The propensity to patent

This paper analyzes the relationship between 1974 R&D expenditures and invention patenting by 4,274 narrowly-defined lines of business in 443 U.S. industrial corporations. The probability of non-zero patenting rose systematically with company-financed R&D outlays, as did the number of patents received. Within industries, patents tended most frequently to rise in proportion to R&D; among the exceptions, the tendency was toward diminishing returns. Variables measuring overseas sales, federal R&D support, diversification, scope of invention use, and invention type had only modest explanatory power. There was no significant evidence of disproportionate patent accumulation in the more highly concentrated industries.     

Compensation strategy: does business strategy influence compensation in high‐technology firms?

Drawing on the strategic employee group concept, this study empirically examines whether a firm's innovation strategy influences compensation systems for strategic employee groups in the high‐technology industry. We focus on compensation packages for R&D employees who play a critical role in successful implementations of innovation strategy. Using compensation data for middle‐level managers and professional employees from 237 firms in the high‐technology industry, we found that a firm's strategic intention to pursue innovation has a significant influence on the relative pay level, compensation time horizon, and stock option vesting period lengths of this strategic employee group. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The organizational influence of the Chief Technology Officer

The proposition that the Chief Technology Officer's (CTO) primary bases for power and influence are in technical expertise and position power is critically analyzed from the perspective of upper echelons research. This fresh perspective suggests that CTOs who aspire to have significant influence in their organizations should also build their power bases on broad knowledge of the firm and its environment, a network of personal relationships inside and outside the firm, ownership position in the firm, and intuitive understanding of the business. The CEO's leadership style can also enhance or curtail the influence of the CTO. Research and managerial implications are drawn.     

The Immediate Impact of New Product Introductions on Stock Price: The Role of Firm Resources and Size*

New product development and introduction is an ongoing important issue to facilitate a firm's success. To demonstrate the financial impact of new product introductions and the supporting role of firm resources and organizational structure, the authors collected 409 new product announcements from 1990 to 1998 and used event methodology and regression models in this research. Building on resources and capabilities perspectives, the present study argues that firm resources with emphases on research and development (R&D) are imperative to materialize new product concepts. However, the research revealed that R&D resources have dual effects on immediate shareholder value (i.e., abnormal stock returns). On one hand, when the firm commits only lower to moderate levels of R&D, investors would have perceived such R&D as expenditures reducing the firm's profit margin and thereby negatively evaluate R&D resources. Nevertheless, when the firm has dedicated its resources to R&D significant enough to signal investors its potential benefits can outweigh its costs, it generates positive shareholder value. Further, the study found that investors honor positive marketing resources that are critical to promote and launch new products to customers. Apart from resources perspectives, according to the organizational structure literature, firm size reflects the layers of bureaucracy within an organization. The research found a negative effect on shareholder value, indicating that investors evaluate more optimistically smaller firms that are likely to be more innovative and entrepreneurial resulted in more breakthrough products. In conclusion, this study provides value to practitioners in understanding the impact of firm size and, more importantly, to what extent they dedicate their resources in R&D and marketing to generate different performance outcomes.     

Compensation transparency and managerial opportunism: a study of supplemental retirement plans

Existing research on managerial compensation is based primarily on optimal contracting and managerial hegemony theories. Under the optimal contracting theory, observed compensation contracts are optimally determined, aligning the interests of managers and shareholders. Under the managerial hegemony theory, observed compensation contracts deviate from the optimum because top managers with power over boards are able to influence their own pay. I argue that the impact of managerial power over boards on managerial pay, and hence the deviation of compensation contracts from the optimum, is contingent on the transparency of managerial compensation. Within this framework, I investigate the impact of supplemental executive retirement plans (SERPs)— historically the least transparent compensation component— on opportunistic decision making. An empirical analysis based on a time series sample of CEOs of S&P/TSX60 firms provides support of the compensation transparency theory. I find that SERP benefits are primarily driven by variables proxying for CEO power over the board, whereas more transparent compensation components are primarily driven by economic factors. The results also suggest that CEOs whose SERPs are contingent on firm performance appear to reduce firm R&D expenditures as they approach retirement. Both findings provide important contributions to existing research on the impact of managerial compensation on opportunistic decisions. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Doing R&D and/or Importing Technologies: The Critical Importance of Firm Size in Taiwan’s Manufacturing Industries

We analyze the relationship between firm size and innovation inputs in Taiwan. Two inputs are considered: R&D and technology imports. Building on an existing theoretical framework, we test this relationship by estimating bivariate Tobit models in twenty 2-digit industries, using a panel of 27,754 firms observed from 1992 to 1995. We find that, in all industries, R&D intensity and/or technology imports intensity depend strongly on firm size, following an “inverted-U” pattern. Moreover, we find that most industries are only “mildly Schumpeterian”. Finally, our results provide some empirical evidence for complementarity between R&D and technology imports in the innovation process.     

A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON INDUSTRY R&D AND MARKET STRUCTURE*

This paper aims to shed some new insights on the long‐debated and both extensively and intensively explored relationship between market concentration and industry R&D intensity. In order to do so, this study develops, from a classic Dorfman‐Steiner [1954] model of firm R&D, a model of industry R&D, where consumer preference over quality and price, R&D technology, and the joint distribution of firm‐specific technological competence and market share jointly determine the level of industry R&D intensity. The joint distribution term, which reflects both the underlying distribution of firms‐specific technological competence and the strength of its link with market share, suggests that the concentration‐R&D relationship differs depending on the strength of the link or simply the appropriability of R&D in terms of market share: A positive relationship is predicted for low‐appropriability industries, where market concentration supplements low R&D appropriability, while a negative or an inverted U‐shaped relationship for high‐appropriability industries. An empirical analysis of data, disaggregated at the five‐digit SIC level, on R&D and market concentration of Korean manufacturing industries provides supportive evidence for the predictions.     

Are institutional investors myopic? A time-series study of four technology-driven industries

This paper examines the popular myth that managers in high-technology industries are altering their critical R&D investments in response to the short-term profit pressures of large institutional stockholders. The study entails an empirical examination of the relationship between R&D spending and institutional ownership over a 10-year period for 129 firms based in four research-intensive industries. Contrary to the view that institutional investors are having a damaging affect on R&D spending, after controlling for intervening effects the results suggest that higher levels of institutional ownership may be associated with greater R&D expenditures. A number of possible explanations for this finding are developed.     

The influence of market structure on technological performance in the food-manufacturing industries

This paper tests the effect of firm and market structure variables on the rate of R&D investment by food processing firms. While the estimated relationship is consistent with the hypotheses of Schumpeter and Galbraith at small firm sizes and small-to-moderale concentration levels, above these critical values expected firm R&D increases at a decreasing rate with firm size and decreases with market concentration. The second part of this paper examines the origins of process patents closely related to six food industries. On average U.S. firms outside the industry, foreign firms, and individuals were each assigned more food-industry patents than were U.S. food processing firm. These findings place the public policy interpretation of observed relationships between market power and firm technological performance into a broader perspective. Even if a reduction in market concentrationn reduced R&D originating within a food industry, this decrease might bede minimus relative to technological changes, originating outside the industry.     

Exploring the Motivational and Behavioral Foundations of External Technology Experts’ Knowledge Sharing in Collaborative R&D Projects: The Contingency Role of Project Formalization

High‐tech manufacturers increasingly rely on the knowledge contributions of external technology experts (ETEs), who contribute to collaborative R&D projects on behalf of suppliers. Many scholars have considered knowledge sharing in R&D collaborations from a firm‐level or project‐level perspective and focused on formalization as a potential remedy. While individual supplier employees at the operative level make the decision to share critical knowledge, the individual‐level perspective in literature on knowledge sharing in collaborative R&D projects is virtually nonexistent. Because knowledge sharing in collaborative R&D is a largely discretionary act on behalf of the supplier employee, personal motivations rather than inter‐firm relationship elements (e.g., network position or dependency) become the primary determinant of one’s sharing behavior. Abstracting from or ignoring these motivations of supplier employees in studies on collaborative R&D may obscure important insights for R&D managers. This study is an important first step in providing the empirical evidence needed to uncover the motivational and behavioral foundations for ETEs’ knowledge sharing in a collaborative R&D setting. Building on theories of gift and social exchange, this article identifies customer stewardship and distributive fairness as two important personal motivations of ETEs to share knowledge. Project formalization is considered as a key contingency condition. Analyzing survey responses of 186 ETEs, a multilevel regression‐based moderated‐mediation analysis of direct and indirect effects shows that customer stewardship predicts an ETE’s knowledge sharing behavior under (very) low levels of project formalization, and distributive fairness predicts knowledge sharing behavior under medium to high levels of formalization. Together, the results provide R&D project managers who aim to leverage external knowledge contributions with valuable insights that have been obscured in past firm‐level collaborative R&D studies.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Modeling the firm's response to research & development tax credit policies

In this article, we develop a microeconomic model of normative firm behavior under the incentive of a research and development (R&D) tax credit. The model is based on the well-known concept of a two-factor learning model in which R&D expenditures and manufacturing capacity expansion are the principle determinants of cost reduction in a new technology product. We distinguish between the behavior of start-up firms and ongoing firms and study the potential impacts of progressively larger R&D tax credits. We find highly significant differences in the potential impact of the credit on start-up firms versus ongoing firms. We also find that the credit can significantly impact optimal product pricing of the technology when introduced into the marketplace. We examine the implications of this latter fact on the overall social cost of the R&D tax credit.     

