What are good R&D investment strategies for leaders and followers?

Research and development (R&D) investment affects the growth of firms in the same industry differently according to their technological positions. This study empirically investigates differences in how R&D investment influences firm growth between technological leaders and followers. Additionally, this study investigates the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition on the relationship between R&D investment and firm growth. Using a sample of 2322 observations from 492 firms in the U.S. chemical and allied products industry for the period 2000–2009, we show that an increase in R&D investment leads to greater firm growth for technological followers than for technological leaders. We also find that the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition vary depending on whether a firm is a technological leader or follower.     

Dynamic R&D choice and the impact of the firm's financial strength

ABSTRACT

This article investigates how a firm's financial strength affects its dynamic decision to invest in R&D. We estimate a dynamic model of R&D choice using data for German firms in high-tech manufacturing industries. The model incorporates a measure of the firm's financial strength, derived from its credit rating, which is shown to lead to substantial differences in estimates of the costs and expected long-run benefits from R&D investment. Financially strong firms have a higher probability of generating innovations from their R&D investment, and the innovations have a larger impact on productivity and profits. Averaging across all firms, the long-run benefit of investing in R&D equals 6.6% of firm value. It ranges from 11.6% for firms in a strong financial position to 2.3% for firms in a weaker financial position.     

R&D investment and internal finance: the cash flow effect

This paper investigates the cash flow effect on R&D investments for firms in Denmark. Evidence is found that internal funds are important in explaining R&D investments, indicating that R&D investment decisions are affected by credit market imperfections. Cash flow sensitivities are larger both for smaller firms and for firms with low debt relative to assets. Furthermore, this effect is also present after controlling for cash flow’s potential role as a predictor of future profitability.     

R&D subsidies and private R&D expenditures: evidence from Italian manufacturing data

This paper uses a comprehensive firm level data set for the manufacturing sector in Italy to investigate the effect of government support on privately financed R&D expenditure. Estimates from a non‐parametric matching procedure suggest that public assistance has a positive effect on private R&D investment in the sense that the recipient firms achieve more private R&D than they would have without public support. This indicates that the possibility of perfect crowding out between private and public funds can be rejected. Furthermore, in this sample of Italian firms, tax incentives appear to be more effective than direct grants. The paper also examines whether public funding affects the financial sources available for R&D and finds that grants encourage the use of internal sources. The results also show some evidence of positive effects on credit financing for R&D.     

R&D investment,cash holdings and the financial crisis: evidence from Korean corporate data

This article examines the real effects of the financial crisis in 2008 on corporate R&D investment by analyzing firm-level panel data from 2005 to 2011 obtained from KIS-VALUE, a Korean corporate finance database. I estimate a dynamic panel model of R&D investment that includes an after-crisis dummy to reflect the effects of the external finance supply shock after the financial crisis, an interaction term of the dummy and cash holdings to measure the marginal effect of cash holdings after the crisis, investment opportunities (sales and the q ratio) and financial positions as the debt-equity ratio. The estimation implies a negative yet relatively small impact of the credit supply shock from the financial crisis on R&D investment and the mitigation of the negative impacts by cash holdings after the onset of the financial crisis, whereas the data show decreasing R&D investment and sales for the whole period. Based on the data and the estimation, I find that firms were able to lessen the pressure from diminishing market demand before the crisis using external finance, but they had to use internal financial sources after the crisis smooth R&D investment.     

Domestic R&D and offshoring: does offshoring reduce knowledge production?

An important question in industrialized countries is whether offshoring activities reduce the probability of performing own research and development (R&D) or whether the R&D intensity falls in firms that already have R&D activities. This question is addressed using a unique data set that combines survey and register data. No evidence is found for a lower probability of own R&D after offshoring takes place compared to before. Moreover, offshoring does not lead to lower R&D intensity in general. However, firms that offshore R&D activity have larger R&D intensity after offshoring has taken place, which suggests that R&D performed at home is complementary to foreign R&D.     

Monetary Policy,Financial Frictions,and Heterogeneous R&D Firms in an Endogenous Growth Model*

Motivated by empirical facts, I construct an endogenous growth model in which heterogeneous research and development (R&D) firms are financially constrained and use cash to finance R&D investments. I also examine the optimal monetary policy. The effects of financial constraint crucially depend on whether R&D firms are homogeneous or heterogeneous regarding R&D productivity. If R&D firms are homogeneous, then the zero nominal interest rate (i.e., the Friedman rule) is always optimal under severe financial constraint. Heterogeneity in R&D productivity leads to the opposite result. With heterogeneity, severe financial constraint makes the strictly positive nominal interest rate welfare-improving under a plausible condition.     

The impact of R&D subsidy on innovation: evidence from New Zealand firms

This study examines the impact of government subsidy through R&D grants on innovation output for firms in New Zealand. Using a large database that links administrative and tax data with survey data, we find that R&D grants have a stronger effect on more novel innovation (e.g. applying for a patent or introducing new products to the world) than on incremental innovation (e.g. any product innovation) and that larger, project-based grants are more effective at promoting innovation than smaller, non-project-specific grants. There is little evidence that R&D grants have differential effects between smaller (<50 employees) and larger firms.     

Does R&D spending boost tangible investment? An analysis on European firms

This article investigates the relationship between firm’s R&D intensity, expressed as R&D expenditure over sales, and investment intensity in tangible assets. It is commonly acknowledged that R&D requires additional physical investment to be implemented. R&D increases a firm’s productivity and return to tangible investments, thus, providing to the firm incentives to bear high tangible capital costs and to invest more. This represents a crucial issue for a firm’s growth, particularly considering the strong interaction between physical capital accumulation and technological progress. The analysis is based on a large sample of manufacturing firms across seven European countries in the period 2007–2009. Since the sub-sample of firms performing R&D might not be random, there may potentially be an endogeneity issue. The analysis also considers that firms may decide to spend on R&D and investment in physical capital simultaneously. The questions of both endogeneity and simultaneity are dealt with by employing an instrumental variable two-step procedure. We find a positive and significant impact of R&D intensity on firms’ tangible investment intensity. The econometric results highlight the importance of financial factors, particularly with respect to firms’ internal resources. Exposure to international trade has a negative impact on investment, possibly depending on the time-span of the sample used.

Abbreviations: Technological Innovation and R&D; Investment Capital; Industry Studies; Firm Behavior; Empirical Analysis     

Corporate tax policy and heterogeneous firm innovation: Evidence from a developing country

This paper adds to the literature by identifying the causality of corporate tax policy on firm innovation in a developing country. We exploit the China’s 2006 corporate income tax base reform to integrate the tax system between foreign-invested and state/collective-controlled firms as a natural experiment. The difference-in-differences strategy documents a positive effect of corporate tax deduction on firm patenting. The effect is particularly significant if a firm is of larger size or locates in eastern provinces. We also examine possible channels behind the findings, including changes in R&D and capital investment, intangible assets, financial constraints, and new product sales.     

Firm performance and corporate finance in New Zealand

Low productivity growth in New Zealand has been a paradox. We study New Zealand firms’ profitability, in terms of profit margin and return on assets (ROA), from the viewpoints of productivity enablers using firm-level panel data. We find that tangible fixed investment and a research and development (R&D) tax incentive are associated with higher profitability performance. In addition, the firm size is found to be a key determinant of profit margin. By contrast, we do not find any evidence that intangible investment can improve the profitability. The global financial crisis has not changed the leverage effect on ROA in New Zealand, while the impact of R&D became more prominent after the crisis.     

