Reciprocity and R&D search: Applying the behavioral theory of the firm to a communitarian context

We propose that the behavioral theory of the firm perspective on R&D search requires modification when applied to “communitarian” cultures such as Japan because reciprocity and embeddedness can influence the search decision. When performance exceeds aspirations, communitarian‐oriented firms are more inclined to use their privileged position to help their less fortunate stakeholders by engaging in additional R&D search that should yield greater payoffs for these stakeholders in the future. Our results indicate that while Japanese firms engage in “problemistic” search in a manner similar to what has been found in other contexts, they respond differently when performance exceeds expectations. We find that as performance rises above aspirations, communitarian‐oriented firms raise R&D search to a greater extent than do firms that lack a communitarian orientation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

R&D employment effects of financial slack generated by R&D tax exemption: The importance of firm-level contingencies

This paper focuses on R&D employment effects due to financial slack generated by an R&D tax exemption scheme in Belgium. The tax exemption is granted without firm-level requirements, which facilitates testing firm-level contingencies on the influence of the generated financial slack. We find that R&D employment effects increase with the level of the R&D tax exemption related to financial slack resources and that this positive relation is more outspoken for older firms and for firms with an intermediate share of R&D tax exemptions in the overall mix of R&D policy support. No effects are found for firm size and its R&D intensity. These findings suggest targeting the R&D tax exemption support according to firm characteristics to obtain longer term R&D employment effects. The focus on R&D employment adds to the literature on the evaluation of R&D policies which is largely oriented toward R&D expenditure and innovation outputs.     

New product introductions below aspirations,slack and R&D alliances: A behavioral perspective

We develop hypotheses based on behavioral theory that explain how high technology firms' new product introduction (NPI) performance below aspiration levels impact the number of R&D alliances, and how slack moderates this relationship. Using panel data of U.S. biopharmaceutical firms, we find that as firms' NPI performance below historical aspiration levels increases the number of R&D alliances they form increases and slack intensifies this relationship. We contribute to alliance research by providing theory and empirical evidence that increases in the distance of NPI below aspirations serve as a motivation for increases in R&D alliances, and empirically to behavioral theory by revealing that NPI goals act similarly to financial performance goals in their impact on firms' actions and slack intensifies this relationship. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Direct and interaction effects of top management team and board compositions on R&D investment strategy

This paper examines why firms differ in levels of R&D investment intensity by developing and testing a theory of direct and interaction effects of top management team and board outsider composition on R&D intensity. The theory is tested in a longitudinal sample of technology‐intensive firms that completed an initial public offering. The results indicate that both top management team composition and board composition have direct and additive effects on R&D investment intensity. Also, monitoring by outsider directors does not constitute a universally effective governance mechanism with regard to a firm's R&D investment strategy. Firms opt for lower levels of R&D investment intensity when their outsider‐rich board interacts with a team of managers who have high levels of (1) firm tenure, (2) shared team‐specific experience, or (3) functional heterogeneity. When a firm's competitiveness relies on sustained R&D investments, it is important to note these interaction effects and make adjustments to promote a healthy dialogue between managers and the board. Adjustments could be made to the management team composition (e.g., initiating management turnover to reduce firm tenure) or to the bundle of governance mechanisms (e.g., partially substituting board monitoring with other mechanisms). Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family

The sharp increase in SEP declarations and declaring firms emphasizes the necessity for understanding firms’ innovation investment behavior in standardization. This paper empirically investigates whether declared standard-essential patents (SEPs) and the declaring firm’s business model (operationalized as a firm’s location in the value chain) are associated with a firm’s innovation investment behavior. To this end, we measure firms’ innovation investment behavior through average total research and development (R&D) expenditures per filed patent family for publicly listed firms from 1999 to 2018. Our sample mainly includes major SEP family declarants. We rely on a binary business model taxonomy differentiating upstream and downstream firms. Within that setting, total R&D expenditures rise with increasing fragmentation of declared SEP families, suggesting that firms adjust their R&D investments to declaration developments in standard-setting organizations (SSOs). We also show that upstream firms have significantly lower total R&D expenditures than downstream firms, which could indicate structural differences in their intellectual property (IP) and R&D management processes. Our results can help SSOs and regulators better understand firms’ innovation investment behavior.     

Allocation of inventive effort in complex product systems

This paper examines the allocation of inventive effort in complex product systems. I argue that complex product systems, e.g., personal computers (PCs), are distinguished by functional interaction among several components, each guided by a relatively autonomous bundle of technical and economic characteristics. I try to explore whether the dynamics of such interactions between components of complex product systems can help us understand changes in the relative allocation of inventive effort. I advance and empirically test three hypotheses: (1) emergence of component constraints (bottlenecks) in product systems will trigger research and development (R&D) investment to resolve the constraints; (2) slack component firms have a strong incentive to invest in resolving component constraints; and (3) the incentive of slack component firms to invest in resolving component constraints is increasing in their prior sunk R&D investments in slack components. In sum, I argue that interactions between components in a product system conditions the R&D incentives of firms and also that the incentives are increasing in their prior investments or capabilities. Using product reviews from technical journals, I trace the constraint components in the PC from 1981 to 1998 and attempt to predict shifts in the allocation of inventive effort in the subsequent period. The empirical results strongly support all three hypotheses. This study highlights the paradoxical effect of modularity in complex product systems. Modular design architectures, while contributing to accelerating the pace of technical change, also tend to limit the economic benefits of firms' component R&D efforts, especially when different components technologies are progressing at different rates. This often creates an impetus to enlarge the scope of firm R&D activities beyond the component product markets that firms operate in. Other implications for R&D decision making are discussed. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Non‐R&D innovation and firms’ new product performance: the joint moderating effect of R&D intensity and network embeddedness

Non‐R&D innovation increasingly plays a critical role in explaining firms’ new product performance. Yet, there has been little research on the consequences and contingent mechanisms of non‐R&D innovation for firms embedded in collaborative network environments. To address this research gap, we investigated a conceptual framework of non‐R&D innovation using data drawn from Chinese manufacturing firms. First, we found that non‐R&D innovation positively affects firms’ new product performance. Second, we discovered that high R&D intensity positively strengthens the impact of firms’ non‐R&D innovation on new product performance. Third, we provided critical analysis of the role of non‐R&D innovation in promoting new product performance, accomplished by enhancing R&D investment while simultaneously improving the degree of network embeddedness. Our findings extend both the non‐R&D innovation literature and open innovation literature while providing managers with several key recommendations.     

Outside CEOs and innovation

Research Summary: Innovation is the principle driver of firm and economic growth. Thus, one disturbing trend that may explain stagnant growth is a 65% decline in firms’ R&D productivity. We propose that the rise of outside Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) may be partially responsible for the decline because those CEOs are more likely to lack technological domain expertise necessary to manage R&D effectively. While this proposition was motivated by interviews with Chief Technology Officers (CTOs), we test it at large scale. We find that firm R&D productivity decays during the tenure of outside CEOs relative to that of inside CEOs. We further find this effect is more pronounced for firms with high R&D intensity and for firms employing outside CEOs with more remote experience, lending circumstantial support for the underlying assumption regarding lack of expertise. Note that this is not a call for boards to avoid outside CEOs, rather it is recommendation to consider the implications for innovation. Managerial Summary: While outside CEOs offer advantages over internal candidates, we argue one unintended consequence is weaker innovation. This argument was prompted by two coincident trends: a 65% decline in companies’ R&D productivity and a doubling of outside Chief Executive Officers (CEOs). The argument was reinforced by interviews with Chief Technology Officers (CTOs), who recounted shifts in orientation from R&D as an investment to R&D as an expense that occurred shortly in response to a new CEO. We felt this shift was more likely with outside CEOs because they may lack technological domain expertise necessary to effectively manage R&D. Our results are consistent with the argument—company R&D productivity decreases under outside CEOs. Note, however, that we don’t advocate avoiding outside CEOs, rather we recommend R&D firms consider technological domain expertise during CEO hiring.     