中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究

本文利用随机前沿生产函数测算了中国高技术产业的研发效率，并考察了企业规模、市场结构和所有权结构等因素对研发效率的影响。主要研究结论是：中国高技术产业的研发效率整体偏低，但呈现稳步上升状态，行业间效率差异有逐步缩小趋势。企业规模和市场竞争程度与研发效率之间存在着显著的正相关关系．外商投资企业和国有企业比重对研发效率也有正向影响，但外商投资企业对研发效率的贡献程度更高。     

Creating incentives for innovation? The relationship between pay dispersion in R&D groups and firm innovation performance

Innovation is a critical organizational outcome for its potential to generate competitive advantage. While the contribution of knowledge workers to the generation of innovation is widely recognized, little is known about how organizational incentive mechanisms stimulate or inhibit these workers' behaviors that promote innovation. This study examines the relationship between pay dispersion in R&D groups and firm innovation using employee‐level compensation data in US high‐technology firms. The results show that (1) pay dispersion in R&D groups is negatively related to firm innovation and (2) this negative relationship is alleviated in firms with greater financial slack. This study contributes to the innovation literature by illuminating the implications of organizational incentive systems for successful innovation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effect of compensation program and structure on sbu competitive strategy: A study of technology-intensive firms

In this paper we examine the impact various compensation programs have upon business-level strategy for technology-intensive firms. Similarly, we examine the effect of centralization of R&D and non-R&D decision-making, formality of procedures, and SBU size on competitive strategy. Analysis of data from 79 SBUs suggest that there is a resource trade-off between marketing-oriented strategies and R&D-oriented strategies, and that managers who operate under certain types of compensation programs will tend to favor R&D/innovation strategies and capital investment over other alternatives. Structure and competitive position also appear to play a significant role in determining technology and investment strategy.     

Strategies for knowledge use in R&D and their implications for innovative performance

We argue that research on R&D strategy and on the use of external knowledge in R&D in particular should differentiate between distinct uses of external knowledge. We distinguish between uses of external knowledge for replication (using knowledge as is) vs. for compounding (building on acquired knowledge by combining it together with internally developed knowledge). We theorize about the respective innovative performance implications of these two strategies and compare them with a self-reliant strategy of internal R&D. We also elaborate contingencies for each strategy, pertaining to firm capabilities and cooperation. We test our predictions using a large sample survey of Dutch innovators in multiple industries. Our findings indicate that compounding firms perform better than replicating firms when the share of sales that consists of innovations that are new to the market is assessed, but they do not outperform firms with an internal R&D strategy. Furthermore, these differences disappear when the share of sales consisting of less novel innovations is studied. This research demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between R&D strategies that replicate vs. compound external knowledge.     

The impact of research and development promotion schemes in the Taiwanese electronic component industry

This paper explores the effect of government research and development (R&D) promotion schemes on R&D expenditures in the electronic component industry. We investigated the impact of three promotion tools: R&D tax credits, exemption from tariffs, and accelerated depreciation. A total of 124 firms was interviewed. A two-limit model was used in the data analysis.
Our empirical analysis indicates the scheme generated a rate of increase in industrial R&D investments of about 16%. Furthermore, on average, the impacts of R&D tax credits, exemption from tariffs, and accelerated depreciation, were about 10%, 4%, and 2%, respectively. In addition, we found that the larger the firm, the weaker the influence of the promotion scheme on R&D expenditures in the industry.     

Joining Forces or Going It Alone? On the Interplay among External Collaboration Partner Types,Interfirm Governance Modes,and Internal R&D

This paper adds to the emerging literature stream advocating a contingency view on open innovation. Drawing on the relational view of the firm, this study sheds light on the complex interplay among collaboration partner types (market‐ and science‐focused innovation partners), governance modes (informal, self‐enforcing and formal, contractual collaboration governance), and internal research and development(R&D). More specifically, it is proposed that the use of governance modes tailored to both the characteristics of each innovation partner type and the specific innovation objectives pursued by the focal firm (incremental and radical new product development) can increase the payoff from innovation collaboration. Moreover, appropriate collaboration governance is expected to reduce the focal firm's vulnerability to possible negative side effects often assumed to be associated with the simultaneous pursuit of external collaboration and internal R&D, among which most notably the not‐invented‐here (NIH) syndrome. Cross‐industry evidence from 2502 German firms underlines the critical role of collaboration governance—a contingency factor that is at the heart of the relational view, yet has remained surprisingly absent from the open innovation debate so far.