Optimal project rejection and new firm start-ups

Management Science

Volumn 52, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 262-275

  Cassiman, Bruno ^a   Ueda, Masako ^b  

^a IESE BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Bargaining; IPR; New firm start ups; Project selection; Real option

Indexed keywords

BARGAINING; IPR; NEW FIRM START-UPS; PROJECT SELECTION; REAL OPTION;

CONTRACTS; DECISION MAKING; INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT;

PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

EID: 33644667552     PISSN: 00251909     EISSN: 15265501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0458     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Aghion, P., J. Tirole. 1994. The management of innovation. Quart. J. Econom. 109(4) 1185-1209.
2. Aghion, P., J. Tirole. 1997. Formal and real authority in organizations. J. Political Econom. 105(1) 1-29.
3. Anton, J., D. Yao. 1995. Start-ups, spin-offs, and internal innovations. J. Law, Econom. Organ. 11 362-378.
4. Arrow, K. 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. R. Nelson, ed. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 609-626.
5. Arrow, K. 1974. Limits of the organization. W. W. Norton, New York.
6. Baldwin, C. 1982. Optimal sequential investment when capital is not readily reversible. J. Finance 37 763-782.
7. Bankman, J., R. J. Gilson, 1999. Why start-ups? Stanford Law Rev. 51(2).
8. Bhidé, A. 1996. The road well travelled: A note on the journeys of HBS entrepreneurs. HBS publication, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.
9. Bhidé, A. 2000. The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses. Oxford University Press, New York.
10. Buckman, R. 2000. Tech defectors from Microsoft resettle together. The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 16).
11. Calvo, G. A., S. Wellisz. 1978. Supervision, loss of control, and the optimum size of the firm. J. Political Econom. 86(5) 943-952.
12. Cassiman, B., M. Ueda. 2004. Optimal project rejection and new firm start-ups. IESE working paper R460,
13. Chesbrough, H. 1999. The organizational impact of technological change: A comparative theory of national institutional factors. Indust. Corporate Change 8(3) 447-485.
14. Chesbrough, H. 2002. Graceful exits and foregone opportunities: Xerox's management of its technology spin-off organizations. Bus. History Rev. 76(4) 803-838.
15. Christensen, C. 1997. The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
16. Franco, A., D. Filson. 2002. Spin-outs: Knowledge diffusion through employee mobility. Working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis 272 modified, Minneapolis, MN.
17. Gans, J. S., S. Stern. 2000. Incumbency and R&D incentives: Licensing the gale of creative destruction. J. Econom. and Management Strategy 9(4) 485-511.
18. Gans, J. S., S. Stern. 2003. The product market and the market for ideas: Commercialization strategics for technology entrepreneurs. Res. Policy 32 333-350.
19. Gans, J. S., D. H. Hsu, S. Stern. 2002. When does start-up innovation spur the gale of creative destruction? RAND J. Econom. 33(4) 571-586.
20. Garvin, D. A. 1983. Spin-offs and the new firm formation process. California Management Rev. XXV(2) 3-20.
21. Gilbert, R. J., D. M. G. Newbery. 1982. Preemptive patenting and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 72(3) 514-526.
22. Gilson, R. J. 1999. The legal infrastructure of high technology industrial districts: Silicon Valley, Route 128, and covenants not to compete. New York Univ. Law Rev. 74(3) 575-629.
23. Gompers, P. A., J. Lerner. 2000. The determinants of corporate venture capital successes: Organizational structure, incentives, and complementarities. R. K. Morck, ed. Concentrated Corporate Ownership. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, 17-50.
24. Gompers, P. A., J. Lerner, D. Scharfstein. 2005. Entrepreneurial spawning: Public corporations and the genesis of new ventures, 1986-1999. J. Finance. Forthcoming.
25. Gromb, D., D. Scharfstcin. 2003. Entrepreneurship in equilibrium. Mimeo. Working paper, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.
26. Hannan, M. T., J. Freeman. 1994. Structural inertia and organizational change. Amer. Social. Rev. 49 149-164.
27. Hellmann, T. 2002. A theory of strategic venture investing. J. Financial Econom. 64(2) 285-314.
28. Hellmann, T. 2004. When do employees become entrepreneurs? Mimeo. Working paper, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA.
29. Henderson, R. 1993. Underinvestment and incompetence as responses to radical innovation: Evidence from the photolithographic alignment equipment industry. RAND J. Econom. 24(2) 248-270.
30. Henderson, R., K. Clark. 1990. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35 9-30.
31. Holmstrom, B. 1989. Agency costs and innovation. J. Econom. Behavior Organ. 12(3) 305-327.
32. Hyde, A. 1998. The wealth of shared information: Silicon Valley's high-velocity labor market, endogenous economic growth, and the law of trade secrets, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 1-14.
33. Kao, J. 1989. Entrepreneurship, Creativity, and Organization: Text, Cases, and Readings. Prentice-Hall International, Englewood, NJ.
34. Klepper, S. 2001, Employee startups on high-tech industries. Indust. Corporate Change 10(3) 639-674.
35. Klepper, S. 2003, The evolution of the U.S. automobile industry and Detroit as its capital. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
36. Klepper, S., S. Sleeper. 2002. Entry by spin-offs. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
37. Lerner, J. B. Hunt. 1998. Xerox technology ventures: March 1985. HBS Case 9-295-127, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.
38. Lewis, T. R., D. Yao. 2003. Innovation, knowledge flow, and worker mobility. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
39. Lindholm-Dahlstrand, A. 2001. Entrepreneurial origin and spin-off performance: A comparison between corporate and university spin-offs. P. Moncada-Paterno-Castello et al., eds. Corporate and Research-Based Spin-offs: Drivers for Knowledge-Based Innovation and Entrepreneurship. European Commission, IPTS Technical Report Series, EUR 19903 EN, 43-66.
40. Merges, R. P. 1999. The law and economics of employee inventions. Harvard J. Law Tech. 13 1-63.
41. Motta, M., T. Roende, 2003. Trade secret laws, labour mobility and innovations. CEPR discussion paper 2003-17, London, UK.
42. Nelson, R., S. Winter. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
43. Pakes, A., S. Nitzan, 1983. Optimum contracts for research personnel, research employment, and the establishment of "rival" enterprises, J. Labor Econom. 1(4) 345-365.
44. Penrose, E. 1959. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford University Press, New York.
45. Pindyck, R. S. 1988, Irreversible investment, capacity choice, and the value of the firm. Amer. Econom. Rev. 78(5) 969-985.
46. Qian, Y. 1994. Incentives and loss of control in an optimal hierarchy. Rev. Econom. Stud. 61 527-544.
47. Reinganum, J. 1983. Uncertain innovation and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 73 741-748.
48. Scherer, F. M., D. Ross. 1990. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 3rd ed. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
49. Shane, S. 2001. Technology regimes and new firm formation. Management Sci. 47(9) 1173-1190.
50. Sheff, D. 1990. Don Valentine interview, Part II. Upside 52.
51. Silverman, B. 1999. Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resourcebased view and transaction cost economics. Management Sci. 45 1109-1124.
52. Teece, D. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15 285-305.
53. Tushman, M., P. Anderson. 1986. Technological discontinuities and organization environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 31 439-465.
54. Wall Street Journal, The. 2002. GE goes back to future-R&D grows in importance as innovation becomes key to industrial titan's growth. (May 7) B.I.