The Localisation Of Corporate Technological Trajectories In The Interwar Cartels: Cooperative Learning Versus An Exchange Of Knowledge

By itself, an exchange of knowledge between complementary activities is inadequate to bring the localised technological specialisation of firms closer together, but cooperative 1earning tends to like the technological profile of partner companies more closely cornplementary Interwar cartels in the electrical equipment industry were restricted to an exchange of knowledge at the corporate group level, but in chemicals they sometimes included cooperative Learning. US patent data for the interwar period arc used to construct a measure of the pattern of the localised technological trajectories of the largest US and European firms. Cartels had a limited impact on the overall level of research or the propensity to patent ar the corporate group level. hut cooperative learning made the technological trajectories of chemical firms more similar or closely complementry. Instend. electrical equipment firms became more localised in their learning, paths, by separating products while exchanging knowledge between activities that remained complementary. The findings are relevant to the study of current technological cooperation through inter-firm alliances.

[1]  Bruce J. Hunt,et al.  The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio, 1900-1932 , 1985 .

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

[3]  W. J. Baker,et al.  A history of the Marconi Company , 1970 .

[4]  Edith Penrose.  The economics of the international patent system , 1951 .

[5]  Keith Pavitt,et al.  The Size Distribution of Innovating Firms in the UK: 1945-1983 , 1987 .

[6]  S. Winter,et al.  Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development , 1987 .

[7]  J. Cantwell.  The Globalisation of Technology: What Remains of the Product Cycle Model? , 1995 .

[8]  G. Richardson,et al.  The Organisation of Industry , 1972 .

[9]  William Rupert Maclaurin,et al.  Invention and Innovation in the Radio Industry , 1950 .

[10]  C. Freeman.  Economics of Industrial Innovation , 1975 .

[11]  John Cantwell,et al.  New perspectives on the late Victorian economy: Historical trends in international patterns of technological innovation , 1991 .

[12]  Kendall Birr,et al.  Pioneering in industrial research : the story of the general electric research laboratory , 1959 .

[13]  H. G. Fox,et al.  Inventions, Patents and Monopoly , 1947 .

[14]  Elting E. Morison,et al.  American Genesis: A Century of Invention and Technological Enthusiasm 1870–1970 by Thomas P. Hughes (review) , 1989, Technology and Culture.

[15]  Leonard S. Reich.  Research, Patents, and the Struggle to Control Radio: A Study of Big Business and the Uses of Industrial Research. " , 1977 .

[16]  J. Burke,et al.  Petroleum Progress and Profits: A History of Process Innovation by John Lawrence Enos (review) , 1962 .

[17]  David A. Hounshell,et al.  Science and Corporate Strategy: Du Pont R&D , 1989 .

[18]  Leonard S. Reich,et al.  The Making of American Industrial Research: Science and Business at GE and Bell, 1876-1926 , 1985 .

[19]  John Cantwell,et al.  The frontier of international technology networks: sourcing abroad the most highly tacit capabilities , 1999 .

[20]  G. Stocking,et al.  Cartels in Action , 1949 .

[21]  S. Winter,et al.  Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence , 1994 .

[22]  T. Williams,et al.  The State and the Emergence of the British Oil Industry , 1981 .

[23]  W. Scott,et al.  Tracking the Giant Corporation@@@Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. , 1991 .

[24]  George Wise.  Willis R. Whitney, General Electric, and the origins of U.S. industrial research , 1985 .