Using R&D cooperative arrangements to leverage managerial experience: A study of technology-intensive new ventures

During the past decade, increasing attention has been given to the widespread use of research and development (R&D) strategic alliances and cooperative interorganizational relationships. This research has addressed a variety of inter-firm relationships ranging from joint ventures to informal networking. However, most of this literature is based on research involving large established firms. More recently, researchers have recognized that small firms or new ventures are also adopting cooperative R&D strategies with increasing frequency. A variety of reasons for the increasing use of R&D cooperative arrangements in new ventures has been offered, including the need to complement a new venture's existing internal resources, the need to quickly gain the technical capabilities to compete in rapidly changing markets, and the desire to minimize the fixed costs associated with acquiring capital assets.This paper reports the results of a study of new high-technology ventures that examined the relationship between performance, the experience of a venture's management team, and its use of R&D cooperative arrangements. The central proposition of this research was that the effectiveness of R&D cooperative activities is associated with the level of combined expertise possessed by the new venture's management team. Specifically, it was anticipated that new ventures with management teams possessing more experience with the industry and/or with similar technologies would be better able to successfully engage in R&D cooperative activities.The primary data analysis technique was moderated regression. The data was collected from Security and Exchange Commission initial public offering registration statements and other archival documents filed by 210 new ventures in three high-technology manufacturing industries.The results of the regression analysis revealed that sales growth was associated with the use of R&D cooperative arrangements. More important, the results also indicated that this relationship was positive when the new venture's management team was relatively more familiar with the industry, markets, and/or with similar technologies. In other words, our results indicate that the relatively more experienced managers were more proficient at using R&D cooperative activities to strategically position their respective firms vis-à-vis their less experienced counterparts. Evidently, these managers were better able to identify the risks and benefits of engaging in such cooperative activities. Additionally, we provide preliminary evidence that the greater knowledge possessed by the management teams may have allowed the new ventures to reduce the costs associated with R&D market transactions.These findings are important because they suggest that prior managerial experience in similar industries and/or with similar technologies is an important prerequisite for the successful use of R&D cooperative arrangements by new high-technology ventures. Management's knowledge of customer needs, product characteristics, and/or the specific idiosyncracies of the industry and/or technology seems to significantly enhance a new technology-intensive venture's ability to effectively engage in R&D cooperative activities.     

Multilateral R&D alliances by new ventures

We examine the antecedents and outcomes of new ventures' formation of multilateral R&D alliances. Our results show an inverted U-shaped relationship between market uncertainty and a new venture's likelihood of forming multilateral R&D alliances. Top management team's social capital and ventures' technological capabilities are critical for new ventures to identify and capture alliance opportunities. Moreover, our analysis reveals value creation effects of multilateral R&D alliances for new ventures despite the challenges and difficulties associated. We further show that the value creation effect is a function of the type of exchange relationship (i.e., net- vs. chain-based) in the multilateral R&D alliance and that governance structure moderates this relationship.     

Functional and contextual dimensions of INVs’ alliance partner selection

Prior research on the selection of international alliance partners calls for investigation of the potential specificity of selection criteria for evaluating partners for alliances with different objectives or functions. The present study responds to this need and contributes to the development of the field of international entrepreneurship by examining the relation between the alliance function and the criteria chosen. We studied three alliance functions: R&D, production, and marketing. Second, for each alliance function, we analyzed the criteria selected within two contexts: developing countries and those that consider emerging markets in their partner choice set. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 executives from international new ventures (INVs) in two major North American biotechnology clusters, representing 239 alliances; 65.7 % of these were signed with international partners. Results indicate that, aside from compatibility/complementarity of resources (R&D and production alliances), all criteria used within a single function are unique to that function. Furthermore, these criteria differ somewhat when the potential partners considered by a firm include those from both emerging and developed markets, compared with firms that limit potential partners to those in developed market contexts. Finally, the study reveals that respondent firms integrate country, industry, and market attractiveness factors with partner selection criteria for marketing alliances. This suggests that, for many firms, market choice and partner selection are not successive steps. The study’s originality lies in its focus on the relationship between alliance function and partner selection criteria used by INVs as well as within different contexts.     

The effects of absorptive capacity,knowledge sourcing strategy,and alliance forms on firm performance

This paper explores the relationship between absorptive capacity, knowledge sourcing strategy, alliance forms, and firm performance. Based on the literature, the concept of a knowledge sourcing strategy in alliance contexts is proposed, which can be categorised into two types: a knowledge internalisation strategy and a knowledge access strategy. From an organisational learning perspective, it is argued that a firm's absorptive capacity has a positive influence on a knowledge internalisation strategy, and accordingly a firm's choices of alliance forms are also influenced. R&D performance is also included in the theoretical model in order to generate further managerial implications. Instead of using conventional regression methods, structural equation modelling (SEM) is adopted to conduct path analysis, as SEM is well suited in verifying multiple-dependent models. The arguments advanced are supported by empirical analysis of a sample of 148 alliances.     

Technology strategy and new venture performance: A study of corporate-sponsored and independent biotechnology ventures

New ventures, companies eight years or younger, play a major role in the development of an emerging, high-technology industry. Corporate-sponsored new ventures (those supported by an established corporation) and independent ventures (those founded by independent entrepreneurs) frequently battle for industry leadership and financial success. Whereas both venture types use technology to achieve financial and market success, little is known about the differences in their technology strategies.Technology strategy is the plan that guides a new venture's decisions on the development and use of technological capabilities. This strategy covers six major areas. The first is selecting the pioneering posture, where a venture decides whether or not be among the industry's first companies to introduce new products (technologies) to the market. The second is determining the number of products to be introduced to the market. The third is choosing the extent of a venture's use of internal and external R&D sources. Internal sources usually refer to in-house R&D activities. External sources may include purchasing or licensing of technology from other companies, or joining strategic alliances to acquire that technology. The fourth is deciding the level of R&D spending. The fifth is selecting the combination (portfolio) of applied and basic research projects. Whereas basic R&D advances science, applied R&D leads to new products and technologies. The sixth, and final, dimension is the venture's use of patenting to protect any competitive advantages it might gain from its R&D activities.This article reports the results of a study that explored the differences in the technology strategies and performance of corporate and independent ventures. The biotechnology industry was chosen to test the study's hypotheses, using 112 ventures.Seven of the study's hypotheses focused on the potential variations in technology strategy between corporate and independent ventures. Independent ventures (IVs) were expected to surpass corporate ventures (CVs) in pioneering new products (technologies), using internal R&D, and emphasizing applied R&D. CVs were expected to surpass IVs in introducing new products, using external R&D sources, spending on R&D, and patenting. The study's remaining three hypotheses covered possible variations in new venture performance (NVP) and their sources.The results showed that IVs focused more on pioneering, pursued a more applied R&D portfolio, and emphasized internal R&D more than CVs. CVs utilized external technology sources, spent more heavily on R&D, stressed basic R&D, and used patenting more intensively than IVs. These results were consistent with the hypotheses. However, contrary to expectations, there were no significant differences between CVs and IVs in the frequency of new product introductions, probably because most ventures were at the invention, rather than the commercialization, stage.The results on the NVP of CVs and IVs were counter to expectations. IVs outperformed CVs, probably because of the high motivation of the IV owners who reaped the rewards of growth and profitability. Also, whereas CVs may have greater access to the resources of their sponsors, political conflicts and rigid corporate controls might have reduced their ability to achieve competitive advantages.The results also indicated that CVs and IVs appeared to gain competitive advantages from different technological choices. Pioneering, a focus on applied R&D, and extensive use of the internal R&D sources were also positively associated with the performance of IVs. Heavy R&D spending, the use of both internal and external R&D sources, frequent product introductions, and patenting were positively associated with the performance of CVs. Finding that technology strategies significantly impacted NVP should encourage executives to consider pursuing a formal technology strategy. Likewise, the finding that different dimensions of technology strategy influenced the performance of CVs and IVs in different ways has practical implications. CV managers can learn from their higher performing IV rivals. Also, because established companies frequently acquire IVs, information about their technology strategies can be valuable in assimilating the acquired ventures. Overall, the results show that technology strategy is an important factor in enhancing new venture performance.     