The impact of R&D programme success on the decision to capitalise development expenditures in European firms

The financial reporting treatment of R&D expenditures can have important implications for firms’ strategic investment in R&D. Yet, financial reporting issues have been largely neglected in the R&D management literature. In this study, we first hypothesise that firms’ capitalisation of development expenditures subsequent to the mandatory adoption of IAS 38 (International Accounting Standard 38: Intangible Assets) is positively and significantly impacted by a measure of R&D programme success. Our empirical findings – based on a pan-European sample of firms – reveal strong support for this prediction. Our findings also offer support for our second hypothesis which predicts that capitalisation of development expenditures in conjunction with an evaluation of R&D programme success has a positive and significant impact on growth in shareholder value. Consequently, our work suggests that an important challenge for R&D professionals within firms is to develop improved measures of R&D success and to communicate this information to senior executives.     

Absorptive capacity, efficiency effect and competitors�� spillovers

Standard innovation surveys do not consider incoming spillovers for non-innovative firms. As a consequence, empirical works may overestimate the absorptive capacity effect, particularly among competitors. The Swiss innovation surveys presented here measure the importance of knowledge for both innovating and non-innovating firms. This original feature enables us to show that knowledge from rivals actually deters manufacturing firms from engaging in R&D activities. We therefore provide stronger evidence that the efficiency effect due to intra-industry spillovers is larger than that generally estimated by data from standard surveys. The R&D based absorptive capacity is weaker than expected, and non-innovative firms as well as non-R&D firms heavily rely on their rivals’ knowledge to maintain their technological capacities.     

A matching analysis of why some firms in peripheral regions undertake R&D whereas others do not

Many studies have established the importance of investment in R&D to facilitate innovation and consequently improve firm productivity. Firms decide whether or not to undertake R&D depending on a range of factors such as market orientation, business objectives, competitive advantages and absorptive capacity. This paper studies the factors that influence this decision in peripheral locations; and for firms that do not undertake R&D, we analyse the reasons for not doing so. The research is based on data from a survey of some 250 matched firms operating in Northern Ireland, about half undertaking R&D and half not. Northern Ireland is an interesting case study because it exhibits a low level of investment in R&D despite the public subsidies and policy initiatives that have existed over the last 30 years. For firms that undertake R&D, our results mostly confirm the findings of others while for firms that do not undertake R&D the results point to a capabilities-gap rather than a resource-gap as the fundamental problem. Policy conclusions are drawn as to what might be done to boost both the amount of R&D undertaken and the number of firms engaged in R&D in peripheral regions.     

An Empirical Evaluation of The Effects of R&D Subsidies

R&D subsidies are a common tool of technology policy, but little is known about the effects they have on the behavior of firms. This paper presents evidence on the effects that R&D subsidies have on the R&D effort of recipients, and on the probability that a firm will participate in a program granting R&D subsidies. The empirical model consists of a system of equations: a participation equation; and an R&D effort equation. Endogeneity of public funding is controlled for. Estimates are obtained with a cross-section sample of Spanish firms. The main findings are that: 1) small firms are more likely to obtain a subsidy than large firms, probably reflecting one of the public agency's goals; 2) overall, public funding induces more private effort, but for some firms (30% of participants) full crowding out effects cannot be ruled out, and 3) firm size remains related to effort, whether or not a firm gets public funding.     

Industrial districts and financial constraints to innovation

Informational frictions between borrowers and lenders are particularly acute for innovative firms undertaking high‐risk projects. As a consequence, banks may end up denying credit to them. However, the literature on relationship finance predicts that a closer relationship between credit suppliers and obligors is deemed to alleviate information asymmetries, hence preventing credit rationing from occurring. The question of whether such situations also apply to innovative firms has so far remained relatively unexplored. Using a cross‐section of Italian manufacturing firms, I find that credit constraints appear to be more severe for firms undertaking innovative activities, although such effects are weaker when measures of R&D intensity are included. The empirical analysis also shows that firms located in an industrial district have easier access to external finance. If I move to consider firms engaged in substantial R&D activities located in a district, results suggest that they can benefit from better financial conditions.     

Effectiveness of R&D subsidies during the crisis: firm-level evidence across EU countries

This paper is one of the first attempts in the literature to evaluate the effectiveness of R&D policies in Europe during the great crisis of the late 2000s. Using homogenous firm-level data for the largest EU Member States over the period 2007–2009, we test whether manufacturing firms receiving public subsidies spent more on R&D. The analysis is performed using both non-parametric techniques and parametric estimation methods accounting for the possible endogenous selectivity of R&D subsidies. The hypothesis of full crowding-out is rejected in all countries under exam as firms did not replace their own resources with public grants. However, these firms did not allocate additional funds to research and hence, differently from earlier works, we do not find evidence for additionality effects of R&D subsidies. Our estimates indicate that, albeit not expansive, public subsidies to R&D thwarted the reduction of firm R&D efforts in the aftermath of economic crisis.     

R&D boundaries of the firm: An estimation of the double-hurdle model on commissioned R&D,joint R&D,and licensing in Japan

This paper studies the firm’s decisions on in-house R&D and its procurement from outside through commissioned R&D, joint R&D, and technology acquisitions (i.e., licensing-in). Using the data about 14,000 manufacturing firms in Japan, we estimate a modified double-hurdle model in which the first hurdle determines whether the firm should perform any R&D at all and the second hurdle determines whether (and how much) it should perform each mode of procured R&D. The results generally support the two major theories—the transaction cost theory and the capability theory. The estimated positive effects of firm size, in-house R&D intensity, diversification, and vertical integration support the hypothesis that capability is needed for procured R&D, while the estimated positive effect of the index of appropriability by patents supports the hypothesis that this appropriability reduces transaction costs. In addition, we found that information flow from scientific sources and that from transaction-based sources affect the three modes of procured R&D differently.     

Biotechnology as a Technological Paradigm in the Global Knowledge Structure

The aim of this study is to analyse whether the receipt of public R&D funding determines firm's R&D strategy selection. This issue is crucial, as previous studies have shown that each R&D strategy is associated to a higher, or lower, innovation performance. We consider three R&D strategies – make, buy, make–buy – and three different sources of public funding – regional, state and other (such as EU). The model estimation is performed through a multinomial logit model with random effects with a sample of 457 large firms for the period 1992–2005, taken from the Spanish Survey of Business Strategies. The main finding is that the source of the funding influences whether firms select the make, buy or make–buy strategy. Additionally, because of the panel structure of the sample, we observe that the effect of public funding on the R&D strategy selection lasts longer for state and regional funds than for other funds.     

Firm's objective function and product and process R&D

Firms undertake different kinds of R&D activities. They do product R&D (R&D aimed at improving the quality of existing products, and creating new products). They also do process R&D (R&D aimed at lowering the cost of making existing and new products). Moreover, firms often do both product and process R&D simultaneously. As far as the objective of firms is concerned, this need not be limited to profit-maximization only. Rather, firms may have a broader objective, where they care about profits as well as consumer surplus. This paper studies effects of a firm having a general objective function (that takes into consideration both profits and consumer surplus) on its product and process R&D choices, and corresponding implications.I consider product and process R&D choices of firms in an infinite horizon set-up with discrete time. Firms in my framework can simultaneously do both product and process R&D in every period, face a discrete-choice model of consumer demand with vertical product differentiation, and maximize a discounted, weighted sum of their profits and consumer surplus over the infinite time horizon.I show how process and product R&D differ from each other in my framework, and the role of a firm's objective function in this regard. I compare process and product R&D choices across firms that differ in their objective function, and illustrate effects of providing general R&D subsidies (subsidies given for any R&D, regardless of whether it is product or process R&D) to firms. I also characterize how in my framework, the choice of process R&D in total R&D — R&D composition — by an individual firm varies over time, and how process and product R&D choices, process and product R&D productivity, and the choice of R&D composition vary across firms that differ in size but are otherwise similar.