Family Ownership and R&D Intensity in Small‐ and Medium‐Sized Firms

Research was largely consistent in predicting a negative relationship between family ownership and research and development (R&D) intensity until Chrisman and Patel, using a behavioral agency model (BAM), called this general assumption into question. They argued that publicly owned family firms typically invest less in R&D than nonfamily‐owned firms. This behavior may however be reversed if economic performance levels are below family aspirations or if family long‐term goals, such as pursuing strong transgenerational family control, are highly valued. While most researchers, like Chrisman and Patel, primarily focused on large listed firms, more research on the relationship between family ownership and R&D intensity in privately held small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) is required. This is because firm size can play an important role in understanding the innovation management behavior of firms. Building on the BAM perspective, in the present paper it is argued that Chrisman and Patel's results can be extended to the context of SMEs, albeit with one important specification: the relationship between family ownership and R&D intensity is likely to be contingent on the way the family has invested its wealth. Specifically, it is contended that in the context of SMEs, where goals are more fluid and mixed, when there is a high overlap between family wealth and firm equity (i.e., most of the family's wealth is invested in the firm) the relationship between family ownership and R&D intensity is negative because of the family owners' greater desire to protect their socioemotional wealth (SEW). However, if the overlap between the family's total wealth and single firm equity is low (i.e., firm equity is just a small part of the total family wealth), the relationship between family ownership and R&D intensity is positive as the low overlap between family wealth and firm equity reduces the family's loss aversion propensity. In such a situation, family ownership is likely to foster R&D intensity because of the long‐term orientation of family owners that increases the family firm's propensity to bear the risk of investing in R&D activities. The hypothesis is tested and confirmed in a study of 240 small‐ and medium‐sized firms based in Italy. The paper contributes to the literature in several ways. First, adding to the literature on innovation management and R&D intensity, it increases the understanding of what drives or inhibits R&D investments in SMEs when a family is involved in the ownership of the firm. This is particularly important because research on innovation management, as well as research on R&D intensity in family firms, is primarily focused on large firms and much less on SMEs. Second, the study complements arguments from prior research on the correlates of R&D intensity in large listed firms, showing that the BAM and SEW perspective offer a theoretical framework that is also able to illustrate the complex nature of innovation management in the context of SMEs. Third, the study contributes to research on the effects of family ownership on the general functioning of a firm. In particular, it provides new insights into how family ownership may affect R&D intensity.     

How to leverage the impact of R&D on product innovation? The moderating effect of management innovation

Although research and development (R&D) is a key indicator of (technological) innovation, scholars have found mixed results regarding its effect on product innovation and firm performance. In this paper, we claim that variations in R&D effectiveness can be explained by changes in a firm’s social system, in particular in its management innovation. It is still unclear how management innovation influences R&D effectiveness in terms of product innovation. In this study, we address this theoretical and empirical gap in the innovation literature. Our theoretical arguments and findings from a large-scale survey among Dutch firms show that R&D has a decreasingly positive relationship with product innovation, particularly for firms with low levels of management innovation. However, in firms with high levels of management innovation, this relationship becomes more J-shaped, especially in small and medium-sized firms. Our findings also appear to indicate that management innovation may be more important for competitive advantage than just R&D. Overall, our insights reveal that management innovation is a key moderator in explaining firms’ effectiveness in transforming R&D into successful product innovation.     

Profitability Goals,Control Goals,and the R&D Investment Decisions of Family and Nonfamily Firms

Research and development (R&D) investments can help build sustainable competitive advantages and improve firm performance. Nevertheless, managers also acknowledge the difficulties associated with managing R&D and the low chances of success of innovation programs. For this reason, researchers have long been interested in understanding how managers make R&D investment decisions. Research grounded in the behavioral theory of the firm suggests that a primary driver of R&D investment decisions is profitability: when profitability goals have not been met, managers are more likely to initiate a problemistic search through increasing R&D investments. While emphasizing profitability goals and their relationship with R&D investments, prior research largely downplays the role of goals beyond profitability that exist in a significant number of firms (family firms) that are owned and managed by family members whose primary concern is preserving their control over the organization. Research indicates that these family‐centered noneconomic goals lead family managers to minimize R&D investments and that the coexistence of multiple goals produces highly variable R&D investment behavior. Yet, how family‐centered goals for control and profitability enter decision‐making in family firms is not fully understood. In this study, we propose that family managers form distinctive reference points that capture supplier bargaining power and are used to evaluate the degree of external obstruction to their managerial control. The empirical analysis of panel data on 431 private Spanish manufacturing firms observed over the period 2000–2006 shows that the importance of profitability and control goals follows a sequential logic in family firms, such that family firms react more strongly to increasing supplier bargaining power when their profitability reference points have been reached. This study extends current understanding of the distinctive organizational processes engendered by family management in business organizations leading to new research opportunities at the intersection of the innovation management and family business literatures.     

R&D spending,domestic competition,and export performance of Japanese manufacturing firms

This paper examines three factors influencing the export performances of Japanese manufacturing firms: R&D spending, domestic competitive position, and firm size. Export sales are positively associated with (1) R&D expenditures, (2) size of a firm, and (3) average R&D intensity of an industry. A firm's export ratio is related to the size of the firm, but not to the firm's and the industry's R&D intensities. Follower firms are characterized by higher export ratios than market leaders. The results indicate a relationship between the patterns of domestic competition and the international competitiveness of Japanese firms.     

Investment opportunities and R&D investments in family and nonfamily firms

The firm’s investment opportunity set (IOS) reflects the prospective growth opportunities related to physical and human capital investments. IOSs are largely firm specific, embedded in assets-in-place, or generated by experience curves, learning-by-doing, and other similar phenomena. However, the value of an IOS can be destroyed if a firm does not exercise the option to invest. In this study, we theorize that a firm’s ability to invest in R&D is conditional on the availability of a favorable IOS. We test our theoretical propositions in the European business environment using a sample of large publicly traded firms with concentrated ownership. Our findings support the notion that the IOS is a significant determinant of corporate R&D investments, but the magnitude of this effect depends on the identity of the ultimate owner. Specifically, the sensitivity of R&D investments of family- and state-owned corporations is higher to favorable IOS than that of widely held corporations, suggesting these firms are more responsive to favorable IOS than others. By introducing the IOS dimension, our results have interesting implications for both theory and practice.     

The role of reference point in CEO restricted stock and its impact on R&D intensity in high‐technology firms

Prior work based on agency theory and behavioral agency model has focused on how absolute pay values affect firm outcomes. Departing from this traditional approach, we draw from behavioral decision theory to explain how relative pay levels influence firm risk taking. We investigate how CEO restricted stock value relative to reference point influences R&D intensity in high‐technology firms. We propose that negative deviation increases are related to R&D increases and positive deviation increases lead to R&D decreases, while negative deviation has greater effect than positive deviation. We establish theoretical boundary conditions by considering CEO duality and board vigilance as moderators. Drawing from agency theory, we predict the main effects will be enhanced under duality and weakened under high board vigilance. Our hypotheses are largely supported. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Is R&D risky?

Research summary : Many studies use research and development (R&D) intensity or R&D spending as a proxy for risk taking, but we have little evidence that either associates positively with firm risk. We analyze the relations between R&D intensity (R&D spending to sales) and R&D spending on the one hand and 11 different indicators of firm risk on the other, using data from 1,907 to 3,908 firms in various industries over 13 years. The analysis finds a general lack of consistent positive association between R&D and firm risk, making the use of R&D as an indicator of risk taking questionable. Furthermore, R&D intensity and spending do not correlate positively, suggesting they measure different constructs. We discuss potential reasons for these nonsignificant results. Our study demonstrates that researchers should avoid casual use of R&D as a proxy for risk taking without explicitly providing a clear definition and measurement model for risk. Managerial summary : Risk is a key construct in strategic management research. Many studies in this area measure risk taking by research and development (R&D) intensity (the ratio of R&D spending to sales) or R&D spending. However, since R&D intensity and spending have also been used to measure various other things such as information processing demands, this raises the question of whether R&D intensity and spending are valid indicators of firm risk. We examine this issue by considering the associations of R&D intensity and R&D spending with conventional measures of firm risk. We find a general lack of consistent positive association between R&D and firm risk, making the use of R&D as an indicator of risk taking questionable. Furthermore, R&D intensity and spending do not correlate positively, suggesting they measure different things. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Institutional framework,corporate ownership structure,and R&D investment: an international analysis