Exploring the innovation strategies of young firms: Corporate venture capital and venture capital impact on alliance innovation strategy

We investigate how governance structure and power influence alliance exploration strategy. Adopting a real options perspective and the agency view, we suggest that innovation strategies differ based on the firm's governance authority. We find that the motivations of corporate venture capitalist firms, venture capitalists, and firm founders may have an impact on the formation of exploratory alliances among adolescent firms. Using a sample of 122 adolescent firms, we examine the influence that governance structure has on the firm's alliance portfolio and innovation potential. While the influence of corporate venture capitalist firms alone do affect alliance formation strategy, corporate venture-backed firms with founders having high influence (knowledge or ownership in the firm) are more likely to form innovation-focused alliances. In contrast, venture capitalist-backed firms tend to avoid innovation-focused alliances, preferring more exploitive ones, even when founders have high influence within the firm.     

The financing of alliance entrepreneurship

It is popular nowadays for entrepreneurial firms to advance their entrepreneurship outside their boundaries through alliances. This paper studies how the financing of entrepreneurship changes in strategic alliances. We model a financially constrained entrepreneur and a deep-pocket incumbent developing an innovative product through a strategic alliance, which generates externalities on the incumbent. We find that i) in contrast to traditional theories, the entrepreneur's financial constraint can be tightened by an increase in his endowment; ii) an outside investor is introduced as a third party to deal with the free-riding agency problem; and iii) the externalities have a significant effect on the design of financial claims in the alliance contract, and the incentive-compatible financial instruments are consistent with empirical observations.     

Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment

Technology strategy (TS) is one of the most important aspects of any firm's strategic posture especially in dynamic environments such as the computer software industry. Not only do new ventures face the pressures that accompany all young companies (e.g., shortages of capital), but they also have to keep up with a rapid rate of technological change. Consequently TS, the sum of a firm's choices on how to develop and exploit its technological resources, can profoundly affect a venture's performance and survival.This empirical study examines the relationships between TS and new venture performance (NVP). By focusing on TS variables and analyzing their performance outcomes, the study offers insights into the factors that can influence the success of new ventures in a fast-paced environment. This study also examines key environmental moderators, those external environmental forces, which can significantly impact the strength or direction of the relationship between a firm's TS and NVP.The study examines five TSs that can enhance NPV. The first is radicality, which means developing and introducing new products ahead of competitors. The second is the intensity of product upgrades, which refers to a venture's commitment to introducing more refinements and extensions of its products than its competition. The third is the level of R&D spending, which indicates a venture's strong investment in internal research and development activities. The fourth is the use of external technology sources (e.g., strategic alliances and licenses) to augment a firm's own R&D efforts. The final dimension is the use of     

Multilateral alliances and innovation output: The importance of equity and technological scope

The formation of R&D alliances has become an increasingly popular way to achieve improved innovation outcomes. However, R&D alliances face high failure rates due to the dual nature, cooperation and competition, of what can be a very challenging inter-firm relationship, a problem that is compounded when an alliance involves more than two partners. As such, it is important to understand the mechanisms that encourage cooperation in multilateral alliances to help firms achieve desired innovation outcomes. In this study, we hypothesize two such mechanisms: equity governance structure and multi-technology scope. We test our hypotheses using panel data from the pharmaceutical industry spanning 15 years. Our results support the idea that equity governance and having a multiple technology scope are positively related to innovation outcomes in multilateral alliances.     

Cooperative or competitive in alliance formation: Alliance patterns with respect to rivals

Premised on the assumption that strategic alliance is a type of competitive action toward rivals, this study explores how a firm uses alliances differently with respect to rivals. I distinguish between two types of alliances that directly involve rivals: alliance with a rival and with a rival's partner. The former and the latter reflect cooperative‐ and competitive‐orientations respectively. Further, I investigate what drives a focal firm to adopt a particular alliance rather than another. The findings indicate that the key consideration explaining different alliance patterns is the resource profiles of focal and rival firms. This study contributes to the literature on competitive dynamics and strategic alliance by suggesting a new approach to integrate interfirm competition and cooperation. Copyright © 2016 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Develop and nurture an international alliance capability

Firms increasingly enter into alliances when expanding into international markets and market segments. Unfortunately, many of these alliances fail because managers are overconfident and unprepared for the diverse and complex contingencies they encounter. Growing research suggests that developing an alliance capability function improves alliance performance. We first identify common types of problems and opportunities that arise from alliance design to alliance dissolution. With this understanding, we then specify the alliance capabilities that must be developed to deal with these contingencies. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Strategic orientation of high-technology firms in a transitional economy

Strategic orientation is a critical factor for a firm's competitiveness in a transitional economy context but it is understudied in the current literature. This article examines the antecedents of strategic orientation from both the socio-cognitive and resource-based view perspectives. The study posits that the strategic orientations of firms in a transitional economy context are influenced by the top managers’ cognitions and organizational resources. Based on a national survey of high-technology firms in China, the study finds that a stronger market-focused strategic orientation was facilitated by managerial cognitions about the future of the industry and current operation and performance of the firm, as well as organizational resources including an R&D infrastructure, technological alliance, and top managers' foreign experience. The study confirms that strategic orientations should be examined from multiple theoretical perspectives.     

R&;D Subsidy and Self-Financed R&;D: The Case of Japanese High-Technology Start-Ups

This paper examines whether public R&D subsidies constitute a substitute or complement for private-financed R&D. The empirical analysis is based on a panel data of 223 Japanese high-technology start-ups. Our evidence is consistent with the complement hypothesis, i.e., that publicly-funded R&D does promote private R&D. The complement effects are stronger for more mature firms. This is because such firms, in the growth phase, might have greater demands for R&D funds.     

Alliance capabilities,interpartner attributes,and performance outcomes in international strategic alliances

This study tests, using a sample of cross-border alliances, how different alliance capability components intersect to develop resource complementarity and trust and how such interpartner attributes themselves intersect to enhance performance. We find that management capability allows firms to build resource complementarity and trust. High formulation capability is required for management capability to positively shape resource complementarity. Search capability is only positively linked to resource complementarity when formulation capability is low. International alliance experience drives resource complementarity. Trust has an inverted U-shaped relationship with performance, and resource complementarity drives trust and performance. Resource complementarity positively moderates the trust–performance link.     

Corporate motivation and performance in R&D alliances

In the face of the global challenges of rapid transitions in technologies and markets, R&D activity has become one of the main ways for companies to engage in innovation. In addition, minimizing transaction cost is no longer sufficient to ensure a company's survival; therefore, companies must investigate and acquire resources to facilitate innovation within the organization. This study investigates corporate motivation and the performance of R&D alliances among machinery manufacturers in Taiwan. To explore the relationships between motivation and performance, this study adopts two distinct but complementary perspectives on R&D alliances: transaction-cost economics (TCE) and resource-based theory (RBT). This study includes the administration of a survey to explore the issues of motivation of companies participating in R&D alliances, types of governance structure in alliances, relationships between governance structure and performance, and relationships between motivation and performance of an R&D alliance in Taiwan's machinery industry (the TMI). The results in this study assert that corporate motivation as derived from both TCE and RBT perspectives has a significant positive relationship with the performance of R&D alliances; however, the other moderating variables, such as types of governance structure and corporate attributes, do not have a significant impact on the performance of R&D alliances in the TMI.     

Returns to alliance portfolio diversity: The relative effects of partner diversity on firm's innovative performance and productivity

This study considers the impact of diversification in types of technological alliances, resulting in alliance portfolio diversity, on various dimensions of a firm's performance, as they relate to exploration and exploitation. Using a large panel of innovative firms in the Netherlands, this study shows that partner type diversity in a firm's alliance portfolio has an inverted U-shaped relationship with productivity and radical innovative performance and a positive relationship with incremental innovative performance. Moreover, the results suggest that a lower level of diversity is needed to achieve an optimal level of productivity compared to radical innovative performance, whereas for incremental innovative performance a higher level of portfolio diversity appears to give the best performance.     

