Leveraging micro‐ and macro‐structures of embeddedness in alliance networks for exploratory innovation in biotechnology

Researchers agree that alliance networks can be an important instrument in a firm's innovation process, but there is limited empirical evidence on actually how they facilitate the creation of new knowledge for exploratory innovation. The research question is what alliance network configuration is optimal for exploratory innovation. The present study investigated the interaction between a firm's alliance portfolio structure (the micro‐level) and the industry alliance network structure (the macro‐level), and it empirically tested how their interaction may be affecting the exploratory innovation outcome of network participating firms in the biotechnology industry. The paper uses data from exploratory patents filed by 455 dedicated biotechnology firms in 1986–1999 and an overall network comprising 2,933 technological alliances over the same period. The results indicate that, in the case of biotechnology, firms with high exploratory innovation output have short path indirect access to many other firms (micro‐level), and operate in dense industry alliance networks centralized around a few key firms (macro‐level), and that these effects are curvilinear.     

Building and leveraging competence exploitation and exploration for firm new product success

We theorize that industry conditions of collaboration intensity and innovation intensity drive the development of competence exploitation and exploration in manufacturer-manufacturer collaborations, and that such competencies can be leveraged to increase firm-level new product sales and market share, contingent on the firm's establishment of non-proprietary knowledge transfer capability. We test our model using a survey of 224 manufacturer-manufacturer collaborations. Our findings indicate that collaboration intensity drives firms to build both competence exploration and exploitation while innovation intensity drives neither. We also find that while non-proprietary knowledge capability enhances the influence of competence exploration on a firm's new product sales and market share, it dampens the firm's ability to leverage competence exploitation for firm-level new product success.     

DOMESTIC MARKETS AND INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS: GENERIC AND PRODUCT-SPECIFIC COMPETENCIES IN THE ENGINEERING SECTOR

This paper develops a theory of how the size of the domestic market shapes firm competencies. Our theory implies that large markets are beneficial even if factors such as economies of scale or learning effects are absent. We validate our model by an international comparison of the performance of firms that provide engineering services to the oil and petrochemical industry. We conclude that, relative to the United States, the competitiveness of European or Japanese industries is greater in activities whose underlying competencies are not product specific and can be utilized across a variety of products. The benefits of large markets are greatest for activities based on product-specific competencies. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of R&D‐specific factors on the attractiveness of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises as partners vis‐à‐vis alliance formation in large emerging economies

This study examines the impact of research and development (R&D)‐specific factors in determining the likelihood of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) from developed countries to be attractive partners vis‐à‐vis forming alliances with SMEs from large emerging economies (LEEs). This study is founded on the knowledge‐accessing theory of alliance formation, which emphasises the higher efficiency gains of knowledge application as opposed to knowledge generation. We extend this theory to SMEs on the basis that smaller firms, because of their resources constraints and drive to survive, are likely to use alliances to access external knowledge bases leading to new product development (NPD) opportunities because of the low feasibility of acquiring knowledge. As a mix of complex knowledge is necessary to develop most modern products and services, SMEs are also likely to adopt a more flexible operational approach and to accept compromises to forge knowledge‐accessing alliances. We illustrate this theoretical development using primary data collected from British and German biotechnology SMEs, declaring the intention prospectively to form alliances with their counterparts in Brazil. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the factors influencing the likelihood of a firm as an attractive alliance partner. Our results indicate that R&D‐specific factors influence the likelihood of firms to be attractive alliance partners. In particular, firms showing an in‐house innovation history focused on one or few products are more likely to be attractive alliance partners with LEE firms than those that do not. Another R&D‐specific predictor that enhances the chances of alliance partner attractiveness with LEE firms is the firm's focused searching and identifying capability relative to technology or equipment that demonstrates good prospects to improve the firm's line of products. A third predictor refers to the firm's awareness regarding non‐cost obstacles for its own technological development. Implications for policy makers and practitioners are also discussed.     

Innovation and Product Development Strategies in the Italian Motorcycle Industry

The motorcycle industry in Italy offers fertile ground for anyone interested in developing a better understanding of the role innovation plays in enhancing a firm's competitive position. This industry includes both domestic and Japanese firms, with companies ranging from high-volume manufacturers to specialty or niche producers. Firms trying to gain a competitive edge in this crowded field must contend with not only advances in product and process technology, but also the whims of fashion. In a survey of top-level marketing and product development managers from eight leading firms in the Italian motorcycle industry, Moreno Muffatto and Roberto Panizzolo explore the innovation models these firms employ to enhance their competitive position. Their study has the following objectives: categorizing the various competitors in terms of their product and market strategies and their product development and innovation strategies; highlighting differences between the methods of Italian and Japanese firms competing in this market; analyzing the relationships between firms, as well as the roles suppliers play in the various innovation strategies; and identifying the various organizational models employed by the firms in this industry. Different product and market strategies are identified on the basis of three variables: total production volume, the number of different products offered, and the number of different engine capacities offered. Using these variables, the companies in the study are categorized as volume producers, specialists, or niche specialists. The firms are further differentiated on the basis of the relative emphasis each places on product technology and design, product innovation, product variety, and time-based competition. In the firms studied, partnerships play a key role in new product development. Nearly every firm participates in joint projects, most often involving development of either an entire vehicle or an engine. Other partnerships involve firms in countries that offer emerging markets for the motorcycle industry. Organizational structures and strategies employed by the volume producers in this study include: the large product leader, who oversees concept definition and product planning; the project leaders group, which coordinates all phases of development, including activities assigned to external groups; the project managers matrix, a matrix organizational structure with a strong product orientation; and the business unit program manager, who oversees all projects within an independent business unit.     

Learning Capability,Technological Parity,and Innovation Mode Use*

The purpose of this research was to examine whether a firm's learning capability interacts with industry technological parity to predict innovation mode use. Learning capability is conceptualized in the current research as a firm's ability to develop or acquire the new knowledge‐based resources and skills needed to offer new products. Industry technological parity is conceptualized as the extent to which similarity and equality exist among the technological competencies of the firms in an industry. Three generic modes of innovation are considered: internal, cooperative, and external innovation. These modes reflect the development of new products based solely on internal resources, the collaborative development of new products (i.e., with one or more development partners), and the acquisition of fully developed products from external sources, respectively. The premises of this research are that (1) technological parity can create incentives or disincentives for innovating in a particular mode, depending upon the value of external innovative resources relative to the value of internal innovative resources and (2) firms will choose innovation modes that reflect a combination of their abilities and incentives to innovate alone, with others, or through others. Survey research and secondary sources were used to collect data from 119 high‐technology firms. Results indicate that firms exhibit greater use of internal and external innovation when high levels of industry technological parity are matched by high levels of firm learning capability. By contrast, a negative relationship between learning capability and industry technological parity is associated with greater use of the cooperative mode of innovation. Thus, a single, common internal capability—learning capability—interacts with the level of technological parity in the environment to significantly predict three distinct innovation modes—modes that are not inherently dependent upon one another. As such, a firm's internal ability to innovate, as reflected in learning capability, has relevance well beyond that firm's likely internal innovation output. It also predicts the firm's likely use of cooperative and external innovation when considered in light of the level of industry technological parity. A practical implication of these findings is that companies with modest learning capabilities are not inherently precluded from innovating. Rather, they can innovate through modes for which conditions in their current environments do not constitute significant obstacles to innovation output. In particular, modest learning capabilities are associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are low, high, and low, respectively. Conversely, strong learning capabilities tend to be associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are high, low, and high, respectively.     

Cooperation with competitors and product innovation: Moderating effects of technological capability and alliances with universities

The relationship between cooperation with competitors and product innovation performance was investigated along with the moderating effect of the innovating firm's technological capability and its alliances with universities. The hypothesis that cooperation with competitors has an inverted U-shaped relationship with product innovation performance was tested using data on new product introductions from 1499 Chinese firms. The results support the existence of a bell-shaped relationship between co-opetition and product innovation performance. Technological capability and alliances with universities were shown to weaken the relationship. The findings add significantly to the emerging literature on dynamic co-opetition.     

Product line strategies of new entrants in an established industry: evidence from the U.S. bicycle industry

A firm's product line breadth in a given market has both benefits and costs; these effects can be more clearly seen by examining not only the number of products a firm offers, but also the degree of complexity that the product line represents. The effects of breadth are particularly important for new entrants in a relatively mature industry and I examine the breadth–survival relation on new entrants in the bicycle industry in the period 1993–98. I find that firms offering a greater number of products, those with very simple and very complex product lines, and those whose product lines have a moderate degree of overlap with rivals have the highest survival rates. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Network innovation versus innovation through networks

In today's dynamic, complex and interconnected environments, interfirm networks in its various forms (e.g. franchising, retail and service chains, cooperatives, financial networks, joint ventures, strategic alliances, clusters, public-private partnerships, digital platforms) are becoming increasingly important in helping firms improve their competitive position through an enhanced access to innovation, complementary resources and capabilities otherwise not available to them. Driven by increased performance pressures in unpredictable environments, firms embedded in networks are increasingly moving from cooperators to collaborators as value co-creators. The aim of this introductory article is to discuss the role of innovation in business networks by focusing on two major topics: Network innovation versus innovation through networks. In addition, we provide an overview of the articles included in the special issue on Networks and Innovation focusing on the questions: (1) what is the impact of network characteristics on a firm's innovation?; and (2) what are the determinants of innovation in interfirm networks?     

Some Approaches to Complementary Product Strategy

Without complementary products, many high-tech innovations might be relegated to the scrap heap. For example, the development of desktop computers was not the sole impetus for the personal computing revolution. This innovation also depended on the development of word processing, spreadsheet, and desktop publishing software, as well as peripheral devices such as laser printers. Development of complementary products clearly offers increased opportunities for firms in many high-tech markets. However, managers must balance those opportunities with the added risks their firms face in attempting to develop products that may extend beyond their core lines of business. Focusing on the early business analysis stage of the product development process, Sanjit Sengupta identifies some alternative approaches that firms use for developing and marketing complementary products. Using data from 103 projects in the computer, consumer electronics, software, and communications industries, his study explores the relationships between a firm's complementary product strategy and such conditions as complementary product opportunity, organizational fit, and the multiplier effect of the complementary product on sales of the primary product. His study also examines the sources of competitive advantage in complementary product strategies. Contrary to the notion that only large, well-funded firms can pursue a complementary product strategy, the study identifies various alternatives to expensive, in-house development efforts. Depending on the level of resources available for a particular project, a firm may choose various modes for adopting a complementary product strategy, including co-development alliances, proprietary interface development, co-marketing alliances, and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) agreements. Findings from this study indicate that competitive advantage in complementary product strategy comes from the multiplier effect on sales of the primary product and from the innovativeness of the complementary product. Even if the complementary product has low sales potential by itself, the product may still offer a significant competitive advantage through its multiplier effect on the sales of the primary product. Somewhat surprisingly, the results suggest that organizational fit and complementary product opportunity have no effect on competitive advantage. However, organizational fit does appear to be an important condition for adopting a complementary product strategy. (c) 1998 Elsevier Science Inc.     

Building product diversification through contractual R&D agreements

Firms engage in contractual R&D agreements for several reasons, including product innovation motives, firm performance goals, and technological diversification. This article demonstrates that firms also might enter into external collaborations to penetrate new markets. This study therefore explores both the effects and the strategic risks of contractual R&D agreements and their related knowledge structures for a firm's capacity to diversify into new markets. Drawing on a novel panel data set obtained from 102 Fortune high‐tech firms, the authors demonstrate that strategic alliances enable knowledge‐integrated firms to penetrate new businesses; however, these organizations should be cautious about engaging in licensing‐in agreements, which have negative effects on product diversification.     

Standardization Alliance Networks,Standard-Setting Influence,and New Product Outcomes*

Standardization alliances evolve through collaborations among firms for developing and implementing industry technical standards. Cooperative standard setting can help allied firms to gain access to external knowledge and technologies, but it is unclear how the configuration of a standardization alliance can result in improving a firm’s performance in new product development. This study examines how standardization alliance network-based resource advantages vary across a firm’s network position and the firm’s ability to influence industry standard setting and new product outcomes. Empirical analyses, based on archival data from 170 Chinese automobile manufacturers from 1999 to 2013, indicate that firms that span structural holes in standardization alliance networks gain an advantage when focusing on early new product introductions but suffer a disadvantage when aiming at more innovative products. In contrast, taking a central position in standardization alliance networks is negatively related to a firm’s speed in bringing new products to market but positively related to the firm’s new product introduction rate. Further, standard-setting influence significantly mediates the effect of network position on a firm’s new product speed to market. Increasing centrality and structural holes can lead to the improvement of a firm’s standard-setting influence, and this, in turn, positively affects speed to market.     

论无边界企业

传统经济学认为企业是有边界的，企业的边界在于边际成本等于边际收益之处。本文认为，随着信息技术的发展，企业边界可趋于无穷。这是因为，在信息经济条件下，企业随着边界扩张，边际成本递减、边际收益递增，边际成本曲线和边际收益曲线无法随着企业规模的扩大而相交于一点。对无边界企业来讲，企业边界不再是指物质边界，而是指能力边界，企业边界的大小，取决于自身核心能力的强弱。企业要想成为无边界企业，必须将自身的核心能力打造成价值模块，并融入全球价值网络当中。无边界企业有着不同的具体形式，但是不论哪种形式，都是基于核心能力运作的，价值网络是核心能力的集大成。     

Those Who Know,Do. Those Who Understand,Teach. Disseminative Capability and Knowledge Transfer in the Automotive Industry

Innovations in the automotive industry are increasingly building on contributions from different technological fields. Correspondingly, firms in this industry more than ever tend to form research and development (R&D) alliances that aim at innovating new products through integrating separate fields and transferring knowledge. While, in symmetrical R&D alliances, each partner intends to ultimately maintain their distinctive and specialized knowledge base, overlapping knowledge facilitates cooperation and ultimately alliance success. Thus, the capability for knowledge transfer between partners is crucial in such R&D alliances. The literature provides ample evidence that such knowledge transfer is more likely to succeed if the recipient firm has absorptive capability. However, whereas the characteristics of the knowledge transfer process and the recipient firm are well understood, limited attention has so far been given to the issue of the knowledge source firm's ability to transfer knowledge to R&D alliance partners. This study focuses on the impact of source firm capability on successful knowledge transfer in R&D alliances. The study develops a theoretical framework of disseminative capability consisting of five dimensions and tests it on a sample of 59 projects in R&D alliances in the automotive industry. To ensure content validity and avoid common source bias, data were collected from both alliance partners. To test the hypotheses, multiple regression analyses were performed. The results reveal that the source firm's disseminative capability including the attainment of expert knowledge, assessing the recipient firm's knowledge base, and encoding knowledge are positively related to knowledge transfer success, while, surprisingly, detaching knowledge and support of knowledge application in the recipient firm are negatively related. Intentionally or unintentionally, disseminating knowledge across firm boundaries is widely perceived as detrimental to a firm's competitive advantage. Accordingly, the literature tends to downplay disseminative capability as an important means of exploiting external knowledge in collaborative settings. By demonstrating potential benefits for the source firm to transfer knowledge to the allying R&D partner firm, this paper reinvigorates the collaborative dimension in knowledge transfer. Further, the paper is the first of this kind to theoretically explain and empirically show that dimensions of disseminative capability of collaborators in R&D alliances are important for knowledge transfer, whereas disseminative capability is the complementary inverse of an organization's absorptive capacity.     

The role of strategic alliances in high-technology new product development

The authors examined 905 new product innovations introduced since September 1988 to determine the influences on product innovativeness, with a specific interest in strategic alliances, or cooperative strategies. Findings suggest that single firms, horizontal cooperative strategies, small and mixed'sized firms, biochemical industries, cross-industry product offerings, cross-industry cooperations, the progression of time, and European firms tend to indicate significantly more innovative products. Implications are proposed for business practitioners and researchers with specific application to the diffusion of innovation.     

R&D Cooperation,Partner Diversity,and Innovation Performance: An Empirical Analysis

Existing literature on research and development (R&D) alliances focuses on formation motives and performance impacts of these alliances but hardly on diversity of the partners' portfolio. Cooperation with a diverse set of partners leads to learning opportunities with regard to both cooperation and innovation skills and hence is expected to enhance the firm's innovation performance. This paper examines two research questions: (1) the impact of functional and geographical diversity of R&D partners on radical and incremental innovation performance of product innovating firms, and (2) the organizational determinants of partner diversity in R&D alliances. The empirical analysis is based on data from the Dutch Community Innovation Survey, R&D and Information and Communication Technology Surveys, and Production Statistics, which lead to a representative sample of 12,811 innovating firms in the period 1994–2006. Through random‐effects panel Tobit estimates, econometric models for both research questions are estimated. The results indicate that functional and geographical diversity act through different channels. Functional diversity leads to a variety of knowledge intake and synergetic effects necessary to develop and commercialize novel products. Geographical diversity results in successful adaption of existing products to different local requirements such as technical standards, market regulations, and customer preferences. The organizational determinants of both kinds of partner diversity are prior experience, patenting, and information technology infrastructure.     

Product innovation through coopetition in alliances: Singular or plural governance?

This study researches how firms can improve their product innovation in coopetition alliances through alliance governance. Our survey-based study of 372 vertical alliances in the medical device industry contributes to a clarification of prior studies' contrasting findings on product innovation when coopetition is present in alliances. Our results show that the singular use of relational governance improves product innovativeness in vertical alliances that experience growing levels of coopetition. In contrast, the singular use of transactional governance reduces product innovativeness with growing coopetition. When firms apply both relational and transactional governance as plural governance, vertical coopetition alliances get access to new ways to improve their product innovativeness.     

Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry

This paper investigates the relationship between intercorporate technology alliances and firm performance. It argues that alliances are access relationships, and therefore that the advantages which a focal firm derives from a portfolio of strategic coalitions depend upon the resource profiles of its alliance partners. In particular, large firms and those that possess leading‐edge technological resources are posited to be the most valuable associates. The paper also argues that alliances are both pathways for the exchange of resources and signals that convey social status and recognition. Particularly when one of the firms in an alliance is a young or small organization or, more generally, an organization of equivocal quality, alliances can act as endorsements: they build public confidence in the value of an organization's products and services and thereby facilitate the firm's efforts to attract customers and other corporate partners. The findings from models of sales growth and innovation rates in a large sample of semiconductor producers confirm that organizations with large and innovative alliance partners perform better than otherwise comparable firms that lack such partners. Consistent with the status‐transfer arguments, the findings also demonstrate that young and small firms benefit more from large and innovative strategic alliance partners than do old and large organizations. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Biotechnology Commercialization Strategies: Risk and Return in Interfirm Cooperation

The management and exploitation of biotechnological product innovation have proven to be more difficult than initially expected because the number of currently marketed biotechnological products is far from sufficient to counter deficits in pharmaceutical innovation. This study provides insight into the role of governance structures in interfirm cooperation and their effects on biotechnological product innovation and company success. Most of the existing literature regarding alliances and mergers and acquisitions (M&A) examines their effects on technology recipients' innovation performance. Here, the effects of alliances and M&A on both the innovation success and financial performance of technology suppliers (i.e., sources) are examined. Drawing from a sample of 220 human therapeutic biotechnology and biopharmaceutical firms over a period of 32 years (1980–2011), an analysis of the effects of biotechnology clusters, strategic alliances, and acquisitions is provided. This study reveals the existence of a risk‐return trade‐off for strategic alliances between biotech companies and larger, more established firms. Increased biotech company involvement in product development alliances decreases risk by increasing the likelihood of future product introductions. The trade‐off, however, is that biotech companies earn lower returns when their products are developed through such alliances. A similar risk‐return trade‐off effect is found for clusters. However, acquisitions generally affect both product introductions and product returns in a negative way. These findings have strategic implications not only for managing the development of biotechnological product innovations and technology platforms but also for commercialization strategies with respect to interfirm cooperation and risk reduction.     

Diffusing knowledge-based core competencies for leveraging innovation strategies: Modelling outsourcing to knowledge process organizations (KPOs) in pharmaceutical networks

As pharmaceutical firms try to market their products and reduce costs, vertically integrated structures hamper innovation processes. Yet, pharmaceutical firms must innovate to compete. Outsourcing knowledge intensive activities to knowledge process organizations (KPOs) serves to reduce innovation process obstacles. Grounded in diffusion theory and strategic management literature, this conceptual paper explores four interrelated strategic concepts: core competencies, economies of scale and scope, knowledge sharing, and learning. This paper claims that (a) accumulated core competencies of multinational pharmaceutical companies (MPCs) erode over time and these companies become dependent on KPOs (b) MPCs must understand how KPOs manage core competencies (c) economies of scope benefit KPOs enabling them to sustain competitive advantages for their MPC partners, meanwhile the benefits from economies of both scale and scope shift from MPCs to KPOs (d) KPOs need to monitor their rate of learning to remain competitive. The paper identifies implications for industrial managers and directions for future research.