Appropriability regime for radical and incremental innovations

In the present day markets, new product development and innovation are essential for value creation. Innovation, however, hardly provides benefits if rivals are able to copy it with little or no extra cost. Consequently, being able to build an appropriability regime that provides effective protection against imitation and enables getting returns on investments in innovation is necessary. The problem is that choosing the methods to protect different kinds of innovations is not straightforward. In this paper we study appropriating from radical and incremental innovations. It is widely known that many significant differences exist between the two innovation types, and the appropriability conditions are no exception. Empirical evidence on the topic is provided by analyzing survey data collected among 299 companies. As a result, the effects of environmental dynamism and research and development (R&D) intensity on radical and incremental innovation are illustrated, and knowledge is provided on the role of the appropriability regime in enhancing the potential to profit from radical and incremental innovations.     

Appropriability and the retrieval of knowledge after spillovers

Research summary: Firms create and capture value through innovation. In technology‐driven firms, there has been an explicit emphasis on appropriability through imitation deterrence and cumulative inventions that build on prior firm innovation. We introduce systematic empirical evidence for a third mechanism of appropriability namely, knowledge retrieval, which is defined as the re‐absorption of previously spilled knowledge. We extend previous studies which consider technological complexity and organizational coupling as predictors of appropriability by examining their impact on knowledge retrieval. We find that technological complexity has a curvilinear relationship with retrieval while organizational coupling has a negative relationship. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of absorptive capacity, organizational design and appropriability of innovation. Managerial summary: It is a widely held assumption that knowledge should be protected and held tightly within the firm to ensure value creation and value capture. The implicit recognition is that knowledge spillovers, or knowledge leakage, is detrimental to performance. By examining the patterns of citations among patents of 142 semiconductor firms, we study how organizational structure and technological complexity play a role. We find that moderate technological complexity improves appropriability. If imitation deterrence is paramount, then the optimal structure would be a tightly‐coupled organization. In other instances, loosely‐coupled organizations may be superior because they foster internal cumulative innovations and, if spillovers were to occur, they also maximize knowledge retrieval. Our findings suggest that all is not lost when spillovers occur and that firms can continue to benefit in downstream innovations. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do Individual Employees' Learning Goal Orientation and Civic Virtue Matter? A Micro‐Foundations Perspective on Firm Absorptive Capacity

Research summary : In this study, we build on the micro‐foundations perspective and investigate how individual characteristics contribute to the development of firm absorptive capacity. In particular, we assess how individual learning goal orientation affects firm potential and realized absorptive capacity. Furthermore, we study how individuals' civic virtue acts as a micro‐level social integration mechanism that moderates the effect from firm realized absorptive capacity to potential absorptive capacity. Using the multilevel structural equation modeling technique and data from 871 core‐knowledge employees nested in 139 high‐technology firms, we find support to our major hypotheses. Together, this study finds support for the micro‐foundations' perspective and generates novel insights on how individual‐level factors could be linked with firm‐level heterogeneity in absorptive capacity. Managerial summary : We study how employees' characteristics contribute to a firm's absorptive capacity, that is, the ability of a firm to identify, assimilate, and exploit knowledge from the environment. Because firms have increasingly tapped into external resources to foster innovation over the past two decades, absorptive capacity is crucial to firm learning and success. Using data from 871 core‐knowledge employees in 139 high‐technology firms, we find that individual employees' learning goal orientation, the tendency to seek improvements in employees' competence and to understand or master new things advances the development of a firm's potential and realized absorptive capacity. More important, individual employees' civic virtue, the discretionary involvement in company issues, serves as a social integration mechanism that reduces the gap between firm potential and realized absorptive capacity. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Orchestrating resources for FMA in coopetitive NPD

The rapid introduction of new products in high‐tech industries is a key competence for firms wanting to benefit from the first‐mover advantage (FMA). Prior studies call for forging links between FMA and the resource‐based view, as the resources at the disposal of a firm tend to influence the likelihood and timing of market entry. Analysing the way firms orchestrate internal and external resources enables a better understanding of this link. More precisely, synchronising the combination of internal and external resources is important in determining the development time of new products. This issue becomes vital when the NPD process regroups competitors due to the short age of the acquired knowledge. An in‐depth case study of the product development strategies of four competitors that collaborated to develop Ethernet solutions identifies three different product introduction strategies based on different resource orchestrations and timing: pioneer, wise and slow. The firms that structured their resources early to make them available for bundling during coopetition were able to introduce products faster than firms that structured their resources during coopetition. Furthermore, our results show that only prepared firms are able to reap benefits from knowledge gained through coopetitive NPD.     

Repeating a familiar pattern in a new way: The effect of exploitation and exploration on knowledge leverage behaviors in technology acquisitions

Research Summary: We identify two types of knowledge leverage behaviors undertaken by acquiring firms: integrated and independent knowledge leverage. We address how the prior exploitation or exploration orientation of acquirers influence these two modes of knowledge leverage behaviors. The degree of exploitation of acquirers promotes integrating their existing knowledge with acquired knowledge in innovative actions. In contrast, the degree of exploration of acquirers increases the likelihood that new innovations will use acquired knowledge without integrating it with their prior knowledge. In addition, the firm's prior acquisition rate moderates the relationship between the acquiring firms’ previous exploitation or exploration orientation and their knowledge leverage mode. The findings of this article suggest that pre‐acquisition innovation capabilities are distinct from but influence the post‐acquisition innovation actions. Managerial Summary: Firms often undertake acquisitions to gain access to new knowledge, but they can differ dramatically in how they leverage acquired knowledge. We show that the firm's prior innovation patterns drive this choice. Firms that have previously focused on incremental innovations in their internal innovation efforts tend to integrate acquired knowledge with their own prior knowledge. In contrast, firms that have previously pursued bold innovations tend to leverage acquired knowledge alone in new innovations. Thus, we show that firms use acquisitions as a means to extend their internal innovation patterns—firms that have focused on incremental innovations extend that with acquisitions by linking new innovations to their prior knowledge while firms that have pursued bold initiatives use acquired knowledge to move in new technology directions.     

Organizing coopetition for innovation: The case of wireless telecommunication sector in Europe

Prior research highlighted the prevalence of coopetition as a strategy for innovation in high-tech industries for several reasons but the link between forms of coopetition and innovation is still understudied. In order to fill this gap in the literature, this study attempts to answer the following question: which form of coopetition favors which type of innovation? The results of an embedded case study approach of five Celtic-Plus projects (European Eureka Program) in the wireless telecommunication sector show that two forms of coopetition exist: multiple and dyadic. While multiple coopetition is successfully pursued for radical innovation, dyadic coopetition is more suitable for incremental innovation. Different innovation objectives lead to different levels of value creation/appropriation tensions between coopetitors. In order for competitors to pursue radical or incremental innovation successfully, different levels of social capital related to different choices of partners are needed. The role of social capital levels as a moderating factor between value creation/appropriation tensions and innovation type is discussed in detail. The study proposes a conceptual model that links coopetition strategy motives to the types of coopetition and their results in terms of radical or incremental innovation. Finally, a framework that helps firms to balance between multiple/dyadic–vertical/horizontal collaboration according to the levels of value creation/appropriation tensions and social capital is proposed.     

The Role of Marketing Resources in Radical Innovation Activity: Antecedents and Payoffs

While radical product innovations represent significant engines of firm growth, questions remain over whether marketing helps or hurts (1) a firm's radical product innovation activity and (2) its rewards from radical product innovation activity. By attaching an attention‐based view of the firm to a market‐based assets view of marketing, this paper examines the role of three marketing resources—market knowledge, reputation, and relational resources—on radical innovation activity. Our conceptual framework posits differentiated effects among marketing resources as antecedents of radical innovation activity and as moderators of its impact on firms' financial performance. Using a survey of a broad set of high‐tech business‐to‐business (B2B) firms to test hypotheses, it is found that firms with strong relational resources enjoy a higher propensity for, and stronger financial rewards from, radical innovation activity. Reputational resources come with a trade‐off as they hurt the incidence of radical innovation but enhance its financial rewards. However, market knowledge resources appear to hurt both radical innovation activity and its financial rewards. Our results point to the multifaceted role of marketing in radical innovation activity, which is unlikely to come with a single benefit or liability as prior work often posits. Rather, our research heightens the alertness of managers to assess their firms' marketing strength as a bundle of stocks of several marketing resources. Managers must understand the distinct benefits and drawbacks of each resource in developing and launching radical innovations. Our research underscores the differentiated value of marketing in radical innovation activity in B2B high‐tech contrary to the entrenched idea of a limited or even stifling role of marketing in this context.     

Balancing the Two Knowledge Dimensions in Innovation Efforts: An Empirical Examination among Pharmaceutical Firms

This study investigates the relationships between the two knowledge dimensions (knowledge breadth and knowledge depth) and two types of innovations (radical innovation and incremental innovation). While existing literature identifies knowledge in general as an important driver of innovation, the exact relationships between knowledge breadth/depth and incremental/radical innovations are not clear. Drawing from the knowledge‐based view, this study advances the understanding of the relationships between knowledge dimensions and types of innovations by hypothesizing a nonlinear relationship between knowledge breadth and radical innovation as well as a nonlinear relationship between knowledge depth and incremental innovation. Furthermore, the moderating effects of the interaction between knowledge breadth and knowledge depth on the above‐mentioned relationships are also examined. Due to the different natures of the two types of innovations, it is hypothesized that knowledge depth positively moderates the relationship between knowledge breadth and radical innovation while knowledge breadth negatively moderates the relationship between knowledge depth and incremental innovation. To empirically test the hypotheses, secondary data from multiple sources were collected on 64 pharmaceutical firms over 15 years. Due to the panel data structure and observed dispersion issues in the dependent variables, negative binomial random effects models were formulated to test the hypotheses. The statistical results largely support the proposed hypotheses. The results demonstrate that while knowledge breadth positively contributes to the development of radical innovations and knowledge depth positively contributes to the development of incremental innovations, both relationships are subject to diminishing returns. Furthermore, while the finding did support the negative moderating effect of the knowledge breadth on incremental innovation, the positive moderating effect of knowledge depth on radical innovation is not supported. While the effect is not explicitly hypothesized, knowledge breadth seems to have a direct impact on incremental innovation as well.     

Knowledge diversity and coordination: The effect of intrafirm inventor task networks on absorption speed

Research Summary: We combine the absorptive capacity and social network theory approaches to predict how intrafirm “whole” network characteristics affect the firm's speed of absorption of external knowledge to produce inventions. We start from the widely accepted view that distant, externally‐developed knowledge is difficult to absorb into the focal firm's own knowledge production. We suggest that high levels of intrafirm inventor task network diversity and task network density are essential for a diversity of knowledge inputs and coordinated actions regarding knowledge transfer, which in turn, reduces problems related to the absorption of knowledge—especially in the case of knowledge that is distant from the focal firm. The results of an event history study of 113 pharmaceutical firms that engaged in technology in‐licensing from 1986 to 2003 provide general support for our hypotheses. Managerial Summary: Firms keen to keep up with an uncertain and ever‐changing industry environment, can benefit from the speedy introduction of inventions. We examine how firms absorb licensed‐in technologies to nurture the rapid development of own related inventions. We show that a firm's absorption speed depends on the characteristics of the internal collaboration networks among the firm's inventor employees. More specifically, technologically diverse and well‐connected inventor networks improve the firm's ability to absorb external technologies quickly. This applies especially to externally acquired technologies that are unfamiliar to the firm. Depending on the distance of the acquired technology from the focal firm combined with speed‐inducing inventor network characteristics, our estimates suggest that firms can reduce the time needed for absorption by several months.     

The Paradox of Openness: How Product and Patenting Experience Affect R&D Sourcing in China?

