On the importance of technological relatedness: SMEs versus large acquisition targets

Technovation

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 57-64

  Hussinger, Katrin ^a,b,c  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c ZEW Centre for European Economic Research   (Germany)

Author keywords

M A; SMEs; Technological proximity

Indexed keywords

ACQUISITION TARGETS; EMPIRICAL RESULTS; SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISE; TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIOS;

MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS;

COMPUTER CRIME;

EID: 71549166313     PISSN: 01664972     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ahuja G., and Katila R. Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal 22 (2001) 197-220
2. Arrow K.J. Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resource for Inventions, in the Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (1962), Princeton University Press, Princeton
3. Barney J.B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17 1 (1991) 99-120
4. Breschi S., Lissoni F., and Malerba F. Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy (2003) 69-87
5. Capron L., and Shen J.-C. Acquisitions of private versus public firms: private information, target selection and acquirer returns. Strategic Management Journal 28 (2007) 891-911
6. Cassiman B., Colombo M., Garrone P., and Veugelers R. The impact of M&A on the R&D process. An empirical analysis of the role of technological and market relatedness. Research Policy 34 (2005) 195-220
7. Cantwell J., Gambardella A., and Granstrand O. The Economics and Management of Technological Diversification (2004), Routledge, London
8. Chakrabarti A.K., Hauschildt J., and Süverkrüp C. Does it pay to acquire technological firms?. R&D Management 24 1 (1994) 47-56
9. Cheng S., and Long J.S. Testing for IIA in the multinomial logit. Sociological Methods and Research 35 4 (2007) 583-600
10. Cloodt M., Hagedoorn J., and van Kranenburg H. Mergers and acquisitions: their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries. Research Policy 35 (2006) 641-654
11. Cohen W.M., and Levinthal D.A. Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D. The Economic Journal 99 397 (1989) 569-596
12. Cohen W.M., and Levinthal D.A. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 1 (1990) 128-152
13. Cohen W.M., and Levinthal D.A. Fortune favors the prepared firm. Management Science 40 2 (1994) 227-251
14. Colombo, M.G., Grilli, L., Piva, E., 2006. In search of complementary assets: The determinants of alliance formation of high-tech start-ups. Research Policy 35, 1166-1199.
15. Comanor W.S. Vertical mergers, market power, and the antitrust laws. American Economic Review 57 (1967) 254-265
16. Conner K.R. A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought within industrial organization economics. Do we have a new theory of the firm?. Journal of Management 17 1 (1991) 121-154
17. Czarnitzki D. Extent and evolution of the productivity gap in Eastern Germany. Journal of Productivity Analysis 24 (2005) 211-231
18. Czarnitzki D., and Kraft K. Are credit ratings valuable information?. Applied Financial Economics 17 13 (2007) 1061-1070
19. D'Aspremont C., and Jacquemin A. Cooperative and non-cooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers. American Economic Review 78 (1988) 1133-1137
20. Gambardella A., and Torrisi S. Does technological convergence imply convergence in markets? Evidence from the electronics industry. Research Policy 27 (1998) 445-463
21. Gans J.S., and Stern S. Incumbency and R&D incentives: licensing the gale of creative destruction. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 9 (2000) 485-511
22. Giuri, P., Mariani, M., Brusoni, S., Crespi, G., Francoz, D., Gambardella, A., Garcia-Fontes, W., Geuna, A., Gonzales, R., Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., Lebas, C., Luzzi, A., Magazzini, L., Nesta, L., Nomaler, Ö., Palomeras, N., Patel, P., Romanelli, M., Verspagen, B., 2006. Everything you always wanted to know about inventors (but never asked): evidence from the Patval-EU Survey. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 5752.
23. Graff G.D., Rausser G.C., and Small A.A. Agricultural biotechnology's complementary intellectual assets. The Review of Economics and Statistics 85 2 (2003) 349-363
24. Granstrand O., Patel P., and Pavitt K. Multitechnology corporations: why they have distributed rather than core competencies?. California Management Review 39 4 (1997) 8-25
25. Grimpe C., and Hussinger K. Pre-empting technology competition through firm acquisitions. Economics Letters 100 (2008) 189-191
26. Hagedoorn J., and Duysters G. The effect of mergers and acquisitions on the technological performance of companies in a high-tech environment. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 14 (2002) 68-85
27. Hall B.H. The effect of takeover activity on corporate research and development. In: Auerbach A. (Ed). The Economic Effects of Takeover Activity (1988), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
28. Hall, B.H., 1990. The manufacturing sector master file: 1959-1987. NBER Working Paper No. 3366, Cambridge, MA.
29. Heeley M.B., Matusik S.F., and Jain N. Innovation, appropriability, and the underpricing of initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal 50 1 (2007) 209-225
30. Jaffe A.B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firm patents, profits and market value. American Economic Review 26 (1986) 1023-1046
31. Jensen M., and Ruback R. The market for corporate control. Journal of Financial Economics 11 (1983) 1-53
32. Kamien, M.I., Schwartz, N.L., 1982. Market Structure and Innovation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
33. Lerner, J., Tirole, J., Strojwas, M., 2003. Cooperative marketing agreements between competitors: evidence from patent pools. NBER Working Paper No. 9680, Cambridge, MA.
34. Leten B., Belderbos R., and van Looy B. Technological diversification, coherence and performance of firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management 24 (2007) 567-579
35. McFadden D. Modelling the choice of residual location. In: Karlqvist A. (Ed). Spatial Interaction Theory and Residential Location (1978), North Holland, Amsterdam
36. O'Donoghue T., Scotchmer S., and Thisse J.-F. Patent breadth, patent life and the pace of technological progress. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 7 (1998) 1-32
37. Peteraf M.A. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 14 3 (1993) 179-191
38. Priem R.L., and Butler J.E. Is the resource-based "view" a useful perspective for strategic management research?. Academy of Management Review 26 1 (2001) 22-40
39. Reinganum J.F. Uncertain innovation and the persistence of monopoly. American Economic Review 73 (1983) 741-748
40. Shapiro, C., 2001. Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting. In: Jaffe, A., Lerner, J., Stern, S. (Eds.), Innovation Policy and the Economy. Cambridge, MA, pp. 119-150.
41. Shen J.C., and Reuer J. Adverse selection in acquisitions of small manufacturing firms: a comparison of public with private targets. Small Business Economics 24 4 (2005) 393-407
42. Singh H., and Montgomery C.A. Corporate acquisition strategies and economic performance. Strategic Management Journal 8 4 (1987) 377-386
43. Sorescu A.B., Chandy R.K., and Prahbu J.C. Why some acquisitions do better than others: product capital as a driver of long-term stock returns. Journal of Marketing Research 44 (2007) 57-72
44. Valentini, G., 2004. Mergers and acquisitions and technological performance. Mimeo, IESE Business School.
45. Veugelers, R., 2006. Literature review on M&A and R&D. In: Cassiman, B., Colombo, M.G. (Eds.), Merger and Acquisitions-The Innovation Impact.
46. Williamson O.E. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (1975), Free Press, New York