Technological Performance and Alliances Over the Industry Life Cycle: Evidence from the ASIC Industry

Technology development in firms is frequently based on a combination of internal and external technological learning. Consequently, firms need to develop both technological capital (a patent portfolio) and alliance capital (a portfolio of technology alliances). This paper examines the relationship between technological capital, alliance capital, and their joint impact on the technological performance of firms, with an application to the application‐specific integrated circuit industry. We find that positive marginal returns to alliance capital are decreasing at higher levels of alliance capital. Technological capital and alliance capital can either augment or reduce each others' influence on innovation performance depending on the stage of the technology life cycle in the industry. A reinforcing relationship related to absorptive capacity requirements and technological uncertainty is present in early stages, while technology leakage and market competition effects render the combination of high levels of technological and alliance capital counterproductive in later stages of the technology life cycle.     

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.     

Technological Diversification, Coherence, and Performance of Firms

Technological diversification at the firm level (i.e., the expansion of a firm's technology base into a wide range of technology fields) is found to be a prevailing phenomenon in all three major industrialized regions,—the United States, Europe, and Japan—prompting the term multitechnology corporation. Whereas previous studies have provided insights into the composition of technology portfolios of multitechnology firms, little is known about the relationship between technological diversification and firms' technological performance. Against a backdrop of the technology and innovation management literature, the present article investigates the relationship between technological diversification and technological performance, taking into account the moderating role of technological coherence in firms' technology portfolios. Hereby, technological coherence is defined as the degree to which technologies in a technology portfolio are technologically related. To measure the technological coherence of portfolios, a measure of technological relatedness of technology fields is constructed based on patent citation patterns found in 450,000 European Patent Office (EPO) patent grants. Two hypotheses are presented here: (1) Technological diversification has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with technological performance; and (2) technological coherence moderates the relationship between technological diversification and technological performance positively. These hypotheses are tested empirically using a panel data set (1995–2003) on patent portfolios pertaining to 184 U.S., European, and Japanese firms. The firms selected are the largest research and development (R&D) actors in five industries: pharmaceuticals and biotechnology; chemicals; engineering and general machinery; information technology (IT) hardware (i.e., computers and communication equipment); and electronics and electrical machinery. Empirical results, obtained by fixed‐effects negative binomial regressions, support both hypotheses in the present article. Technological diversification has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with technological performance. Technological diversification offers opportunities for cross‐fertilization and technology fusion, but high levels of diversification may yield few marginal benefits as firms risk lacking sufficient levels of scale to benefit from wide‐ranging technological diversification, and firms may encounter high levels of coordination and integration costs. Further, the results show that the net benefits of technological diversification are higher in technologically coherent technology portfolios. If firms build up a technologically coherent diversified portfolio, the presence of sufficient levels of scale is ensured and coordination costs are limited. At the same time, technologically coherent diversification puts firms in a better position to benefit form cross‐fertilization between technologies. The present article clearly identifies the important role of technological coherence in technology diversification strategies of firms.     

Transferring industrial technology to less developed countries

This article discusses the motivations for industrial firms to transfer technology to less developed countries (LDCs), where technological innovation is most critically needed. The types of technology most appropriate for transfer are described, with special emphasis on technologies that do not threaten a firm's economic interests. The various channels through which technology can be transferred are specified.     

Diversity of Board Interlocks and the Impact on Technological Exploration: A Longitudinal Study

Scholars have given increased attention to organizational networks as an important component of technological innovation. Although a significant body of research has examined the implications of organizational networks on knowledge diffusion, researchers know little about the impacts that diverse network interlocks have on corporate innovation outputs. To address this gap in the literature, this article draws upon insights from organizational learning and social network theory and argues that interlocked networks affect corporate innovation. Further, interlocks differ in terms of both the heterogeneity of tied‐to firms—ties created through shared board directors—and the directors who create these ties. Accordingly, this study proposes that more diverse interlocks will have a greater impact on corporate technological exploration. To test this proposal, data from multiple sources were analyzed, including historical records of board appointments and data on technological innovations from U.S. public companies. Empirical results from generalized estimating equations suggest that the industrial diversity of interlocked firms increases the likelihood of technological exploration. Moreover, interlocks with R&D‐intensive firms are more important for technological exploration than those created by firms that do not invest heavily in R&D. There is no empirical evidence demonstrating that the ratio of interlocks created by directors with output‐oriented experience enhances technological exploration. Overall, this research reveals that diversity of leader‐created board interlocks can be an important mechanism for fostering corporate entrepreneurial activities such as technological exploration.     

Adoption of a Process Innovation with Learning-by-Doing: Evidence from the Semiconductor Industry

This article analyzes the adoption of a new process technology in the global semiconductor manufacturing industry. The paper extends research on the relationship between learning-by-doing and technology adoption by examining the stability of learning effects across technological generations. While the results indicate that production experience with the immediately preceding technological generation is associated with a higher likelihood of adoption, we find no evidence that experience with older technologies or regional knowledge spillovers influence adoption. Finally, the results indicate that large firms and memory manufacturers have a higher likelihood of adoption than small firms and non-memory manufacturers, respectively.     

Knowledge Acquisition in University–Industry Alliances: An Empirical Investigation from a Learning Theory Perspective*

A firm's technological knowledge base is the foundation on which internal product and process innovations are generated. However, technological knowledge is not accumulated solely through internal learning processes. Increasingly, firms are turning to external sources in the technology supply chain to acquire the technological knowledge they need to introduce product and process innovations. Thus, the successful structuring and executing of partnerships with external “technology source” organizations is often critical to competitive success in technologically dynamic environments. This study uses situated learning theory as a basis for explaining how factors inherent to the knowledge acquisition context may affect the successful transference of technological knowledge from universities to their industry partners. Data collected via a survey instrument from 104 industry managers were used to explore the effects of various organizational knowledge interface factors on knowledge acquisition success in university–industry alliances. The organizational knowledge interface factors hypothesized to affect knowledge acquisition success in the current research include partner trust, partner familiarity, technology familiarity, alliance experience, formal collaboration teams, and technology experts' communications. Results indicate that partner trust predicts the successful acquisition of tacit knowledge but not explicit knowledge. Both forms of knowledge are predicted by partner familiarity and communications between the partners' technology experts. These findings suggest three principal managerial implications. First, although the development of a trusting relationship between the knowledge source and knowledge‐seeking parties is generally advisable, firms that seek to acquire explicit technological knowledge from their alliance partners may successfully do so without having made significant time and energy investments designed to assure themselves that they can trust those partners. The relative observability and verifiability of explicit knowledge relative to tacit knowledge may enable knowledge‐seeking parties to have greater confidence that knowledge has been acquired when partner trust is in question or has not been deliberately developed. A second implication is that, other things being equal, a knowledge‐seeking party's interests may be best served through repeated exposures to particular alliance partners, particularly if those exposures facilitate mutual understandings on relevant process‐related matters. A third managerial implication is that ongoing, broad‐based communications between the partners' technology experts should be used to effect technology transfer. A key quality of the organizational knowledge interface that promotes the successful acquisition of technological knowledge, both tacit and explicit, is multipoint, real‐time contact between the technology experts of the partner organizations. Such communications potentially enable the knowledge‐seeking party to directly access desired information through the most knowledgeable individuals on an as‐needed basis.     

Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices

The issue of the failure of incumbent firms in the face of radical technical change has been a central question in the technology strategy domain for some time. We add to prior contributions by highlighting the role a firm's existing set of complementary assets have in influencing its investment in alternative technological trajectories. We develop an analytical model that considers firm heterogeneity with respect to both technological trajectories and complementary assets. Complementary assets play a dual role in incumbents' investment behavior toward radical technological change: they are not only resources (pipes) that can buffer firms from technology change, but also prisms through which firms view those changes, influencing both the magnitude of resources that should be invested and the trajectory to which these resources should be directed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evolutionary diffusion: internal and external methods used to acquire encompassing,complementary, and incremental technological changes in the lithotripsy industry

