On the Strategic Accumulation of Intangible Assets

The resource-based view holds that firms can earn supranormal returns if and only if they have superior resources and those resources are protected by some form of isolating mechanism preventing their diffusion throughout industry. One isolating mechanism that has been proposed for intangible assets is their accumulation process. The hypothesis is that intangible assets are inherently inimitable because would-be imitators need to replicate the entire accumulation path to achieve the same resource position. Thus, entrants can never catch up to incumbents.An interesting challenge to this hypothesis is counterfactual evidence that entrants sometimes outperform incumbents. Such counterfactual evidence should not exist if the theory is strictly correct. This paper attempts to reconcile resource accumulation theory with the counterfactual evidence. We do so by building an intermediate good-production function for a firm's intangible asset stocks. We test the contribution of the intangible asset stock to the firm's final good-production function and examine the extent to which that asset stock deters rival mobility in the pharmaceutical industry.We find that the asset accumulation process itself cannot deter rivals, because asset stocks reach steady state rather quickly. Entrants can achieve an incumbent's intangible asset stock merely by matching its investment until steady state. Thus, we conclude that the accumulation process per se is not an isolating mechanism. While this is perhaps the most important contribution, another contribution is an empirical methodology for characterizing the accumulation function.

[1]  Robert P. Leone Generalizing What Is Known About Temporal Aggregation and Advertising Carryover , 1995 .

[2]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  R&D, Patents, and Productivity , 1981 .

[3]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Capitalism as an engine of progress , 1990 .

[4]  M. Lieberman The learning curve, diffusion, and competitive strategy , 1987 .

[5]  Hiroyuki Itami Mobilizing invisible assets , 1987 .

[6]  F. Scherer Research and Development Resource Allocation Under Rivalry , 1967 .

[7]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[8]  Steven Klepper,et al.  Firm Survival and the Evolution of Oligopoly , 2002 .

[9]  D. B. Montgomery,et al.  First‐mover advantages , 1988 .

[10]  Jan W. Rivkin Imitation of Complex Strategies , 2000 .

[11]  Wesley M. Cohen,et al.  Empirical studies of innovation and market structure , 1989 .

[12]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Landscape Design: Designing for Local Action in Complex Worlds , 1999 .

[13]  T. O. Kvålseth Cautionary Note about R 2 , 1985 .

[14]  Marvin B. Lieberman,et al.  Postentry Investment and Market Structure in the Chemical Processing Industries , 1987 .

[15]  R. Lamb,et al.  Competitive strategic management , 1984 .

[16]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Productivity and R and D at the Firm Level , 1981 .

[17]  R. Rumelt Towards a Strategic Theory of the Firm , 1984 .

[18]  R. T. Beaty,et al.  The competitive challenge , 1993 .

[19]  P. Ghemawat Commitment: The Dynamic of Strategy , 1991 .

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

[21]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage , 1989 .

[22]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  R&D and the Productivity Slowdown , 1980 .

[23]  D. Teece,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[24]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  R&D and Productivity Growth at the Industry Level: Is There Still a Relationship? , 1998 .

[25]  Richard Makadok Can first-mover and early-mover advantages be sustained in an industry with low barriers to entry/imitation? , 1998 .

[26]  Richard J. Gilbert,et al.  Chapter 8 Mobility barriers and the value of incumbency , 1988 .

[27]  S. Winter Knowledge and Competence as Strategic Assets , 1987 .

[28]  Daniel A. Levinthal Adaptation on rugged landscapes , 1997 .

[29]  Simon Broadbent,et al.  Building better TV schedules: New light from the single source , 1997 .

[30]  E. Mansfield The economics of technological change , 1968 .

[31]  S. Lippman,et al.  Uncertain Imitability: An Analysis of Interfirm Differences in Efficiency under Competition , 1982 .

[32]  James D. Adams,et al.  Bounding the Effects of R&D an Investigation Using Matched Establishment-Firm Data , 1996 .