Real options in technology licensing

Management Science

Volumn 53, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 1618-1633

  Ziedonis, Arvids A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Knowledge transfer; Licensing; Real options; University industry linkages

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER; UNCERTAIN TECHNOLOGIES; UNIVERSITY INDUSTRY LINKAGES;

DECISION MAKING; SAMPLING; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

CONTRACTS;

EID: 38549094729     PISSN: 00251909     EISSN: 15265501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0705     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Adner, R., D. A. Levinthal. 2004. What is Not a real option: Considering boundaries for the application of real options to business strategy. Acad. Management Rev. 29(1) 74-85.
2. Amram, M., N. Kalutilaka. 1999. Real Options: Managing Strategic Investment in an Uncertain World. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
3. Anand, B. N., T. Khanna. 2000. The structure of licensing contracts. J. Indust. Econom. 48(March) 103-135.
4. Arora, A., M. Ceccagnoli. 2006. Patent protection, complementary assets, and firms' incentives for technology licensing. Management Sci. 52(2) 293-308.
5. Arora, A., A. Gambardella. 1994. Evaluating technological information and utilizing it: Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 24 91-114.
6. Arrow, K. J. 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources of invention. R. R. Nelson, ed. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economics and Social Factors. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 609-625.
7. Association for University Technology Managers. 1998. AUTM licensing survey, fiscal year 1997. Report, Norwalk, CT.
8. Black, F., M. Scholes. 1973. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. J. Political Econom. 81(May-June) 637-659.
9. Boersch-Supan, A. 1990. On the compatibility of nested logit models with utility maximization. J. Econometrics 43 373-388.
10. Borooah, V. K. 2002. Logit and Probit: Ordered and Multinomial Models. M. S. Lewis-Beck, series ed. Sage University Papers Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-138. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
11. Bowman, E. H., G. T. Moskowitz. 2001. Real options analysis and strategic decision making. Organ. Sci. 12(6) 772-777.
12. Brant, R. 1990. Assessing proportionality in the proportional odds model for ordinal logistic regression. Biometrics 46 1171-1178.
13. Caves, R. E., H. Crookell, P. J. Killing. 1983. The imperfect market for technology licenses. Oxford Bull. Econom. Statist. 45(3) 249-267.
14. Cohen, W. M., D. A. Levinthal. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35 128-152.
15. Dixit, A. K., R. S. Pindyck. 1994. Investment Under Uncertainty. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
16. Elfenbein, D. 2004. Contract structure and performance of technology transfer agreements: Evidence from university licenses. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
17. Folta, T. B. 1998. Governance and uncertainty: The trade-off between administrative control and commitment. Strategic Management J. 19 1007-1028.
18. Folta, T. B., K. Miller. 2002. Real options in equity partnerships. Strategic Management J. 23 77-88.
19. Hall, B. H., A. Jaffe, M. Trajtenberg. 2000. Market value and patent citations: A first look. NBER Working Paper 7741, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
20. Hamilton, W. F. 2000. Managing real options. G. S. Day, P. J. H. Schoemaker, R. E. Gunther, eds. Wharton on Managing Emerging Technologies. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 271-288.
21. Harhoff, D., F. M. Scherer, K. Vopel. 1998. Citations frequency and the value of patented inventions. Rev. Econom. Statist. 81(3) 511-515.
22. Hausman, J., D. McFadden. 1984. Specification tests for the multinomial logit model. Econometrica 52(5) 1219-1240.
23. Jaffe, A. B. 1989. Characterizing the "technological position" of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers. Res. Policy 18 87-97.
24. Jaffe, A. B., M. Trajtenberg. 2002. Patents, Citations, & Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
25. Jensen, R., M. Thursby. 2001. Proofs and prototypes for sale: The tale of university licensing. Amer. Econom. Rev. 91 240-259.
26. Kogut, B. 1991. Joint ventures and the option to expand and acquire. Management Sci. 37(1) 19-33.
27. Kogut, B., D. Kim. 1996. Technological platforms and diversification. Organ. Sci. 7(3) 283-301.
28. Kogut, B., N. Kulatilaka. 1994. Operating flexibility, global manufacturing, and the option value of a multinational network. Management Sci. 40(1) 123-139.
29. Kogut, B., N. Kulatilaka. 2001. Capabilities as real options. Organ. Sci. 12(6) 744-758.
30. Kulatilaka, N., E. C. Perotti. 1998. Strategic growth options. Management Sci. 44(8) 1021-1031.
31. Lanjouw, J. O., M. Schankerman. 2001. Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition. RAND J. Econom. 32(1) 129-151.
32. Long, J. S. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
33. Lowe, R. A., A. A. Ziedonis. 2006. Overoptimism and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Management Sci. 52(2) 173-186.
34. MacMillan, I. C., R. G. McGrath. 1998. The value, assessment, and enhancement of industry investments in fundamental research. Working paper, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, PA.
35. Majd, S., R. S. Pindyck. 1987. Time to build, option value, and investment decisions. J. Financial Econom. 18(1) 7-27.
36. McDonald, R., D. Siegel. 1986. The value of waiting to invest. Quart. J. Econom. 101(4) 707-728.
37. McFadden, D. 1981. Econometric models of probabilistic choice. D. McFadden, ed. Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 198-272.
38. McGrath, R. G. 1997. A real options logic for initiating technology positioning investments. Acad. Management Rev. 22(4) 974-996.
39. Miller, K. D., T. B. Folta. 2002. Option value and entry timing. Strategic Management J. 23(7) 655-665.
40. Mitchell, G. R., W F. Hamilton. 1988. Managing R&D as a strategic option. Res.-Tech. Management 31(3) 15-22.
41. Montgomery, C. A., B. Wernerfelt. 1988. Diversification, Ricardian rents, and Tobin's q. RAND J. Econom. 19(4) 623-632.
42. Mowery, D. C., J. E. Oxley, B. S. Silverman. 1998. Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: Implications for the resource-based view of the firm. Res. Policy 27 507-523.
43. Narin, F., E. Noma, R. Perry. 1987. Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Res. Policy 16(2-4) 143-155.
44. Reuer, J. J., T. W Tong. 2005. Real options in international joint ventures. J. Management 31(3) 403-423.
45. Roberts, K., M. L. Weitzman. 1981. Funding criteria for research, development, and exploration projects. Econometrica 49 1261-1288.
46. Rosenberg, N. 1990. Why do firms do basic research with their own money? Res. Policy 19 165-174.
47. Sampat, B. N., A. A. Ziedonis. 2004. Patent citations and the private value of patents. U. Schmoch, ed. Kluwer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 277-298.
48. Shane, S. 2001. Technology regimes and new firm formation. Management Sci. 47(9) 1173-1190.
49. Shane, S. 2002. Selling university technology. Management Sci. 48(1) 122-137.
50. Silverman, B. S. 1999. Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction cost economics. Management Sci. 45(8) 1109-1124.
51. Standard & Poor's Compustat Database. 1998. McGraw-Hill Company, New York.
52. Taylor, C. A., Z. A. Silberston. 1973. The Economic Impact of the Patent System: A Study of the British Experience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
53. Teece, D. J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15 285-305.
54. Train, K. 1986. Qualitative Choice Analysis: Theory, Econometrics, and an Application to Automobile Demand. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
55. Trajtenberg, M., R. Henderson, A. B. Jaffe. 1997. University vs. corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 5 19-50.
56. Trigeorgis, L. 1996. Managerial Flexibility and Strategy in Resource Allocation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
57. Zahra, S. A., G. George. 2002. Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Acad. Management Rev. 27(2) 185-203.
58. Ziedonis, A. A. 2001. The commercialization of university technology: Implications for firm strategy and public policy. Unpublished dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA.