborations are found to negatively affect the probability of growing fast in terms of sales.