We combine agency theory with the law and finance approach to analyze how the legal protection of investors and the corporate ownership structure affect corporate investment in research and development (R&D). We use information from 956 firms from the five most R&D-intensive industries in 19 developed countries. Our results show that better protection of investors’ rights by the institutional environment has a positive influence on corporate R&D. We also find that corporate ownership concentration works as a substitute for legal protection. This finding means that R&D investment of the firms in the countries with poor legal protection increases as ownership becomes more concentrated. Our results also show that the identity of shareholders has a relevant effect: Whereas banks and nonfinancial institutions as shareholders result in lower R&D, institutional investors as shareholders increase corporate investment in R&D.     

Network positioning and R&D activity: a study of Italian groups

Traditionally, R&D studies focus on organisational characteristics and internal context factor effects on a firm's R&D activities. This paper extends previous research by analysing firm–level R&D expenditures in the wider context of inter–organisational networks. Using sample of 2002 manufacturing firms in Italy, it provides evidence that R&D intensity is linked to a firm's positioning within an industrial group's hierarchy. Further tests on the antecedents of R&D expenditures are carried out in relation to the effects of firm characteristics and industry factors. Important findings include a significant and positive association between R&D intensity and the firm's size, performance, intangible assets and industry concentration. These findings suggest that, in addition to firm–level factors and its market environment, network resources and organisation may play an important role in driving the intensity of the firm's R&D expenditures.     

Does international research and development increase patent output? An analysis of Japanese pharmaceutical firms

Internationalizing research and development is often advocated as a strategy for fostering the development of technological capabilities. Although firms conduct international R&D to tap into knowledge bases that reside in foreign countries, we argue that in order to benefit from international R&D investments firms must already possess research capabilities in underlying or complementary technologies. We examine the international R&D expansion activities, research capabilities, and patent output of 65 Japanese pharmaceutical firms from 1980 to 1991. We find that firms benefit from international R&D only when they possess existing research capabilities in the underlying technologies. In addition to refining our understanding of when international R&D enhances firm innovation, our results integrate asset‐seeking and asset‐based theories of foreign direct investment. Internationalizing R&D to tap into foreign knowledge bases is consistent with asset‐seeking theories of foreign direct investment, while the contingent nature by which firms benefit from international R&D is consistent with asset‐based theories of foreign direct investment and the notion of absorptive capacity. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effects of Taxes and Organizational Variables on Research and Development Intensity

Prior research has failed to reach consensus on which variables explain private-sector research and development (R&D) spending. This study extends prior research explaining R&D spending of firms in the US private sector by regressing R&D intensity on a number of tax and organizational variables. COMPUSTAT data from 113 firms in 1994 are used to estimate the effects of the variables on R&D intensity (used interchangeably with R&D activity). Ordinary least square estimates indicate that firms that were eligible for the R&D credit had higher R&D activity than firms that were ineligible. R&D intensity is a decreasing function of both capital intensity and the debt to capital ratio. Neither management stockholding nor diversification strategy meaningfully influenced R&D activity. The reported results have implications regarding US tax policy towards the tax subsidy for R&D. The results also help to clarify prior findings regarding a number of organizational variables on R&D intensity. One implication of these results for US tax policy is that private sector R&D intensity can be meaningfully influenced by the level of tax subsidy.     

Performance of Japanese firms in patented inventions; an analysis of patents granted in the U.S.

This paper addresses the relation between firm size and R&D activity for Japanese large manufacturing firms using patents granted in the U.S.. Japanese firms loom larger in world R&D agenda; therefore, the examination of the determinants of their R&D activity, in particular, the effects of firm size, may provide a suggestion of R&D activity. The firm size-patent count relationship varies across industry. In many industries, Japanese experience is not in favor of the assertion that there is a return to scale in R&D among large firms, indicating that Schumpeterian entrepreneurship is not likely to take place more than proportinately to firm size. This conclusion is not inconsistent with Schumpeter's theory.