When are assets complementary? star scientists,strategic alliances,and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry

To answer the question of when are assets complementary, we investigate specific resource combinations along the value chain, focusing on two mechanisms that are central to combining resources for innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: recruitment and retention of star scientists, and 2) engagement in strategic alliances. We propose that resource combinations that focus on the same parts of the value chain are substitutes due to knowledge redundancies. Conversely, we hypothesize that resource combinations that link different parts of the value chain are complements due to integration of nonredundant knowledge. To test these hypotheses, we empirically track the innovative performance of 108 global pharmaceutical firms over three decades (1974–2003). Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When do strategic alliances inhibit innovation by firms? Evidence from patent pools in the global optical disc industry

Research and development (R&D) consortia are specialized strategic alliances that shape the direction and scope of firm innovation activities. Little research exists on the performance consequences of participating in R&D consortia. We study the effect of patent pools, a unique form of R&D consortia, on firm performance in innovation. While prior research on alliances generally implies that patent pools enhance firm innovation, our study finds the opposite. Analyzing data on systemic innovation in the global optical disc industry, we find that patent pool formation substantially and significantly decreases both the quantity and quality of patents subsequently generated by licensors and licensees relative to the patenting activity of nonparticipants. Our empirical findings suggest that patent pools actually inhibit, rather than enhance, systemic innovation by participating firms. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

突破性创新、互补性资产与企业间合作的整合研究

主导企业在技术变革中经历了技术劣势后，这种劣势在何种程度上转化为商业劣势取决于突破性创新的破坏幅度。如果新技术只破坏了主导企业的技术能力而没有破坏互补性资产的价值．那么主导企业的绩效将会改进：如果新技术同时破坏了主导企业的技术能力和互补性资产的价值．那么主导企业的绩效将会下滑。正是由于大量突破性创新属于前者并且主导企业控制了大部分的互补性资产．开发了突破性创新的新进入企业只能与主导企业建立合作关系．共同分享创新利润。     

Who leaves,where to,and why worry? employee mobility,entrepreneurship and effects on source firm performance

We theorize that the value provided by the firm's complementary assets has important implications for the exit decisions of employees and their subsequent effects on the firm's performance. Using linked employee‐employer data from the U.S. Census Bureau on legal services, we find that employees with higher earnings are less likely to leave relative to employees with lower earnings, but if they do, are more likely to create a new venture than join another firm. Employee entrepreneurship has a larger adverse impact on source firm performance than moves to established firms, even controlling for observable employee quality. Our findings suggest that in knowledge intensive settings, managers should focus on tailoring compensation packages to help minimize the adverse impact of employee entrepreneurship, particularly among high performing individuals. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures?

New ventures face a trade‐off when considering corporate venture capital (CVC) funding. Corporate investors can provide complementary assets that enhance the commercialization of new venture technologies. However, tight links with a particular corporate investor has drawbacks and may constrain new ventures from accessing complementary assets from diverse sources in an open market. Taking this trade‐off into account, we explore conditions under which CVC funding is beneficial to new ventures. Using a sample of computer, semiconductor, and wireless ventures, we find that CVC funding is particularly beneficial for new ventures when they require specialized complementary assets or operate in uncertain environments. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Exploration or exploitation? Small firms' alliance strategies with large firms

How do small firms manage their alliance strategies with large firms? This study compares the relative impacts of exploration and exploitation alliances with large firms on small firms' valuation. Integrating the literatures on the exploration/exploitation paradigm and alliance governance, we argue that exploitation alliances with large firms will on average generate higher values for small firms than exploration alliances with large firms due to a heightened risk of appropriation in exploration alliances. However, if small firms can manage their alliances with large firms via proper alliance governance, they will increase their valuations from exploration alliances with large firms. Analyses of the U.S. biopharmaceutical industry from 1984 to 2006 largely support our hypotheses. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Does technological modularity substitute for control? A study of alliance performance in software outsourcing

Although control is presumed to be necessary to curb opportunism, its implementation in alliances can be costly and challenging. Paradoxically, some contemporary firms have counterintuitively developed successful alliances without extensive formal control. A widespread but untested assertion that might help reconcile this contradiction is that technological modularity reduces the need for alliance control. The objective of this study is to develop and test this assertion. Using data from 120 software outsourcing alliances, we show that, process control, outcome control, and modularity independently enhance alliance performance. However modularity and control are imperfect substitutes: modularity lowers the influence of process control but not of outcome control on alliance performance. Our theoretical development and empirical testing of the interactions of alliance control with modularity has significant implications for strategy theory and practice, which are also discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A model of value assessment in collaborative R&D programs

This study examines the tasks, processes, and frameworks central to performance assessment in collaborative research organizations. The domain of the study is the partnered learning approach to research and development (R&D) management. The empirical results highlight relationships between context (center scale) and performance (value perceived by industry sponsors) in such R&D collaborations. Insights from this research are broadly applicable to the maintenance of alliances among firms involved in collaborative R&D and are generalizable to that context. Data gathered from a national population of 58 National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored centers over a 3-year period reveal significant evolutionary patterns in the development of collaborative relationships. Successful industry university consortia leverage four core process relationships: (1) the creation of research capacity yielding advances in process and product knowledge; (2) technology transfer behaviors within the participants' organizations; (3) participant satisfaction with the outcomes; and (4) the continuity of industry sponsor support, i.e., commitment to the collaboration.