External and internal influences on R&D alliance formation: Evidence from German SMEs

Relying on relational capital theory and transaction cost economics (TCE), this study identifies factors that impede or promote alliance formation in small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Environmental uncertainty and knowledge intensity impede firms' R&D alliance formation; the focal firm's overall trust in partners enhances alliance formation. Trust interacts positively with environmental uncertainty and knowledge intensity to affect alliance formation in SMEs. The findings reflect data from a longitudinal sample of 854 German SMEs, captured over eight years from 1999 to 2007.     

Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms

A key to success in industries populated by entrepreneurial high-technology firms is the rate at which the firm develops new products. Rapid product development creates significant advantages for entrepreneurial firms, including access to early cash flows, external visibility, legitimacy, and early market share. The higher a firm's rate of new product development, the more likely the firm is to achieve and maintain these first-mover advantages. This is particularly true in industries such as pharmaceuticals, where the effectiveness of patent protections leads to patent races in which a “winner take all” scenario exists. But even in industries where patent protection is weak, the advantages of being first, in terms of market preemption, reputation effects, experience curve effects, etc., can still be of major importance. We argue that one way an entrepreneurial firm can increase its rate of new product development is by entering into strategic alliances with firms that possess complementary assets.The basic proposition advanced is that a firm's rate of new product development is a positive function of the number of strategic alliances that it has entered. However, the relationship between strategic alliances and the rate of new product development may be nonlinear. Specifically, although strategic alliances may initially have positive effects on the rate of new product development, this relationship may exhibit diminishing returns. Moreover, past some point it is possible that negative returns may set in. Thus, the relationship between the number of alliances and the rate of new product development may be an inverted U-shape.Two reasons can be given to support such a relationship. First, not all alliances will make an equal contribution to increasing the rate of new product development. The economic “law” of diminishing returns suggests that the more alliances a firm engages in, the more likely it is to enter some alliances whose marginal contribution is relatively minor. Such a phenomenon on its own is enough to suggest diminishing returns.Second, gaining access to complementary assets through strategic alliances is not without risks. Malperformance may occur when the firm discovers that the complementary assets provided by the partner are a poor match, fail to live up to the promises made by the partner, or a partner may opportunistically exploit an alliance, expropriating the firm's know-how while providing little in return. These problems arise because the effectiveness with which the firm can select and manage alliance partners is likely to be negatively related to the number of alliances the firm is managing. Due to information processing requirements, the quality of partner search and the ability to monitor the partners' actions will decline as the firm increases the number of alliances in which it is involved. This reasoning leads to a prediction that past some point, alliances will be increasingly vulnerable to malperformance. This raises not only the possibility of diminishing returns to the number of alliances, but also negative returns as the number of alliances increases past some critical point.This proposed relationship between alliances and new product development was tested on a sample of 132 biotechnology firms. The results provide strong evidence to support the inverted U-shaped relationship between the number of strategic alliances and the rate of new product development. Therefore, at low levels strategic alliances are positively related to new product development, but as the number of alliances increases, the benefits begin to decrease, and at high levels the costs of an additional alliance actually outweigh the benefits.     

The roles of R&;D in new firm growth

Innovative start-ups are an important driver of economic growth. This article presents empirical evidence on the effects of research and development (R&D) on new product development, interfirm alliances and employment growth during the early life course of firms. We use a dataset that contains a sample of new firms that is representative of the whole population of start-ups. This dataset covers the first 6 years of the life course of firms. It is revealed that R&D plays several roles during the early life course of high-tech as well as high-growth firms. The effect of initial R&D on high-tech firm growth is through increasing levels of interfirm alliances in the first post-entry years. R&D efforts enable the exploitation of external knowledge. Initial R&D also stimulates new product development later on in the life course of high-tech firms, but this does not seem to affect firm growth. R&D does not affect the growth rate of new low-tech firms, which seem to be driven mainly by the growth ambitions of the founding entrepreneur. The results show that R&D matters for a limited but important set of new high-tech and high-growth firms, which are key in innovation and entrepreneurship policies.