The impacts of family involvement on R&D investment intensity in firms: Evidence from China

Drawing on the perspective of socioemotional wealth, this paper explores the types of family involvement in family firms and their impacts on R&D investment intensity. Using data from the forecasts issued by A-share family firms listed on Chinese stock markets between 2008 and 2019, the study finds that the separation of ownership and control is negatively associated with R&D investment intensity in non-high-tech firms, whereas potential gains of socioemotional wealth from R&D activities by high-tech firms produce a positive influence that offsets the negative impact of the separation of ownership and control on R&D investments. It reveals the importance of gains of socioemotional wealth. In contrast to the separation of ownership and control, family involvement in management is negatively associated with firms’ R&D investment intensity in both high-tech firms and non-high-tech firms. Our results capture the diversity of family members’ identity recognition, which leads to family members’ different evaluations of the potential gains and losses of socioemotional wealth. Overall, the distinction between high-tech family firms and other family firms is shown to be significant, as is the distinction between the impacts of different types of family involvement.

     

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.     

Family management,family succession,and R&D investment: An empirical study

Using data from the statements issued by A-share family firms listed on Chinese stock markets between 2008 and 2019, this paper explores the impacts of family management and family succession on R&D investment. We draw on the perspective of restricted and extended socioemotional wealth and differentiate exploitative R&D and explorative R&D in a detailed study. The study finds that the proportion of family members among board members or senior executives and the kinship of the CEO or chair of the board of directors have different effects on R&D investment, indicating that a diversity exists in how family members identify their role within the company. Furthermore, the participation of the controller’s children in the enterprise can promote explorative R&D investment instead of exploitative R&D, but only during the process of intergenerational succession. The findings differ from prior research in calling attention to the facts that the impact of family management is not always homogeneous owing to the dispersion of family members into different positions, and it can be misleading to conclude that R&D investment is more conservative in family businesses without considering the structure of R&D investment.

     

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.     

How does R&D intensity influence firm explorativeness? Evidence of R&D active firms in four advanced countries

Despite R&D is seen as a starting point of innovation, firms usually confront a trade-off in allocating limited R&D resources to either exploratory or exploitative activities. Relative to the latter, the former produces a more distinctive variation from the prior knowledge base and helps the firm tap into new opportunity. Given the increasing importance of firm explorativeness in the fast changing environments, the influence of R&D investment on firm explorativeness is not yet conclusive in the literature, not to mention whether the increased R&D investment induces firms to become more explorative. This study aims to generate insight into how and when firm explorativeness is determined by their R&D intensity. As a notion of the use of knowledge new to the organization, firm explorativeness is treated as the degree of using knowledge new to the organization in the pursuit of innovation. Based on a panel data of 1267 firm-year observations in four advanced countries during 1999–2003, the results reveal that a higher level of R&D intensity makes firms more exploitative and less explorative. Nevertheless, the negative relationship between R&D intensity and firm explorativeness is found to be alleviated in the presence of technological opportunity or financial slack. The configurational model sheds further light on the combined and relative weight of two moderators.     

Value and risk dynamics over the innovation cycle

This paper studies investment in intellectual capital and corresponding value and risk dynamics over the innovation cycle. We assume that the innovation cycle consists of three phases, R&D, trial, and market introduction phases. We use a real option investment model to characterize firm value and risk dynamics over the innovation cycle and find that firm value is the sum of the value of assets in place and non-linear option values related to breakthrough, exit, and market introduction options. Firm risk over the innovation cycle is highly non-linear and quite distinct in different phases. During the R&D phase risk is high as the firm faces high operating leverage originating from R&D fixed costs together with technological uncertainty. During the trial phase risk is significantly lower and dominated by option risk to launch the product in the market while after the introduction of the product in the market risk is equivalent to the asset risk of the company. Our model is consistent with the view that positive excess returns of R&D intensive firms are a compensation for risk. Based on this insight we derive several testable predictions.     

R&D and aggregate fluctuations

Empirical observations raise interesting questions regarding the sources of the excessive volatility in the R&D sector as well as the nature of the relation between the sector and aggregate fluctuations. Using US data for the period 1959–2007, we identify sectoral technology and capital investment-specific shocks by employing a Vector Autoregression. The identifying assumptions are motivated by a two-sector dynamic general equilibrium model. Controlling for real and nominal factors, we find that capital investment-specific shocks explain 70 percent of fluctuations of R&D investment, while R&D technology shocks explain 30 percent of the variation of aggregate output, net of R&D investment. Technology shocks jointly explain almost all the variation of output in the R&D sector and 78 percent of the variation of output in the rest of the economy. They also constitute the main factor of the procyclicality of R&D investment.     

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.     

Emergence of innovation networks from R&D cooperation with endogenous absorptive capacity

This paper extends the existing literature on strategic R&D alliances by presenting a model of innovation networks with endogenous absorptive capacity. The networks emerge as a result of dynamic cooperation between firms occupying different locations in the knowledge space. Partner selection is driven by absorptive capacity which is itself influenced by cognitive distance and R&D investment allocation. Under different knowledge regimes, we examine the structure of networks that emerge and how firms perform within such networks. We find networks that exhibit small world properties which are generally robust to changes in the knowledge regime. Certain network strategies such as occupying brokerage positions or maximising accessibility to potential partners pay off, especially in ‘young’ industries with limited involuntary but abundant voluntary spillovers. This particular result is driven by endogenous absorptive capacity.     

Home market effects with endogenous costs of production

In a standard imperfect competition model, we endogenize the costs of production of firms in the increasing returns sector (IRS) via process R&D. We show that firms in the larger region in terms of demand invest more in R&D (i.e.: they are bigger in size and have lower marginal costs) than firms in the smaller region, since the former exploit larger economies of scale in production to pay for the costs of R&D. As a result, when the return on R&D is high, the larger region does not employ disproportionately more labor nor attracts a disproportionately larger share of firms in the IRS in relation to share of demand it hosts, i.e.: negative home market effects (HMEs) in employment and in the number of firms. When this occurs, only partial agglomeration of the IRS in the larger region is sustainable in equilibrium. Even so, the larger region always runs trade surplus in the IRS, i.e.: HME in trade patterns.     

Do investments in intangible customer assets affect firm value?

This paper develops a simple model of investment by service firms in intangible customer assets, and tests whether the model identifies some critical drivers of firms’ stock returns. Similar to firms with significant research and development (R&D) expenditures, we argue that firms in fast-growing service industries with few tangible assets can increase firm value by investing in customer acquisition and service (A&S) expenditure. Using a unique hand-collected data set, we show that per-customer changes in firms’ revenues, customer acquisition costs, and customer service costs help to explain their abnormal stock returns.     

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.     

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.     

On robust asymmetric equilibria in asymmetric R&;D-driven growth economies

In R&D-driven growth models with asymmetric fundamentals, the steady-state equilibrium R&D investments are industry-specific, and they are such that R&D returns are equalized across industries. Return equalization, however, makes investors indifferent as to where to target research and, hence, the problem of allocation of R&D investments across industries is indeterminate. Agents’ indifference creates an ambiguous investment scenario. We assume that agents hold “ambiguous” beliefs on the per-industry profitability of their R&D investments. Investors’ aversion towards ambiguity eliminates the indeterminacy of the investment problem. In particular, the asymmetric return-equalizing equilibrium is robust against a however small degree of investors’ ambiguity aversion.     

Cooperative R&D with Endogenous Technology Differentiation

We study a nontournament R&D duopoly. Before the standard R&D investment and quantity-setting stages, we consider a stage in which firms choose their R&D technologies. Spillovers negatively depend on R&D technology differentiation. We show that, in equilibrium, firms will choose identical or very similar R&D processes. Such equilibria may entail less differentiation than would be dictated by social welfare maximization.     

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.     

Technology ladders and R&D in dynamic Cournot markets

Motivated by dramatic and unpredictable technological advances in energy production (for instance drilling and extraction of shale oil), we extend Cournot models of competition to incorporate research and development (R&D) that can lead to (stochastic) drops in production costs. Our model combines features of patent racing with dynamic market structure, capturing the interplay between the immediate competition in terms of production rates and the long-term competition in R&D. The resulting Markov Nash equilibrium is found from a sequence of one-step static games arising between R&D successes, and several numerical examples and extensive analysis of the emerging comparative statics are presented. Analyzing the relationship between current market dominance and the level of R&D investments, we find that market leaders tend to invest more, which in some sense makes oligopoly dynamically unstable. We show that anticipated market transitions have long-term impact; for example the potential of future monopoly can spur R&D investment now, even if the firm is presently uncompetitive and not actively producing. We also show that, surprisingly, random innovations have an ambiguous effect on R&D. This feature, which is driven by the Cournot framework, contrasts with the common situation whereby uncertainty lowers innovation and delays R&D investments. Finally, we demonstrate that increased competition may actually increase efforts to innovate through higher desire to achieve dominance. This would match the anecdotal evidence that the threat of market entrants forces incumbents to maintain high R&D.     

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.     

Managerial overconfidence,overinvestment, and R&D spillover

This paper examines whether a firm will select an overoptimistic manager when a cost‐reduction investment has a spillover effect. We consider a Cournot competition model where R&D investment ex ante occurs before the process of product market competition. Our analysis reveals that there exists a unique and symmetric equilibrium for firms to delegate overoptimistic managers. We show that only when the spillover effect is sufficiently high do firms benefit from delegation. Furthermore, the equilibrium confidence level and investment decision first decrease and then increase as the spillover parameter changes. As the initial production cost increases, the equilibrium performance becomes worse.     

R&D and regional competitiveness: a study of global entrepreneurial firms

We quantify, using data from the World Bank’s Enterprise Surveys and the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index, the empirical relationship between global competitiveness and R&D investment activity as well as the independent relationship between global competitiveness and R&D investments across geographic regions of economic development. We also explore alternative measures of the effectiveness of R&D investments. Our findings suggest that R&D investments are a possible policy target variable in high-income regions for policy makers to consider for increasing firms’ global competitiveness.