External R&D sourcing may help firms compete in an environment characterized by rapid technological changes. Yet, prior studies have produced conflicting findings on how a firm's technological experience affects the extent to which the firm engages in external R&D sourcing. Although many highlight that firms with extensive technological experience are equipped with more technological knowledge, collaborative skills, and absorptive capacity, encouraging greater levels of external R&D, others suggest the opposite due to potential exchange hazards and partnership conflicts. Adopting an external partner's perspective, the current study reconsiders this “paradox of openness” by analyzing how a focal firm's product experience and patenting experience affect an external partner's tendency to provide external R&D services to the focal firm. Specifically, this study explore how a focal firm's knowledge protectiveness and tacitness embedded in its product and patenting experience influences the external partners' motivation for knowledge transfer. This study predicts that a firm's product experience increases the focal firm's external R&D sourcing because it provides high levels of knowledge tacitness and external openness and can encourage external partners to share and exchange knowledge with the focal firm. In contrast, a firm's patenting experience decreases the focal firm's external R&D sourcing because it denotes knowledge explicitness and protectiveness and may discourage external partners to share and exchange knowledge with the focal firm. This study further predicts that patenting experience has a negative moderating effect on the relationship between product experience and external R&D sourcing. Using a data set of 575 high‐tech firms in China, this study finds support for our predictions. Our findings contribute to the growing literature on the knowledge‐based view and technology entrepreneurship in emerging markets.     

Creating shareholder value via collaborative innovation: the role of industry and resource alignment in knowledge exploration

Collaborative innovation provides firms with a privileged opportunity to perform exploration in an externally oriented mode. The central challenges in exploration via collaborative innovation lie in the selection of relevant partners and in gaining access to potentially valuable external knowledge that the focal firm lacks. This article focuses on two aspects of inter-organizational alignment that affect knowledge differences and may thus help explaining the shareholder value implications arising from collaborative innovation: industry and resource alignment. Relying on data covering 97 bilateral collaborative innovations (194 innovation partners) in R&D intensive high-technology industries, we used event study methodology and follow-up hierarchical regression analyses to test our conceptual framework. With regard to industry alignment, results suggest that investors value greater industry distance between collaborating partners, especially when the partner firm provides high-level R&D resources. Furthermore, the results show a positive effect of supplementary resource alignment (i.e., a focal firm's R&D resources are supplemented by a partner firm's R&D resources) and, notably, a negative effect of complementary resource alignment (i.e., a focal firm's R&D resources are complemented by a partner firm's marketing resources) on investors' valuation of the collaboration's expected future performance. They, thus, contribute to research on shareholder value implications of collaborative innovation. From a managerial perspective, the study provides a better understanding of partner selection and shows how managers should position a collaboration to signal the shareholder value-creating potential to investors.     

Incapability of Technological Capability: A Case Study on Product Innovation in the Japanese Facsimile Machine Industry

Technological leadership in an industry certainly seems like a ticket to ongoing success. However, overemphasis on existing technological capabilities may produce a form of myopia in product development. In other words, by focusing primarily on developing and improving their core technologies, organizations miss opportunities to exploit new technologies and thus create breakthrough products. Ken Kusunoki proposes that problem-solving approaches in a technologically leading firm paradoxically may impede radical product innovation. Suggesting that such firms are inherently oriented toward incremental innovation, he presents a conceptual framework of the dynamic interaction between technological and product development problem-solving in the context of product innovation. He then illustrates this conceptual framework by examining a case of radical innovation in the Japanese facsimile industry. For a technological leader, product innovation typically is driven by technology development. In other words, such a firm quite reasonably relies on the technological advantage it holds over competitors as the basis for its product developments. By refining and enhancing its industry-leading technological capabilities, the firm can successfully introduce incremental innovations in its products. Because of this strong emphasis on exploiting existing technological capabilities, however, the technological leader may fail to capitalize on new technologies that can produce radical innovations. In the race to develop high-speed, digital facsimile equipment during the early 1970s, for example, Matsushita held a decided technological advantage over competitors such as Ricoh. Notwithstanding Matsushita's technological edge, however, Ricoh brought this radical innovation to market two years before Matsushita introduced its first digital machine, causing a serious decline in Matsushita's market share. Ricoh's approach to technological and product problem-solving—an autonomous team structure, with a strong project manager and frequent transfers of engineers among interdependent units—contrasts dramatically with Matsushita's functional structure and strong emphasis on technological problem-solving. Interestingly, Matsushita regained its technological advantage by 1976, thanks to a rapid series of incremental innovations in its product technologies.     

Market Vision and the Front End of NPD for Radical Innovation: The Impact of Moderating Effects

“Market vision” is a mental model that helps focus the organization on a new market application for an advanced technology during the fuzzy front end of the new product development process. Previous research demonstrates that firms involved in the development of radically new, high‐tech products need to develop a market visioning competence (MVC) in order to develop an effective market vision (MV), and these capabilities, in turn, have been found to have a positive effect on key aspects of the early performance (EP) of these firms—specifically, the ability to attract capital and early success with customers. Based on a major empirical study of the nanotechnology sector, the research described in this paper takes an important step forward by focusing on factors in both the external and internal environment of the firm, and their moderating impact on the paths that link MVC, MV, and EP. External structural factors relevant to the firm's competitive environment as well as internal factors, including firm resources, size, incumbency, and technology, are shown to have significant moderating effects both on the way in which MV unfolds and on its capacity for affecting positive returns for the firm when undertaking radical innovation. Five of seven hypotheses were supported by the research. Both level of incumbency (the extent to which the firm has taken part in previous generations of a given technology) and resource availability are shown to positively impact the link between MVC and MV. Also, appropriability (i.e., protection for innovations) and reputation of the firm were found to positively impact the path to EP. Finally, a low level of industry concentration—that is, a large number of small firms—were found to have a positive effect on the path to EP. In sum, the findings support the structure of the model and the majority of the hypothesized moderating relationships, suggesting important implications for management.     

Learning to collaborate through collaboration: How allying with expert firms influences collaborative innovation within novice firms

Research summary : Strategic alliances have been recognized as a means for firms to learn their partners' proprietary knowledge; such alliances are also valuable opportunities for partner firms to learn tacit organizational routines from their counterparts. We consider how relatively novice technology firms can learn intraorganizational collaborative routines from more experienced alliance partners and then deploy them independently for their own innovative pursuits. We examine the alliance relationships between Eli Lilly & Co. (Lilly), a recognized expert in collaborative innovation, and 55 small biotech partner firms. Using three levels of analysis (firm, patent, and inventor dyad), we find that greater social interaction between the partner firm and Lilly subsequently increases internal collaboration among the partner firm's inventors. Managerial summary : Can collaborating externally advance internal collaboration? Yes. Our research found that collaboration among scientists at small, early‐stage biotechnology firms significantly increased after these firms formed highly interactive R&D alliances with a large pharmaceutical company known for its expertise in such collaboration. It is well known that alliances help new firms learn specific new technologies and commercialize innovations. Our study broadens the scope of potential benefits of alliances. New firms can also learn collaboration techniques, deploying them internally to enhance their own abilities in collaborative innovation. Managers should take this additional benefit into consideration in developing their alliance strategies. Pursuing alliance partners with expertise in collaboration and keeping a high level of mutual interactions with partner firm personnel should be important considerations to extract this value. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Appropriability,preemption, and firm performance

The impact of strategies used to appropriate innovation rents on firm performance is analyzed using a sample of U.S. public manufacturing firms. Stronger appropriability at the firm level, achieved through patent protection or the ownership of specialized complementary assets, leads to superior economic performance, as measured by the stock market valuation of a firm's R& D assets. Among commonly used ‘nonconventional’ patent strategies, preemptive patenting allows incumbents to strengthen their market power. Consistent with theory, such effect is higher for incumbents with higher ex ante market power and facing a higher threat of entry, and lower when R& D competition is characterized by the discovery of drastic innovations. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Knowledge management and innovation in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets: The role of openness and absorptive capacity

Knowledge, as resource, and technological innovation, as a dynamic capability, are key sources for firm's sustained competitive advantage and survival in knowledge-based and high-tech industries. Under this rationale has emerged a research stream where knowledge management, organizational learning, or intellectual capital, help to understand and constitute the key pieces of one of the most complex business phenomena; the ‘firm's technological advantage’. This being so, it is also true that in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets, competitive success comes directly from continuous technological innovations, where a single organization cannot successfully innovate in isolation; therefore, firms should rely on external relationships and networks in order to complement its knowledge domains, and then, develop better and faster innovations. In this sense, I would like to highlight the cross-fertilizing role of three constructs that are nurtured by different research traditions: ‘collaborative/open innovation’, from Strategy and Innovation Management research; ‘absorptive capacity’, from ‘A Knowledge-Based View’; and ‘market orientation’, from Marketing research.     

Absorbing knowledge from supply-chain,industry and science: The distinct moderating role of formal liaison devices on new product development and novelty

Building on open innovation literature and recent developments within absorptive capacity research, this paper addresses if the use of formal liaison devices by firms differently influences the effects of external knowledge acquisition from suppliers, customers, competitors and universities on new product development and novelty of new products. The results of a survey of 248 Spanish industrial high-tech firms show that whereas the use of these mechanisms positively moderates the relationship between knowledge acquisition from suppliers and competitors and new product development, they negatively moderate the effect of knowledge acquisition from universities and have no effect on knowledge acquired from customers. On the other hand, the use of these devices negatively moderates the relationship between knowledge acquisition from suppliers and novelty of new products, and has no effect on the knowledge acquired from customers, competitors and universities. Moreover, knowledge acquisition from universities has a direct negative effect on novelty. Contribution of these findings to open innovation and absorptive capacity research is discussed.     

Cannibalize and combine? The impact of ambidextrous innovation on organizational outcomes under market competition

How can a firm achieve ambidexterity? The present study proposes that the answer to this question lies in the distinction between ambidextrous culture and ambidextrous innovation. Drawing upon organizational learning theory and the source-position-performance framework, we propose that ambidexterity requires the adoption of two important organizational cultures, willingness to cannibalize (WTCA) and willingness to combine existing knowledge (WTCO), which allow firms to attain superior performance through the implementation of both radical and incremental (i.e., ambidextrous) innovations. Our major contribution lies in addressing the important debate in the literature on whether exploration and exploitation are complements or substitutes. Furthermore, competition intensity is a key condition that determines the degree to which the two types of organizational cultures and the two types of innovations are necessary for superior firm performance. The study uses data from multiple respondents from 199 Chinese firms. Our findings thus suggest that WTCA and WTCO, which are traditionally treated as opposites, are complements in generating radical innovations.     

Complements or Substitutes? Internal Technological Strength,Competitor Alliance Participation,and Innovation Development

While a firm can choose to develop an innovation internally or externally, the internal knowledge development and external knowledge acquisition tend to interact with each other in the innovation process. The present study examines whether internal technological strength and external competitor alliance participation serve as complements or substitutes in innovation development. Built on the knowledge‐based view, this study offers a contingency perspective on the nature of knowledge integration between internal technological strength and external alliance relationships, and how they jointly influence radical and incremental innovation differently. Adopting a random effect negative binomial model specification, a panel data set of 64 pharmaceutical firms over a 15‐year period were used to test the hypothesized effects. The findings indicate that internal technological knowledge strength has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with radical and incremental innovation. More importantly, the findings also demonstrate that the combined effect of internal and external sources of innovation can have differential effects on radical and incremental innovation development. Specifically, competitor alliance participation strengthens the effect of internal technological strength on incremental product innovation while it weakens the above effect on radical product innovation. This suggests that internal and external sources of innovation may complement each other for incremental innovation while they may represent trade‐offs for radical innovation development. The above findings provide empirical evidence for the complexity of pursuing organizational ambidexterity in innovation generation and highlight the importance of balancing the internal and external knowledge sources in pursuing innovation.     

Building absorptive capacity through firm openness in the context of a less-open country

We explore the roles that potential and realized absorptive capacity play in enhancing firm performance, and examine external knowledge search strategies as antecedents of absorptive capacity. In this way, we endeavor to open the black box that sits between external knowledge search and performance, and suggest that the establishment of deep and broad relationships with external sources has differing impacts on potential and realized absorptive capacity for the firm. We argue that distinguishing clearly between potential and realized absorptive capacity may provide new insights into understanding why some companies are more successful than others at benefiting from external knowledge. A sample of 171 suppliers operating in the Iranian automotive industry is used to test the proposed theoretical model, through a two-stage least squares approach. Surprisingly, our results indicate that only the firm's capability to acquire and assimilate new ideas from the external environment (potential absorptive capacity) is related to performance for these firms operating in Iran, which been isolated from global markets due to international sanctions. Our findings emphasize the notion that potential and realized absorptive capacity represent distinct capabilities, with different antecedents and different impacts on firm performance.