The cost of integrating external technologies: Supply and demand drivers of value creation in the markets for technology

A classic decision faced by technology suppliers and buyers is whether to compete in the product markets or cooperate through licensing. We address this question by examining an important, demand-side barrier to licensing -- the buyers’ cost of integrating a licensed technology. We argue that this cost can be affected by suppliers’ knowledge-transfer capabilities, buyers’ absorptive capacity, and the cospecialization between R&D and downstream activities in the buyers’ industries. Following this argument and a stylized bargaining model, we hypothesize that the supplier’s knowledge-transfer capability stimulates licensing. Moreover, the importance of this capability increases when licensing to industries where potential buyers have weak absorptive capacity or R&D and downstream activities are cospecialized. We find support for our hypotheses using a panel dataset of small “serial innovators.”

[1]  A. Gambardella,et al.  The Market for Patents in Europe , 2006 .

[2]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation , 1993 .

[3]  D. Teece Competition, Cooperation, and Innovation Organizational Arrangements for Regimes of Rapid Technological Progress , 1992 .

[4]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .

[5]  F. Contractor International technology licensing: Compensation, costs, and negotiation , 1981 .

[6]  T. Bresnahan,et al.  The Division of Inventive Labor and The Extent of The Market , 1997 .

[7]  Balaji R. Koka,et al.  The Reification of Absorptive Capacity: A Critical Review and Rejuvenation of the Construct , 2006 .

[8]  Diana Hicks,et al.  Small Serial Innovators: The Small Firm Contribution to Technical Change , 2003 .

[9]  J. Gans,et al.  The Product Market and the Market for 'Ideas': Commercialization Strategies for Technology Entrepreneurs , 2002 .

[10]  Jack A. Nickerson,et al.  A Knowledge-based Theory of the Firm - A Problem-solving Perspective , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[11]  Andrea Fosfuri,et al.  The Penguin Has Entered the Building: The Commercialization of Open Source Software Products , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[12]  Ashish Arora,et al.  Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[13]  Andrea Fosfuri,et al.  Masters of War: Rivals' Product Innovation and New Advertising in Mature Product Markets , 2009, Manag. Sci..

[14]  A. Arora Licensing Tacit Knowledge: Intellectual Property Rights And The Market For Know-How , 1995 .

[15]  D. Teece Technology Transfer by Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost of Transferring Technological Know-How , 1977 .

[16]  A. Arora,et al.  Ideas for rent: an overview of markets for technology , 2010 .

[17]  Douglas J. Miller,et al.  An empirical examination of transaction- and firm-level influences on the vertical boundaries of the firm , 2003 .

[18]  J. Nash THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[19]  X. Martin,et al.  Knowledge transfer capacity and its implications for the theory of the multinational corporation , 2003 .

[20]  Will Mitchell,et al.  Complementarity, capabilities, and the boundaries of the firm: the impact of within‐firm and interfirm expertise on concurrent sourcing of complementary components , 2009 .

[21]  A. Arora,et al.  Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy , 2004 .

[22]  D. Teece Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy , 1993 .

[23]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[24]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[25]  Melissa A. Schilling Understanding the Alliance Data , 2008 .

[26]  E. Hippel Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation , 1994 .

[27]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  CUSTOMER POWER, STRATEGIC INVESTMENT, AND THE FAILURE OF LEADING FIRMS , 1996 .

[28]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization , 1990 .

[29]  Melanie Schreiner,et al.  What really is alliance management capability and how does it impact alliance outcomes and success , 2009 .

[30]  David H. Hsu,et al.  When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction? , 2000 .

[31]  Marco Ceccagnoli,et al.  Productivity and the Role of Complementary Assets in Firms’ Demand for Technology Innovations , 2009 .

[32]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  An Overview of Innovation , 2009 .

[33]  Deepak Hegde,et al.  Highly innovative small firms in the markets for technology , 2005 .

[34]  Ashish Arora,et al.  Insecure Advantage? Markets for Technology and the Value of Resources for Entrepreneurial Ventures† , 2012 .

[35]  Glenn Hoetker,et al.  Configuration of Value Chain Activities: The Effect of Pre-Entry Capabilities, Transaction Hazards, and Industry Evolution on Decisions to Internalize , 2012 .

[36]  Andrea Fosfuri The Licensing Dilemma: Understanding the Determinants of the Rate of Technology Licensing , 2006 .

[37]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators , 2004 .

[38]  A. Arora Contracting for tacit knowledge: the provision of technical services in technology licensing contracts , 1996 .

[39]  Scott Shane,et al.  Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation , 2004 .