Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of governments in resolving collective action dilemmas arising in R&D collaboration between university-research institutes (URI) and small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs). The paper focusses on R&D collaboration in South Korea in light of its major industrial reforms since the 1980s in strengthening the national science and technology innovation system.

To examine factors explaining the likelihood of SMEs to collaborate with URIs in R&D activities, the authors used data that were collected in the Seoul Metropolitan Area by the Seoul Institute in 2010. A logistic regression analysis was performed with data from the Open Innovation System survey, which consists of 336 SMEs; and supplemented by firm-level data retrieved from the government official statistics on structural characteristics of SMEs. The Mann-Whitney Test of Difference was employed to test the perceived importance of R&D activities in various stages of product development.

This research found that SMEs having government certified R&D facilities and higher investments in R&D activities explain their likelihood in engaging in R&D collaboration with URIs. SMEs in the chemical sector also are more likely to establish R&D collaboration with URIs compared to those in the information technology (IT) sector. In terms of the importance of R&D activities, there are marked differences between SMEs collaborating with URIs and those that do not. The differences are found in R&D’s needs related to acquisition of information, basic research, pilot testing of products, and product manufacturing. Most SMEs in the sample reported several barriers to R&D activities, particularly in securing human resources and the operation of R&D; and that, they believe the government can assist them in research and development activities and human resource training.

This study provides new insights into the way in which R&D facilities of SMEs may facilitate R&D collaboration with URIs. The results broaden the understanding on the scope of R&D collaboration adopted by SMEs and strategies that can be adopted and implemented by government agencies to attract and retain firms that are innovative. While the findings also provide insights on the scope of management decisions adopted by SMEs, the sample was limited to 336 SMEs in the Seoul Metropolitan area, making generalization to other regions of the country limited.

From the institutional collective action framework, this research provides a critical lens to build R&D collaboration between the URI and SMEs, highlighting the role of government with considerable efforts to facilitate SMEs to enter into arrangements with URIs by focussing on the importance of R&D facility and stages of product development.

Firms are increasingly organizing cross-regional R&D collaborations among different units. Such collaborations should promote knowledge flows across distance and bring new knowledge to the local communities. However, the nature of cross-regional collaborations varies widely depending on the organizations within which they are organized. Compared with collaborations within small firms, collaborations in large firms tend to be routinized, which reduces the need for interpersonal interactions and increases the dependence on organizational structure. As a result, additional spillover from cross-regional collaboration is likely to be lower if the collaboration is within large firms. We extend this argument to the regional level and hypothesize that regions with a higher level of cross-regional collaborations tend to generate more valuable technologies, but when large firms dominate the formation of such collaborations, the marginal benefits of cross-regional collaboration are significantly reduced. Using a data set from the pharmaceutical industry between 1975 and 2001, we find support for our hypotheses. We conduct a series of robustness tests to check the consistency of our results.

This paper aims to examine the challenges experienced by Russian research and development (R&D) organisations in international technology collaboration in the global innovation arena.

A total of 33 Russian R&D organisations were selected from a sample of 138 potential participating organisations from the Central, Nord‐Western and Volga Federal Districts of Russia to take part in a qualitative interview study. Organisations were selected based on their responses to a questionnaire which measured the extent and nature of their experience in international technology collaborations. Participants were interviewed about their experiences of engaging in international technology collaboration under two different modes of collaboration: short term customer‐supplier relationships vs longer‐term strategic alliances. The semi‐structured interviews focused on 15 different issues which had been derived from the previously published literature on international technology collaboration and a thematic analysis was conducted on the resultant data.

The analysis indicates which of the issues reported as problematic in the literature were pertinent to the Russian organisations in the sample under each mode of collaboration. The findings also provide some evidence that Russian R&D organisations have made progress in the transition from the command to the market economy and are adjusting to the new environment, albeit gradually in some cases.

The paper presents interpretive, qualitative findings, which were analysed from a Russian perspective in three out of seven Federal Districts of Russia. The research sample does not include non‐Russian counterparts and the analysis is restricted to those variables which have previously been identified as exerting an influence over international technology collaborations.

The study reveals a broad range of insights into the types of issues which warrant close managerial attention from both Russian managers and their international partners in engaging in international technology collaborations with contemporary Russian R&D organisations.

The research suggests that different sets of challenges emerge for organisations engaged in different modes of international collaboration and provides insight into the unique context of Russia, challenging some of the previously published analyses of the influence of Russian business and managerial practices on the innovativeness of contemporary Russian organisations.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the collaboration strategies employed by collaborating small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) and university researchers for initiating and optimizing the process and outcome of R&D collaboration.

The paper is based upon a qualitative study of the total population of university departments and SMEs involved in collaborative research projects sponsored by a new governmental programme in Denmark, the aim of which was to build new R&D alliances between industry and universities.

The findings show how partners choose to pursue difference short‐ or long‐term strategies to optimize the process and outcome of university‐industry (UI) collaboration. Some collaborations were thus informed by a short‐term strategy aimed at achieving immediate R&D results. However, to a high extent, many SME partners relied upon a long‐term strategy aiming at developing UI relations beyond the immediate project and practical learning. A variety of shifting strategies shape researchers' decisions during UI collaborations, which thus convey different notions of success.

The findings of the present research point to the importance of taking the diverse reasons and micro strategies informing collaborative efforts into account when studying UI collaborations.

Different strategies may prove successful in optimizing the outcome of UI collaborations depending upon, e.g. partners' previous collaborative experiences. Policies should incorporate some openness towards the differential premises and reasons for UI collaboration.

Relatively little research has addressed the development of UI relationships from the micro‐level perspective of the discretionary decisions and strategies of collaborating researchers.

Product innovations are often the result of combinations of internal and external knowledge. A significant amount of open innovation literature has argued that working with external partners can be beneficial, in particular, when this is complemented by internal R&D, yet a wholesale shift to open innovation has not occurred. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate two new limits of openness, grounded in attention-based theory, that help explain why such a shift has not occurred. This study argues that specific combinations of identities a firm collaborates with, that is, whether a partner is classified as a customer, supplier, competitor or university and/or technological center, predictably increase and decrease product innovation.

This study demonstrates these findings using econometric techniques on a large-scale panel data set, comprising 14,682 observations.

The authors observe positive effects of customer collaboration, partner scope (collaboration with other outside identities) and internal R&D when considered separately. Critically, they observe two important situations where these positive effects are reduced. First, they argue and observe that when customers are added to the mix of identities, diminished returns on product innovation result. Second, they argue and observe that technological customer collaboration reduces the benefits from an internal R&D department (more than collaboration with other identities). The findings of this study are robust in that singling out another partner identity does not reveal such patterns.

The findings stress the importance of considering the identity of collaborating parties in studying the impact of openness on innovation success. This study conceptually and empirically rejects the – implicitly held – assumption in the literature that different partners provide similar benefits and are interchangeable.

This study proposes new limits to the “open innovation” literature. As identities are easy to observe by managers and are shown to impact product innovation, this study argues they are highly relevant to managerial decision-making. This study also observes, through counterfactual analysis, that attention limits are critical, as a theoretical setting of no attention limits would significantly lift product innovations.

This study shows important limitations to the open innovation literature by showing that customer collaboration leads to declining rates of product innovation when combined with greater collaboration scope or the internal R&D department. This study adds the novel insight that customer collaboration weakens the positive effect of collaboration scope and internal R&D on product innovations.

This paper aims to explore the relationship between the types of R&D‐activities within science‐based firms and the knowledge transfer channels used for industry‐science collaboration. Rooted in a contingency approach, it seeks to identify patterns in the organization of knowledge transfer and to disclose ways that may support R&D‐managers in achieving effective knowledge transfer.

The paper is an exploratory study in order to obtain a deep understanding of the relationship. At first, both the types of R&D‐activity and the knowledge transfer channels were conceptualized based on an extensive literature review. Second, data were collected by means of semi‐structured interviews with 17 (assistant) R&D‐managers of ten large European chemical firms.

The analysis suggests that almost each of the knowledge transfer channels used for industry‐science collaboration has a more or less unique link to a specific type of R&D‐activity. An empirically based model is developed that visualizes the linkages. In addition, explanations for observed links are proposed.

The empirical analysis reported focuses on multinational firms in the science‐based European chemical industry, because they invest heavily in R&D and are hence more interested in collaboration with scientific partners. Further research is needed to determine the model's applicability in other empirical settings, both within and outside science‐based industries.

The paper provides R&D‐managers with a model that may support them in deciding how to organize their collaboration with scientific partners based on the type of their internal R&D‐activity to achieve effective knowledge transfer.

The paper is one of the first studies that empirically assesses the relationship between the types of R&D‐activities in firms and the knowledge transfer channels that are used for industry‐science collaboration.

We examine the determinants of multinational firms’ propensity to conduct R&D activities in host countries, with specific attention to the influence of host countries’ university research. We consider heterogeneous locational drivers related to the type of R&D activity: basic research, applied research, development for local markets, and development for global markets. Drawing on official survey data on R&D activities by 498 Japanese multinational firms in 24 host countries and estimating two-stage models, we find that the likelihood that firms conduct R&D in a host country is generally increasing in the strength of university research. Conditional on a firm’s R&D presence, university research strength is associated with a greater propensity to conduct (basic) research activities rather than (local) development, while the intensity of host country university–industry collaboration is most strongly associated with applied research. Host country experience and the depth of the firm’s manufacturing presence are also associated higher propensities to engage in research.

Scientific collaborations represent informal external ties that together with formal R&D alliances constitute a multichannel knowledge sourcing network in science-based industries. Although such multichannel knowledge sourcing benefits firms by providing more thorough access to external sources, it also entails potentially significant redundancies worthy of consideration. This paper aims to take a step by first verifying their existence, followed by an examination of key contingencies determining the extent of these redundancies, i.e. firm absorptive capacity, balanced utilization of ties and firm size.

This is an empirical study that uses scientific collaborations and R&D alliances of US pharmaceutical companies to test the proposed hypotheses.

This paper verifies the existence of multichannel knowledge sourcing redundancies, followed by an examination of key contingencies determining the extent of these redundancies, i.e. firm absorptive capacity, balanced utilization of ties and firm size.

To the knowledge, this is a first attempt at clarifying redundancies in innovative knowledge sourcing and their implications for firm innovation performance.

Las colaboraciones científicas representan vínculos externos informales que, junto con las alianzas formales de I + D, constituyen una red de abastecimiento de conocimiento multicanal en industrias basadas en la ciencia. Aunque esta fuente de conocimiento multicanal beneficia a las empresas al proporcionar un acceso más completo a fuentes externas, también implica impotantes potencailes redundancias que merecen consideración. Dichas redundancias tienen su origen en conocimientos específicos que se superponen y en los requisitos de recursos clave similares, incluido el presupuesto y prsonal de investigación. A pesar de su importancia, la literatura no ha ofrecido una descripción completa de las posibles causas y contingencias de estas redundancias. El presente estudio da un paso en esta dirección al verificar primero su existencia, seguido de un estudio de las contingencias clave que determinan el alcance de estas redundancias.

este es un artículo empírico que utiliza el contexto de la industria farmacéutica para probar la interacción entre las colaboraciones científicas y las alianzas de I + D como impulsores del desempeño de innovación de una empresa farmacéutica que se manifiesta en la productividad de sus patentes.

El análisis empírico revela que el efecto de las colaboraciones científicas y las alianzas de I + D es de hecho parcialmente sustitutivo o redundante, y que dicha redundancia es mayor para las empresas con baja capacidad de absorción, utilización desequilibrada de los dos tipos de vínculos externos y su tamaño.

Este es uno de los primeros intentos empíricos de explorar los efectos sustitutivos de las colaboraciones científicas y las alianzas de I + D a nivel de empresa. La incorporación de contingencias clave como la capacidad de absorción, la utilización equilibrada de las relaciones y el tamaño de la empresa mejoran aún más la novedad y originalidad de nuestra investigación.

Colaborações científicas representam links externos informais que, juntamente com alianças formais de P&D, constituem uma rede de fornecimento de conhecimento multicanal em indústrias baseadas na ciência. Embora essa fonte multicanal de conhecimento beneficie as empresas ao fornecer um acesso mais completo a fontes externas, ela também envolve redundâncias potenciais significativas que merecem consideração. Essas redundâncias resultam da sobreposição de conhecimentos específicos e requisitos de recursos chave semelhantes, incluindo orçamento e pessoal de pesquisa. Apesar de sua importância, a literatura não fornece uma descrição completa das possíveis causas e contingências dessas redundâncias. O presente estudo dá um passo nessa direção, primeiro verificando sua existência, seguido por um estudo das contingências-chave que determinam a extensão dessas redundâncias.

Este é um artigo empírico que usa o contexto da indústria farmacêutica para testar a interação entre colaborações científicas e alianças de P&D como impulsionadores do desempenho inovador de uma empresa farmacêutica manifestada na produtividade de suas patentes.

A análise empírica revela que o efeito das colaborações científicas e alianças de P&D é de fato parcialmente substituto ou redundante, e que a referida redundância é maior para empresas com baixa capacidade de absorção, utilização desequilibrada dos dois tipos de links externos e seu tamanho.

esta é uma das primeiras tentativas empíricas de explorar os efeitos substitutos de colaborações científicas e parcerias de P&D no nível da empresa. Incorporar contingências importantes, como capacidade de absorção, utilização equilibrada de relacionamentos e tamanho da empresa, aumenta ainda mais a novidade e originalidade de nossa pesquisa.

This study investigates the conditions that shape the contractual structure of pharmaceutical-biotechnology R&D agreements and whether these collaborations have produced measurable impact on the overall R&D productivity of pharmaceutical companies. In one section, the effect of uncertainty due to the advances in technology on the structure of R&D contracts is discussed. Specifically, it is shown that newer technologies associated with higher uncertainty result in the choice of more hierarchical contract structures. In addition, the significance of R&D collaborations on the overall innovation process of pharmaceutical companies is evaluated. The results indicate that only some types of R&D alliances, signed in earlier stages of research, have a significant role in the patent production and drug discovery process.

Starting from the model of the initiation and evolution of inter-firm knowledge transfer in R&D relationships developed by Faems et al. (2007), the purpose of this paper is to refine and improve this model, assessing its reliability in a different and wider context and extending it according to the outcomes.

A multiple case-study approach was implemented, examining 34 dyadic inter-firm R&D relationships. This methodology suited the research goal of exploring the validity of a model in an area where little data or theory exists.

The theoretical model proposed by Faems et al. (2007) was improved, confirming the adequacy of the overall structure of their intuition and highlighting several differences in terms of factors that lead to the dissolution of R&D relationships. These differences mainly refer to partners’ similarities before starting R&D relationships, co-opetition situations, knowledge leakage/opportunistic behavior and reputation issues.

This work is the first to investigate two open research gaps related to the model of the initiation and evolution of inter-firm knowledge transfer in R&D relationships: the need for additional case studies in other contexts to develop a more general theory and the lack of research incorporating issues such as relational capital between partners, governance form and alliance scope in an integrated analysis.