Location, decentralization, and knowledge sources for innovation

Organization Science

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 641-658

  Leiponen, Aija ^a   Helfat, Constance E ^b  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Decentralization; Imitative innovation; New to the market innovation; Research and development

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959221657     PISSN: 10477039     EISSN: 15265455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0526     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Argyres, N. S., B. S. Silverman. 2004. R&D, organization structure, and the development of corporate technological knowledge. Strategic Management . 25(8-9) 929-958.
2. Baron, R. M., D. A. Kenny. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical onsiderations. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 51(6) 1173-1182.
3. Beck, N., J. N. Katz. 1997. The analysis of binary time-series-crosssection data and/or the democratic peace. Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of he Political Methodology Group, Columbus, OH.
4. Cassiman, B., R. Veugelers. 2002. R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92(4) 1169-1184.
5. Chacar, A. S., M. B. Lieberman. 2003. Organizing for technological innovation in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. J. A. C. Baum, O. Sorenson, eds. Geography and Strategy: Advances in Strategic Management, Vol.. 20. JAI/Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 317-340.
6. Chandler, A. D. 1962. Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
7. Chung, W., J. Alcácer. 2002. Knowledge seeking and location choice of foreign direct investment in the United States. Management Sci. 48(12) 1534-554.
8. Cohen, W. M., F. Malerba. 2001. Is the tendency to variation the chief cause of progress? Indust. Corporate Change 10(3) 587-608.
9. Dahlin, K. B., D. M. Behrens. 2005. When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness. Res. Policy 34(5) 717-737.
10. Fabrizio, K., L. G. Thomas. 2007. Tacit demand and innovation in the global pharmaceutical industry. Working paper, Emory University, Atlanta.
11. Furman, J. L. 2003. Location and organizing strategy? Exploring the influence of location on organization of pharmaceutical research. Adv. Strategic anagement. 20 49-88.
12. Furman, J. L., M. K. Kyle, I. Cockburn, R. M. Henderson. 2006. Public and private spillovers: Location and the productivity of pharmaceutical research. Annales d'Economie et de Statistique. No. 79/80.
13. Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management J. 17(Winter special issue) 109-122.
14. Greene, W. H. 1997. Econometric Analysis, 3rd ed. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
15. Griliches, Z. 1990. Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. J. Econom. Literature 28(4) 1661-1707.
16. Henderson, R., I. Cockburn. 1994. Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management J. 15(Special ssue) 63-84.
17. Henderson, R., I. Cockburn. 1996. Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J. Econom. 27(1) 2-59.
18. Kay, N. 1988. The R&D function: Corporate strategy and structure. G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, C. Soete, eds. Technical Change nd Economic Theory. Pinter, London, 283-294.
19. Keele, L., N. J. Kelly. 2006. Dynamic models for dynamic theories: The ins and outs of lagged dependent variables. Political Analysis 14(2) 186-205.
20. Kogut, B. 1991. Country capabilities and the permeability of borders. Strategic Management J. 12(Summer special issue) 33-47.
21. Kogut. B., U. Zander. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 3(3) 383-397.
22. Kogut. B., U. Zander. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 24(4) 625-646.
23. Kuemmerle, W. 1999. Foreign direct investment in industrial research in the pharmaceutical and electronics industries-results from a survey of ultinational firms. Res. Policy 28(2-3) 179-193.
24. Laursen, K., A. J. Salter. 2004. Searching low and high: What type of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Res. Policy 33(8) 1201-1215.
25. Laursen, K., A. Salter. 2006. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovative performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic anagement J. 27(2) 131-150.
26. Leiponen, A. 2000. Competencies, innovation, and profitability of firms. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 9(1) 1-24.
27. Leiponen, A. 2005. Skills and innovation. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 23(5-6) 303-323.
28. Leiponen, A., C. E. Helfat. 2010. Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth. Strategic Management J. 31(2) 224-236.
29. Lerner, J., J. Wulf. 2007. Innovation and incentives: Evidence from corporate R&D. Rev. Econom. Statist. 89(4) 634-644.
30. Mairesse, J., P. Mohnen. 2002. Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: An illustrative framework and an application. Amer. Econom. ev. 92(2) 226-230.
31. Mol, M. J., J. Birkenshaw. 2009. The sources of management innovation: When firms introduce new management practices. J. Bus. Research 62(12) 269-1280.
32. Nelson, R. R. 1990. Capitalism as an engine of progress. Res. Policy.. 19(3). 193-214.
33. Patel, P. 1995. Localized production of technology for global markets. Cambridge J. Econom..1; 19(1-4) 141-153.
34. Penner-Hahn, J., J. M. Shaver. 2005. Does international research and development affect patent output? An analysis of Japanese pharmaceutical firms. trategic Management J. 26(2) 121-140.
35. Podsakoff, P. M., D. W. Organ. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Management 12(4) 531-544.
36. Shaver, J. M. 2005. Testing for mediating variables in management research: Concerns, implications, and alternative strategies. J. Management 31(3) 30-353.
37. Singh, J. 2008. Distributed R&D, cross-regional knowledge integration and quality of innovative output. Res. Policy 37(1) 77-96.
38. Teece, D. J. 1977. Technology transfer by multinational firms: The resource cost of transferring technological know-how. Econom. J. 87(346) 242-261.
39. Tripsas, M. 1997. Surviving radical technological change through dynamic capability: Evidence from the typesetter industry. Indust. Corporate Change (2) 341-377.
40. UCLA Academic Technology Services. 2009. FAQ: How do Iinter -pret a regression model when some variables are log transformed? Accessed January 5,. 2009, http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/mult_pkg/faq/general/log_transformed_regression.htm.
41. Von Hippel, E. 1988. The Sources of Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
42. Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. Free Press, New York.
43. Williamson, O. E. 1991. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Admin. Sci. Quart. 36(2) 269-296.
44. Zhao, M, M. Islam. 2006. Cross-regional ties within firms: Promoting knowledge flow of discouraging knowledge spillovers? Working paper, University f Michigan, Ann Arbor.