This study links theories concerning methods that firms use to acquire technology with theories concerning types of technological change. We place particular emphasis on interorganizational relationships. We predict that firms will often acquire know-how needed for encompassing technological change through equity-based arrangements with other organizations, complementary technological changes through nonequity interorganizational arrangements, and incremental changes through internal R&D. Our theory draws on perspectives that emphasize the need to develop new competencies within a business organization and to protect the value of existing competencies. Our empirical analysis examines methods of technology acquisition that firms have used in the commercialization of medical lithotripters, which are devices that fragment stones in the kidney and gall bladder. The analysis contributes to a better understanding of how technology acquisition methods vary with the manner in which technological change relates to a firm's existing capabilities. The study also helps develop our understanding of the evolutionary processes by which capabilities diffuse through an industry. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dynamic or Static Capabilities? Process Management Practices and Response to Technological Change*

Whether and how organizations adapt to changes in their environments has been a prominent theme in organization and strategy research. Within this research, there is controversy about whether organizational routines hamper or facilitate adaptation. Organizational routines give rise to inertia but are also the vehicles for change in recent work on dynamic capabilities. This rising interest in routines in research coincides with an increase in management practices focused on organizational routines and processes. This study explores how the increasing use of process management practices affected organizational response to a major technological change through new product developments. The empirical setting is the photography industry over a decade, during the shift from silver‐halide chemistry to digital technology. The advent and rise of practices associated with the new ISO 9000 certification program in the 1990s coincided with increasing technological substitution in photography, allowing for assessing how increasing attention to routines through ISO 9000 practices over time affected ongoing responsiveness to the technological change. The study further compares the effects for the incumbent firms in the existing technology with nonincumbent firms entering from elsewhere. Relying on longitudinal panel data models as well as hazard models, findings show that greater process management practices dampened response to new generations of digital technology, but this effect differed for incumbents and nonincumbents. Increasing use of process management practices over time had a greater negative effect on incumbents' response to the rapid technological change. The study contributes to research in technological change by highlighting specific management practices that may create disconnects between firms' capabilities and changing environments and disadvantage incumbents in the face of radical technological change. This research also contributes to literature on organizational routines and capabilities. Studying the effects of increasing ISO 9000 practices undertaken in firms provides an opportunity to gauge the effects of systematic routinization of organizational activities and their effects on adaptation. This research also contributes to management practice. The promise of process management is to help firms adapt to changing environments, and, as such, managers facing technological change may adopt process management practices as a response to uncertainty and change. But managers must more fully understand the potential benefits and risks of process management to ensure these practices are used in the appropriate contexts.     

Competitive intensity and collaboration: impact on firm growth across technological environments

This article investigates the impact of competitive intensity and collaboration on firm growth across technological environments. I propose that competitive intensity determines the likelihood of firm collaboration, and that the interaction of competitive intensity and collaboration influences firm growth. These relationships are, in turn, moderated by industry‐level technological intensity. Analyzing 1,004 firms and 378 collaborations from the manufacturing sector in Singapore, I find that firms facing high or low levels of competitive intensity collaborate less often than those facing moderate levels of competitive intensity. Industry technology intensity moderates this relationship, with a stronger inverted‐U‐shaped association between competitive intensity and collaboration in more technology intensive industries. Collaboration leads to higher growth for firms facing lower levels of competitive intensity than for firms facing higher levels of competitive intensity only in more technology intensive industries. In technologically less intensive industries, collaboration leads to higher growth for firms facing higher levels of competitive intensity as compared to those facing lower levels of competitive intensity. These findings have important implications for competitive and collaborative dynamics for firm growth in different technological environments. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Can me‐too products prevail? Performance of new product development and sources of idea generation in China – an emerging market

New products developed in emerging markets such as China, India and Brazil are not only sold locally but also ‘exported’ globally, suggesting a changing landscape for global innovation. Existing literature in technology learning and capability accumulation has long held the claim that, for a certain period of time in their development, firms in latecomer countries rely on their counterparts in developed countries to get new product ideas. However, existing research in this area is generally based on case studies and historical analyses; there are few empirical studies exploring the performance consequence of learning from competitors abroad. Using large‐scale, nationwide survey data from China, we explore specifically whether learning about new product ideas from leading firms in foreign countries will lead to higher performance outcomes than other sources (i.e. domestic competitors, customers, universities or internal departments) in an emerging market. Our findings suggest that Chinese firms that source new product ideas from leading firms in foreign countries achieve overwhelmingly superior performance along financial, customer and technological dimensions. Implications to the managers and policy makers are also discussed.     

How do dynamic capabilities transform external technologies into firms’ renewed technological resources? – A mediation model

How externally acquired resources may become valuable, rare, hard-to-imitate, and non-substitute resource bundles through the development of dynamic capabilities? This study proposes and tests a mediation model of how firms’ internal technological diversification and R&D, as two distinctive microfoundations of dynamic technological capabilities, mediate the relationship between external technology breadth and firms’ technological innovation performance, based on the resource-based view and dynamic capability view. Using a sample of listed Chinese licensee firms, we find that firms must broadly explore external technologies to ignite the dynamism in internal technological diversity and in-house R&D, which play their crucial roles differently to transform and reconfigure firms’ technological resources.     

Determinants of Alliance Portfolio Complexity and Its Effect on Innovative Performance of Companies*

Alliance formation is often described as a mechanism used by firms to increase voluntary knowledge transfers. Access to external knowledge has been increasingly recognized as a main source of a firm's innovativeness. A phenomenon that has recently emerged is alliance portfolio complexity. In line with recent studies this article develops a measure of portfolio complexity in technology partnerships in terms of diversity of elements of the alliance portfolio with which a firm must interact. The analysis considers an alliance portfolio that includes different partnership types (competitor, customer, supplier, and university and research center). So far factors that determine portfolio complexity and its impact on technological performance of firms have remained largely unexplored. This article examines firms' decisions to form alliance portfolios of foreign and domestic partners by two groups of firms: innovators (firms that are successful in introducing new products to the market), and imitators (firms that are successful at introducing products which are not new to the market). This study also assesses a nonlinear impact of the portfolio complexity measure on firms' innovative performance. The empirical models are estimated using data on more than 1800 firms from two consecutive Community Innovation Surveys conducted in 1998 and 2000 in the Netherlands. The results suggest that alliance portfolios of innovators are broader in terms of the different types of alliance partners as compared to those of imitators. This finding underlines the importance of establishing a “radar function” of links to various different partners in accessing novel information. Specifically, the results indicate that foremost innovators have a strong propensity to form portfolios consisting of international alliances. This underlines the importance of this type of partnership in the face of the growing internationalization of R&D and global technology sourcing. Being an innovator or imitator also increases the propensity to form a portfolio of domestic alliances, relative to non‐innovators; but this propensity is not stronger for innovators. Innovators appear to derive benefit from both intensive (exploitative) and broad (explorative) use of external information sources. The former type of sourcing is more important for innovators, while the latter is more important for imitators. Finally, alliance complexity is found to have an inverse U‐shape relationship to innovative performance. On the one hand, complexity facilitates learning and innovativeness; on the other hand, each organization has a certain management capacity to deal with complexity which sets limits on the amount of alliance portfolio complexity that can be managed within the firm. This clearly suggests that firms face a certain cognitive limit in terms of the degree of complexity they can handle. Despite the noted advantages of an increasing level of alliance portfolio complexity firms will at a certain stage reach a specific inflection point after which marginal costs of managing complexity are higher than the expected benefits from this increased complexity.     

On-The-Job Training Under Firm-Specific Innovations and Worker Heterogeneity

In this article I present a general equilibrium adverse selection model of the labor market in which workers differ in their ability to learn and implement new technologies. Exogenous firm-specific process innovations require firms to teach workers the new firm-specific skills introduced by the new technology. As firms' training costs negatively depend on the expected ability of their labor force and positively on their technological level, firms seek to hire workers able to learn at least cost. I show how firm-specific human capital can explain employer- and plant-specific wage differentials caused by skilled-labor-biased technological shocks.     

Networking as a Means to Strategy Change: The Case of Open Innovation in Mobile Telephony

The purpose of this article is to investigate how innovation networks can be used to deal with a changing technological environment. This study combines different concepts related to research and development (R&D) collaboration strategies of large firms and applies these concepts to R&D alliance projects undertaken by Nokia Corporation in the period 1985–2002. The research methodology is a combination of in‐depth semistructured interviews and a large‐scale quantitative analysis of alliance agreements. For the empirical analysis a distinction is made between exploration and exploitation in innovation networks in terms of three different measures. As a first measure, the difference between exploration and exploitation strategies by means of the observed capabilities of the partners of the contracting firms is investigated. The second measure is related to partner turnover. The present article argues that in exploration networks partner turnover will be higher than in exploitation networks. As a third measure, the type of alliance contract will be taken; exploration networks will make use of flexible legal organizational structures, whereas exploitation alliances are associated with legal structures that enable long‐term collaboration. The case of Nokia has illustrated the importance of strategic technology networks for strategic repositioning under conditions of change. Nokia followed an exploitation strategy in the development of the first two generations of mobile telephony and an exploration strategy in the development of technologies for the third generation. Such interfirm networks seem to offer flexibility, speed, innovation, and the ability to adjust smoothly to changing market conditions and new strategic opportunities. These two different strategies have led to distinctly different international innovation networks, have helped the company in becoming a world leader in the mobile phone industry, and have enabled it to sustain that position in a radically changed technological environment. This study also illustrates that Nokia effectively uses an open innovation strategy in the development of new products and services and in setting technology standards for current and future use of mobile communication applications. This article presents one of the first longitudinal studies, which describes the use of innovation networks as a means to adapt swiftly to changing market conditions and strategic change. This study contributes to the emerging, but still inconsistent, literature on explorative and exploitative learning by means of strategic technology networks.     

Technological Change and the Production of Ocean Shipping Services

This paper presents results for the estimation of a translog variable profit function for the subsidized U.S. liner shipping industry. In a study of fifteen firms for the period from 1971 through 1982, the estimation results for a translog variable profit function indicate an industry characterized by input-saving technological changes in the cargo-handling input and important scale economies that increase in extent over the period. At the beginning of the period, the U.S. liner shipping industry included fifteen subsidized firms and several unsubsidized firms. At this writing, four subsizied firms and one unsubsidized firm remain. The technological changes examined here and the diffusion of that technology throughout the international shipping industry are major factors in explaining that dramatic restructuring.     

Stimulating 'hot technologies': interorganizational networks in Dutch ceramic research

The role of interorganizational R&D networks between firms and universities in knowledge transfer of advanced technologies is analyzed. The starting assumption (coinciding with reasons of government bodies to support technological cooperation) is that a national knowledge and technology system exists. From this assumption a number of questions that exist about knowledge and technology transfer can be discussed. Notably whether the knowledge push model of technological innovation is valid. This is done through the analysis of the differences in the pattern of external contacts that exists between the scientific, industrial and policy organizations.
Empirical results of a case study of the stimulation of advanced ceramic technology by the Dutch government form the basis. Advanced ceramics is considered to be an emergent technology within the larger framework of generic technologies. However, the Dutch university and industry structure in this area is weak which raises a number of important questions about the possibility to built a technological infrastructure through government support. The paper concentrates on the role of resource and information flows, which characterize the position of specific organizations in the R&D network. The three main positions in this case are occupied by government bodies, various firms and the university and government laboratories.
Two conclusions on knowledge transfer in university-industry cooperation may be drawn. (a) Institutional (government and university) and industrial research networks are different in character and in fact they consist of different network elements. (b) Government policies, in this case, affect the outlook of scientists but not of firms.     

Which Service? How Industry Conditions Shape Firms’ Service‐Type Choices

This article studies the role of industry conditions as determinants of manufacturing and software firms’ decisions to offer services. It draws on the competence perspective on industry evolution and servitization to theorize and provide empirical evidence on how industry conditions affect firms’ choice to offer two distinct types of services—product‐oriented services and customer‐oriented services. It is argued that firms are likely to offer product‐oriented services in Schumpeterian industry environments to address high technological uncertainty by leveraging and reinforcing capabilities in the existing technology. In contrast, firms are likely to offer customer‐oriented services in non‐Schumpeterian industry environments to address value generation uncertainty by building competences in new technological or market areas. Based on longitudinal data on 410 public firms from manufacturing industries and the software industry, empirical evidence suggests that firms are indeed more likely to offer product‐oriented services in Schumpeterian industry environments, such as in the early stage of the industry life cycle and under conditions of high R&D intensity and competition, whereas they are more likely to offer customer‐oriented services in non‐Schumpeterian environments, such as in the later stages of the industry life cycle and in highly cyclical industries.