The impact of firm size and age on knowledge strategies during product development: a study of the drug delivery industry

A successful new product development strategy involves the identification, development, and exploitation of key resources. Such exploitation of a firm's unique knowledge base ultimately leads to successful new products and, in turn, a sustainable competitive advantage. In this paper, we look at a firm's knowledge strategy along three dimensions, and examine the impact of firm size and age on the type of knowledge strategies used to build technological strength and competitive success. The three dimensions of knowledge strategy examined are: extent of emphasis on speed of learning, emphasis on internal versus external sourcing of knowledge, and the development of a broad versus a narrow knowledge base. Using a population of 27 firms from the drug delivery sector of the pharmaceutical industry, we found that firm size and age influenced the success of firm knowledge strategies. Interestingly, we found that the differences in the knowledge strategy dimensions between large and small firms and between old and young firms were not as great as expected. However, we found that firm size and age moderate the relationship between knowledge strategies and technological strength. In other words, firms that used appropriate knowledge strategies for their size and age optimized their technological strength. Concerning size, smaller firms that focused on faster learning and developing a narrow knowledge base were able to optimize technological strength. On the other hand, large firms that developed a broader knowledge base and focused on internal learning achieved similar success. Concerning age, younger firms that maintained connections to external sources of learning and developed a narrower, niche-based knowledge optimized their technological strength.

[1]  Jesper B. Sørensen,et al.  Aging, Obsolescence, and Organizational Innovation , 2000 .

[2]  William J. Abernathy,et al.  Patterns of Industrial Innovation , 1978 .

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

[4]  C. Prahalad,et al.  Competing for the Future , 1994 .

[5]  Jitendra V. Singh,et al.  Organizational Legitimacy and the Liability of Newness , 1986 .

[6]  P. Bierly,et al.  Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry , 1996 .

[7]  Margaret A. Peteraf The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource‐based view , 1993 .

[8]  Samuel B. Graves,et al.  Innovative productivity and returns to scale in the pharmaceutical industry , 1993 .

[9]  W. Nord,et al.  Implementing Routine and Radical Inno-vation , 1986 .

[10]  J. E. Forrest,et al.  Strategic Alliances between Large and Small Research Intensive Organizations: Experiences in the Biotechnology Industry , 1992 .

[11]  G. Huber Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures , 1991 .

[12]  Clayton M. Christensen The Innovator's Dilemma , 1997 .

[13]  I. Nonaka A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[14]  Francis Narin,et al.  Technological performance assessments based on patents and patent citations , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[15]  Francis Narin,et al.  Technology indicators in strategic planning , 1992 .

[16]  Alok K. Chakrabarti,et al.  Technological learning, strategic flexibility, and new product development in the pharmaceutical industry , 1996 .

[17]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[18]  P. Bierly,et al.  Analyzing innovation adoption using a knowledge-based approach , 2001 .

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

[20]  P. Bierly,et al.  Determinants of technology cycle time in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry , 1996 .

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

[22]  John R. Hauser,et al.  Metrics to evaluate R,D&E , 1997 .

[23]  D. Leonard-Barton CORE CAPABILITIES AND CORE RIGIDITIES: A PARADOX IN MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1992 .

[24]  J. Spender Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm , 1996 .

[25]  G. Pisano Knowledge Integration and the Locus of Learning: An Empirical Analysis , 1994 .

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

[27]  J. Kimberly,et al.  Organizational innovation: the influence of individual, organizational, and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and administrative innovations. , 1981, Academy of Management journal. Academy of Management.

[28]  C. Oliver SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: COMBINING INSTITUTIONAL AND RESOURCE- BASED VIEWS , 1997 .

[29]  F. Damanpour Organizational complexity and innovation: developing and testing multiple contingency models , 1996 .

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

[31]  Steven C. Wheelwright,et al.  Revolutionizing New Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality (Революция в разработке продуктов: количественный скачок в скорости, эффективности и качестве) , 1992 .

[32]  Shanthi Gopalakrishnan,et al.  The impact of organizational context on innovation adoption in commercial banks , 2000, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[33]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Scale, scope, and spillovers: the determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. , 1996, The Rand journal of economics.

[34]  F. Narin,et al.  Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance , 1999 .

[35]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Towards The Flexible Form: How To Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments , 1996 .

[36]  Anne P. Carter,et al.  The Economics of Technological Change , 1966 .

[37]  John R. Hauser,et al.  Research, development, and engineering metrics , 1998 .

[38]  R. Reed,et al.  Causal Ambiguity, Barriers to Imitation, and Sustainable Competitive Advantage , 1990 .

[39]  M. Hannan,et al.  A Time to Grow and a Time to Die: Growth and Mortality of Credit Unions in New York City, 1914-1990 , 1994, American Journal of Sociology.

[40]  M. Hannan,et al.  Structural Inertia and Organizational Change , 1984 .

[41]  J. L. Bower,et al.  Fast-Cycle Capability for Competitive Power , 1988 .

[42]  David L. Deeds,et al.  An Analysis of the Critical Role of Public Science in Innovation: The Case of Biotechnology , 2000 .

[43]  M. Tushman,et al.  Boundary Spanning Individuals: Their Role in Information Transfer and Their Antecedents , 1981 .

[44]  Robert E. Hoskisson,et al.  Effects Of Acquisitions on R&D Inputs and Outputs , 1991 .

[45]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Even Dwarfs Started Small: Liabilities of Age and Size and Their Strategic Implications , 1986 .

[46]  S. Gopalakrishnan,et al.  Vasa syndrome: insights from a 17th-century new-product disaster , 2001, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[47]  R. Veugelers Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing , 1997 .

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

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

[50]  Martin M. Rosner,et al.  Economic Determinants of Organizational Innovation , 1968 .

[51]  Anthony F. Breitzman,et al.  Technological Powerhouse or Diluted Competence: Techniques for Assessing Mergers Via Patent Analysis , 2002 .

[52]  F. Narin,et al.  Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength , 1987 .

[53]  Ian C. MacMillan,et al.  Business Unit Strategy and Changes in the Product R&D Budget , 1983 .

[54]  R. Cordero Managing for speed to avoid product obsolescence: A survey of techniques , 1991 .

[55]  J. Hagedoorn,et al.  The effect of strategic technology alliances on company performance. , 1994 .

[56]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The changing composition of innovative activity in the US -- a portrait based on patent analysis , 2001 .

[57]  Carolyn Y. Woo,et al.  Technology sourcing and output of established firms in a regime of encompassing technological change , 2003 .

[58]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change , 1990 .

[59]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  A model of adaptive organizational search , 1981 .

[60]  Michael H. Zack,et al.  Developing a Knowledge Strategy , 1999 .

[61]  Z. Ács,et al.  Innovation and Small Firms , 1990 .

[62]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Learning from Experience in Organizations , 1985 .

[63]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[64]  J. March,et al.  Organizational Learning , 2008 .

[65]  Edward F. McDonough,et al.  Speeding Up New Product Development: The Effects of Leadership Style and Source of Technology , 1991 .

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

[67]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change , 1996 .

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

[69]  Bryan Hattingh,et al.  The competitive advantage , 2007 .

[70]  Alok K. Chakrabarti,et al.  R&D/marketing linkage and innovation strategy: some West German experience , 1988 .

[71]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  How new product strategies impact on performance , 1984 .

[72]  A. Stinchcombe Social Structure and Organizations , 2000, Political Organizations.

[73]  John E. Ettlie,et al.  Firm size and product innovation , 1987 .

[74]  A. A. Kayal,et al.  An empirical evaluation of the technology cycle time indicator as a measure of the pace of technological progress in superconductor technology , 1999 .

[75]  James Ranger-Moore,et al.  Bigger may be better, but is older wiser ? Organizational age and size in the New York life insurance industry , 1997 .

[76]  Mark E. Parry,et al.  The R&D-marketing interface in Japanese high-technology firms , 1992 .

[77]  R. Cooper,et al.  New Products: What Separates Winners from Losers? , 1987 .

[78]  K. R. Conner,et al.  A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism , 1996 .

[79]  R. Calantone,et al.  Determinants of New Product Performance: A Review and Meta-Analysis , 1994 .

[80]  Marlys K. Christianson,et al.  Managing the unexpected , 2001 .

[81]  Steven C. Wheelwright,et al.  Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency and Quality , 1992 .

[82]  Andrew D. Henderson,et al.  FIRM STRATEGY AND AGE DEPENDENCE: A CONTINGENT VIEW OF THE LIABILITIES OF NEWNESS, ADOLESCENCE, AND OBSOLESCENCE. , 1997 .

[83]  James G. March,et al.  Adaptive Coordination of a Learning Team , 1987 .

[84]  Eric H. Kessler,et al.  Internal Vs. External Learning In New Product Development: Effects On Speed, Costs And Competitive Advantage , 2000 .

[85]  R. Gulati Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation , 1999 .

[86]  M. Sheen Barriers to scientific and technical knowledge acquisition in industrial R&D , 1992 .

[87]  R. Grant Chapter 8 – Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration , 1999 .

[88]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  When is Virtual Virtuous? Organizing for Innovation , 1999 .

[89]  A. Kayal,et al.  Measuring the Pace of Technological Progress , 1999 .

[90]  Christopher Meyer,et al.  Fast Cycle Time: How to Align Purpose, Strategy, and Structure for Speed , 1993 .

[91]  Holger Ernst,et al.  Patenting strategies in the German mechanical engineering industry and their relationship to company performance , 1995 .

[92]  R. Duane Ireland,et al.  MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS AND MANAGERIAL COMMITMENT TO INNOVATION IN M-FORM FIRMS , 1990 .

[93]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[94]  G. Stalk Time-The Next Source of Competitive Advantage , 1988 .

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

[96]  Z. Griliches Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .