Leveraging Research and Development: Assessing the Impact of the U.S. Advanced Technology Program

This paper examines the factors that affect a firm's chances of winning an award from the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and the subsequent impact of the award on a firm's success in raising additional funds for its research and development (R&D) activities. Analysis of data from a survey of 1998 ATP applicants shows that proposals with higher ratings by technical and business/economic experts have a greater chance of winning an award. Further, the projects and firms selected by ATP are more willing to share their research findings with other firms, and tend to be those that open up new pathways for innovation through combining technical areas or by forming new R&D partnerships. Most of the non-winners have not proceeded with any aspect of the R&D project proposed to ATP and, of those that have, most did so at a smaller scale. Furthermore, the ATP award has prestige value for the winning firms; the halo effect from the award increases the success of these firms in attracting additional funding from other sources. Our conclusion is that the ATP is leveraging activities that have a strong potential for broad-based economic benefit.

[1]  Lewis M. Branscomb,et al.  Investing in innovation : creating a research and innovation policy that works , 1998 .

[2]  J. Liebeskind,et al.  Knowledge, Strategy, and the Theory of the Firm , 1996 .

[3]  D. Mowery,et al.  Technology and the pursuit of economic growth , 1991 .

[4]  Andrew C. Inkpen The Management of International Joint Ventures: An Organizational Learning Perspective , 1995 .

[5]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[6]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Economic analysis of research spillovers implications for the advanced technology program , 1996 .

[7]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Do Subsidies to Commercial R&D Reduce Market Failures? Microeconomic Evaluation Studies , 1999 .

[8]  A. Link,et al.  An econometric analysis of trends in research joint venture activity , 2005, Managerial and Decision Economics.

[9]  Kathryn L. Combs,et al.  The Economics of Science and Technology , 2012 .

[10]  G. Hamel Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances , 1991 .

[11]  R. Gulati,et al.  The dynamics of learning alliances: competition, cooperation, and relative scope , 1998 .

[12]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[13]  宮本 光晴 Prices,Quality and Trust--Inter-firm Relations in Britain & Japan/Mari Sako(1992) , 1993 .

[14]  Z. Griliches The Search for R&D Spillovers , 1991 .

[15]  K. R. Harrigan Joint ventures and competitive strategy , 1988 .

[16]  Scott J. Wallsten,et al.  Rethinking the Small Business Innovation Research Program , 1999 .

[17]  Kenneth Flamm,et al.  Creating the Computer: Government, Industry and High Technology , 1990 .

[18]  E. von Hippel,et al.  Sources of Innovation , 2016 .

[19]  J. Lerner,et al.  The Government as Venture Capitalist , 2000 .

[20]  J. Liebeskind,et al.  Keeping Organizational Secrets: Protective Institutional Mechanisms and their Costs , 1997 .

[21]  M. Kelley From Mission to Commercial Orientation: Perils and Possibilities for Federal Industrial Technology Policy , 1997 .

[22]  Andrew A. Toole,et al.  Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence , 1999 .

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

[24]  Roger G. Noll,et al.  The Technology Pork Barrel , 1991 .

[25]  Diane M. Lander,et al.  The influence of voluntarily disclosed qualitative information , 2000 .

[26]  Manuel Trajtenberg R&D Policy in Israel: An Overview and Reassessment , 2000 .

[27]  Mari Sako,et al.  Supplier Relationships and Innovation , 1995 .

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