Technological relatedness, boundary-spanning combination of knowledge and the impact of innovation: Evidence of an inverted-U relationship

Abstract Our paper proposes that corporate technological relatedness, or the degree to which business units within a corporation utilize similar technological knowledge, has both positive and negative effects on corporate R&D activities. On the one hand, business units that employ similar technological knowledge have better absorptive capacity to source knowledge from each other. On the other hand, a higher level of technological relatedness means that each business unit possesses fewer opportunities to gain new knowledge not known to other units, thus promoting path dependence to each other. Using a patent data analysis of 201 firms in R&D-intensive industries, we examine the effects of corporate technological relatedness on within-firm knowledge flow, boundary-spanning combinations of prior knowledge, and innovation impacts.

[1]  R. Willig,et al.  Economies of scope , 1981 .

[2]  Leslie E. Papke,et al.  Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates , 1993 .

[3]  D. Teece.  Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance , 2007 .

[4]  Gabriel Szulanski.  Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm , 1996 .

[5]  K. Arrow.  The limits of organization , 1974 .

[6]  B. Silverman.  Technological Resources and the Direction of Corporate Diversification: Toward an Integration of the Resource-Based View and Transaction Cost Economics , 1998 .

[7]  Eric D. Darr,et al.  An Investigation of Partner Similarity Dimensions on Knowledge Transfer , 2000 .

[8]  A. Arundel,et al.  What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms , 1998 .

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

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

[11]  Karin Fladmoe-Lindquist,et al.  Breakthrough innovations in the U.S. biotechnology industry: the effects of technological space and geographic origin , 2006 .

[12]  D. Mowery,et al.  Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm , 1998 .

[13]  Douglas D. Moesel,et al.  The Market for Corporate Control and Firm Innovation , 1996 .

[14]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Measuring competence?: exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research , 1994 .

[15]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Finding the organizational sources of technological breakthroughs: the story of Hewlett‐Packard's thermal ink‐jet , 2002 .

[16]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[17]  R. Katila,et al.  SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SEARCH BEHAVIOR AND NEW PRODUCT INTRODUCTION , 2002 .

[18]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm: Towards A Synthesis , 2012 .

[19]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[20]  O. Williamson,et al.  Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. , 1977 .

[21]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  A Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1984 .

[22]  Annette L. Ranft,et al.  Acquiring New Technologies and Capabilities: A Grounded Model of Acquisition Implementation , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[23]  R. Grant.  Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal (17), pp. , 1996 .

[24]  N. Venkatraman,et al.  Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms , 2005 .

[25]  Douglas J. Miller.  Firms' technological resources and the performance effects of diversification: A longitudinal study , 2004 .

[26]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  The interplay between exploration and exploitation. , 2006 .

[27]  Jan W. Rivkin,et al.  Complexity, Networks and Knowledge Flow , 2002 .

[28]  B. Silverman,et al.  R&D, ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CORPORATE TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE , 2004 .

[29]  Jaeyong Song,et al.  The paradox of technological capabilities: a study of knowledge sourcing from host countries of overseas R&D operations , 2008 .

[30]  Sidney G. Winter,et al.  FOUR Rs OF PROFITABILITY: RENTS, RESOURCES, ROUTINES, AND REPLICATION , 1995 .

[31]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  The Measurement of Firm Diversification: Some New Empirical Evidence , 1982 .

[32]  A. Nerkar,et al.  Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry , 2001 .

[33]  G. George,et al.  Entry into Insular Domains: A Longitudinal Study of Knowledge Structuration and Innovation in Biotechnology Firms , 2008 .

[34]  D. Teece.  ECONOMIES OF SCOPE AND THE SCOPE OF THE ENTERPRISE , 1980 .

[35]  M. Spence,et al.  Learning Curve Spillovers and Market Performance , 1985 .

[36]  Sai Yayavaram,et al.  Decomposability in Knowledge Structures and Its Impact on the Usefulness of Inventions and Knowledge-base Malleability , 2008 .

[37]  A. Jacquemin,et al.  Entropy Measure of Diversification and Corporate Growth , 1979 .

[38]  Peter J. Lane,et al.  Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning , 1998 .

[39]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology , 1992 .

[40]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Radical Innovation and Corporate Regeneration , 1994 .

[41]  B. Schlegelmilch,et al.  Innovation and control in the multinational firm: A comparison of political and contingency approaches , 2007 .

[42]  Jasjit Singh,et al.  Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[43]  Michael Lubatkin,et al.  Extending modern portfolio theory into the domain of corporate diversification: Does it apply? , 1992 .

[44]  J. Barney.  Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[45]  M. Gordon,et al.  PUBLICATION RECORDS AND TENURE DECISIONS IN THE FIELD OF STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1996 .

[46]  J. Robins,et al.  A resource‐based approach to the multibusiness firm: Empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance , 1995 .

[47]  Nils Stieglitz,et al.  Innovations and the Role of Complementarities in a Strategic Theory of the Firm , 2007 .

[48]  Ezra W. Zuckerman,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams , 2001 .

[49]  Eric von Hippel,et al.  Locating Adaptive Learning: The Situated Nature of Adaptive Learning in Organizations , 1997 .

[50]  S. Zahra,et al.  Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension , 2002 .

[51]  Paul Hadlock.  High Technology Employment: Another View. , 1991 .

[52]  Curba Morris Lampert,et al.  Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions , 2001 .

[53]  Toby E. Stuart,et al.  Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities , 2007 .

[54]  Douglas J. Miller.  Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance , 2006 .