The innovation value chain in new technology-based firms:Evidence from the U.K.

Journal of Product Innovation Management

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 839-860

  Ganotakis, Panagiotis ^a   Love, James H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS; DIRECT IMPACT; EXTERNAL KNOWLEDGE; EXTERNAL SOURCES; INNOVATION PERFORMANCE; MODELING TOOL; NEW TECHNOLOGY-BASED FIRMS; POLICY IMPLICATIONS; PROCESS INNOVATION; SURVIVAL AND GROWTH; TECHNOLOGY-BASED; VALUE CHAINS; WHOLE PROCESS;

INDUSTRY; PRODUCTIVITY; PUBLIC POLICY;

INNOVATION;

EID: 84864682972     PISSN: 07376782     EISSN: 15405885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00938.x     Document Type: Article

References (126)

1. Acs, Z. J., and, D. B. Audretsch,. 1987. Innovation, market structure and firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics 69: 567-574.
2. Acs, Z. J., D. B. Audretsch, and, M. P. Feldman,. 1992. Real effects of academic research: Comment. American Economic Review 82: 363-367.
3. Acs, Z. J., D. B. Audretsch, and, M. P. Feldman,. 1994. R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics 76: 336-340.
4. Adams, J. D., 1990. Fundamental stocks of knowledge and productivity growth. Journal of Political Economy 98: 673-702.
5. Adams, J. D., 1993. Science, R&D, and invention potential recharge: US evidence. American Economic Review 83: 458-462.
6. Aldrich, H., and, E. Auster,. 1986. Even dwarfs started small: Liabilities of age and size and their strategic implications. Research in Organizational Behavior 8: 165-198.
7. Arora, A., and, A. Gambardella,. 1990. Complementarity and external linkages: The strategies of the large firms in biotechnology. Journal of Industrial Economics 38: 361-379.
8. Arora, A., and, A. Gambardella,. 1994. Evaluating technological information and utilizing it: Scientific knowledge, technological capability and external linkages in biotechnology. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 24: 91-114.
9. Artz, K. W., P. M. Norman, D. E. Hatfield, and, L. B. Cardinal,. 2010. A longitudinal study of the impact of R&D, patents, and product innovation on firm performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management 27: 725-740.
10. Athreye, S. S., and, D. Keeble,. 2002. Sources of increasing returns and regional innovation in the UK. Regional Studies 36: 345-357. (Pubitemid 34577594)
11. Aw, B. Y., M. J. Roberts, and, T. Winston,. 2007. Export market participation, investments in R&D and worker training, and the evolution of firm productivity. The World Economy 30: 83-104. (Pubitemid 46128814)
12. Baldwin, J. R., and, W. Gu,. 2004. Trade liberalization: Export-market participation, productivity growth, and innovation. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 20: 372-392. (Pubitemid 39500273)
13. Baum, J. R., E. A. Locke, and, K. G. Smith,. 2001. A multidimensional model of venture growth. Academy of Management Journal 44 (2): 292-303.
14. Belderbos, R., M. Carree, and, B. Lokshin,. 2004. Cooperative R&D and firm performance. Research Policy 33 (10): 1477-1492. (Pubitemid 40085917)
15. Beneito, P., M. E. Rochina, and, A. Sanchis,. 2009. The role of learning in innovation: In-house versus externally contracted R&D experience. Working Paper, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Econõmicas, Valencia, Spain.
16. Bernard, A. B., and, J. B. Jensen,. 1999. Exceptional export performance: Cause, effect, or both? Journal of International Economics 47: 1-25.
17. Bigadikke, E. R., 1976. Corporate diversification: Entry strategy and performance. Boston, MA: Division on Research, Harvard University.
18. Blalock, G., and, P. J. Gertler,. 2004. Learning from exporting revisited in a less developed setting. Journal of Development Economics 75: 397-416. (Pubitemid 39347678)
19. Butchard, R., 1987. A new definition of high technology industries. Economic Review 400: 82-88.
20. Cassiman, B., and, R. Veugelers,. 2002. R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review 92: 1169-1184.
21. Cassiman, B., and, R. Veugelers,. 2006. In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science 52: 68-82.
22. Caves, R. E., 1998. Industrial organization and new findings and the turnover and mobility of firms. Journal of Economic Literature 36: 1947-1982. (Pubitemid 128460240)
23. Chandler, G. N., and, S. H. Hanks,. 1994. Market attractiveness, resource-based capabilities, venture strategies, and venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing 9 (4): 331-349.
24. Chesbrough, H. W., 2003. Open innovation. Boston: Harvard University Press.
25. Chesbrough, H. W., 2006. Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm, ed., H. W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, and, J. West, 1-12. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Chung, S., and, G. M. Kim,. 2003. Performance effects of partnership between manufacturers and suppliers for new product development: The supplier's standpoint. Research Policy 32: 587-603.
27. Cohen, W. M., and, D. A. Levinthal,. 1989. Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Economic Journal 99: 569-596.
28. Cohen, W. M., and, D. A. Levinthal,. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective of learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 128-152.
29. Cooper, R. G., 1984. How new product strategies impact on performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management 1: 5-18.
30. Cox, G., 2005. Cox review of creativity in business: Building on the UK's strengths. HM Treasury.
31. Crépon, B., E. Duguet, and, J. Mairesse,. 1998. Research, innovation and productivity: An econometric analysis at the firm level. Economics of Inovation and New Technology 7: 115-158.
32. Dean, T. J., R. L. Brown, and, C. E. Bamford,. 1998. Differences in large and small firm responses to environmental context: Strategic implications from a comparative analysis of business formations. Strategic Management Journal 19: 709-728. (Pubitemid 128469393)
33. Del Barrio-Castro, T., and, J. Garcia-Quevedo,. 2005. Effects of university research on the geography of innovation. Regional Studies 39 (9): 1217-1229. (Pubitemid 43203407)
34. Department of Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. 2008. High growth firms in the UK: Lessons from an analysis of comparative UK performance. BERR Economics Paper No. 3. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
35. Dowling, M. J., and, J. E. McGee,. 1994. Business and technology strategies and new venture performance. Management Science 40 (12): 1663-1677.
36. Evans, D. S., 1987a. Tests of alternative theories of firm growth. Journal of Political Economy 95: 657-674.
37. Evans, D. S., 1987b. The relationship between firm growth, size and age: Estimates for 100 manufacturing industries. The Journal of Industrial Economics 35: 567-581.
38. Fafchamps, M., S. El Hamine, and, A. Zeufack,. 2007. Learning to export: Evidence from Moroccan manufacturing. Journal of African Economies 17 (2): 305-355.
39. Freel, M. S., 2000. Strategy and structure in innovative manufacturing SMEs: The case of an English region. Small Business Economics 15: 27-45. (Pubitemid 33207318)
40. Freel, M. S., and, P. J. A. Robson,. 2004. Small firm innovation, growth and performance-evidence from Scotland and northern England. International Small Business Journal 22: 561-575. (Pubitemid 40032699)
41. Geroski, P. A., 1990. Innovation, technological opportunities, and market structure. Oxford Econonomic Papers 42: 586-602.
42. Geroski, P., S. Machin, and, J. Van Reenen,. 1993. The profitability of innovating firms. RAND Journal of Economics 24: 198-211.
43. Grassmann, O., and, M. M. Keupp,. 2007. The competitive advantage of early and rapidly internationalizing SMEs in the biotechnology industry: A knowledge-based view. Journal of World Business 42: 350-366.
44. Greene, W. H., 2005. Econometric analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
45. Griliches, Z., 1992. The search for research-and-development spillovers. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94: S29-S47.
46. Griliches, Z., 1995. R&D and productivity: Econometric results and measurement issues. In Handbook of the economics of innovation and technological change, ed, P. Stoneman, 52-89. Oxford: Blackwell.
47. Grossman, G., and, E. Helpman,. 1991. Innovation and growth in the world economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Guellec, D., and, B. van Pottelsberghe,. 2004. From R&D to productivity growth: Do the institutional settings and the source of funds matter? Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 66: 353-378. (Pubitemid 38977082)
49. Hansen, M. T., and, J. Birkinshaw,. 2007. The innovation value chain. Harvard Business Review (June): 121-130.
50. Harris, R. I. D., and, Q. C. Li,. 2009. Exporting, R&D, and absorptive capacity in UK establishments. Oxford Economic Papers 61: 74-103.
51. Harris, R. I. D., and, T. Trainor,. 1995. Innovation and R&D in Northern Ireland manufacturing: A Schumpeterian approach. Regional Studies 29: 593-604.
52. Heckman, J., 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47: 153-161.
53. Hemphill, T. A., 2003. Cooperative strategy, technology innovation and product development in industrial companies. International Journal of Production Economics 69: 169-176.
54. Hipp, C., 2000. Information flows and knowledge creation in knowledge-intensive business services: Scheme for a conceptualization. In Innovation systems in the service economy. measurement and case study analysis, ed., J. S. Metcalfe, and, I. Miles, 149-167. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
55. Hughes, A., and, E. Wood,. 2000. Rethinking innovation comparisons between manufacturing and services: The experience of the CBR SME surveys in the UK. In Innovation systems in the service economy. Measurement and case study analysis, ed., J. S. Metcalfe, and, I. Miles, 105-124. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
56. Jordan, D., and, E. O'Leary,. 2007. Sources of innovation in Irish SMEs: Evidence from two Irish regions. Paper presented at British-Irish Regional Science Association Annual Conference, at Bangor.
57. Joshi, A. W., and, S. Sharma,. 2004. Customer knowledge development: Antecedents and impact on new product performance. Journal of Marketing 68: 47-59. (Pubitemid 39508310)
58. Karkkainen, H., P. Piippo, and, M. Tuominen,. 2001. Ten tools for customer-driven product development in industrial companies. The International Journal of Production Economics 69: 161-176. (Pubitemid 32035376)
59. Kobrin, S. J., 1991. An empirical analysis of the determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal 12: 17-37.
60. Laranja, M., and, M. Fontes,. 1998. Creative adaptation: The role of new technology based firms in Portugal. Research Policy 26: 1023-1036. (Pubitemid 128430982)
61. Laursen, K., and, A. Salter,. 2006. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal 27: 131-150. (Pubitemid 43186021)
62. Leiponen, A., 2005. Organization of knowledge and innovation: The case of Finnish business services. Industry and Innovation 12: 185-203. (Pubitemid 40686996)
63. Li, H., 2001. How does new venture strategy matter in the environment-performance relationship? Journal of High Technology Management Research 12 (2): 183-204. (Pubitemid 33379676)
64. Lindell, M. K., and, C. J. Brandt,. 2000. Climate quality and climate consensus as mediators of the relationship between organizational antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology 85: 331-348.
65. Lindell, M. K., and, D. J. Whitney,. 2001. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 86: 114-121. (Pubitemid 33404733)
66. Link, A. N., D. Paton, and, D. S. Siegel,. 2005. An econometric analysis of trends in research joint venture activty. Managerial and Decision Economics 26: 149-158. (Pubitemid 40405831)
67. Lööf, H., and, A. Heshmati,. 2001. On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis. SSE/EFI Working Paper No 446, Stockholm School of Economics.
68. Lööf, H., and, A. Heshmati,. 2002. Knowledge capital and performance heterogeneity: A firm level innovation study. International Journal of Production Economics 76: 61-85. (Pubitemid 33107297)
69. Love, J. H., and, M. A. Mansury,. 2007. External linkages, R&D and innovation performance in US business services. Industry and Innovation 14: 477-496. (Pubitemid 350226740)
70. Love, J. H., and, M. A. Mansury,. 2009. Exporting and productivity in business services: Evidence from the United States. International Business Review 18: 630-642.
71. Love, J. H., and, S. Roper,. 1999. The determinants of innovation: R&D, technology transfer and networking effects. Review of Industrial Organization 15: 43-64. (Pubitemid 29487781)
72. Love, J. H., and, S. Roper,. 2002. Internal versus external R&D: A study of R&D choice with sample selection. International Journal of the Economics of Business 9 (2): 239-255.
73. Love, J. H., and, S. Roper,. 2009. Organizing the innovation process: Complementarities in innovation networking. Industry and Innovation 16: 273-290.
74. Love, J. H., S. Roper, and, N. Hewitt-Dundas,. 2010. Service innovation, embeddedness and business performance: Evidence from Northern Ireland. Regional Studies 44: 983-1004.
75. Lynskey, M. J., 2004. Determinants of innovative activity in Japanese technology-based start-up firms. International Small Business Journal 22: 159-196. (Pubitemid 38762641)
76. Macdonald, S., and, B. Lefang,. 1998. Patents and policy in the innovation of small and medium sized firms: Building on Rothwell. In New technology-based firms in the 1990s (vol. 5), ed., R. P. Oakey, and, W. E. During, 185-208. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
77. Malhotra, N. K., S. S. Kim, and, A. Patil,. 2006. Common method variance is IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science 52: 1865-1883. (Pubitemid 44927001)
78. Mansfield, E., 1995. Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics 77: 55-65. (Pubitemid 26429371)
79. Marino, K. E., and, A. F. De Noble,. 1997. Growth and early returns in technology-based manufacturing ventures. Journal of High Technology Management Research 8: 225-242. (Pubitemid 127338014)
80. Marvel, M. R., and, G. T. Lumpkin,. 2007. Technology entrepreneurs' human capital and its effects on innovation radicalness. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 31: 807-828.
81. McCann, J. E., 1991. Patterns of growth, competitive technology, and financial strategies in young ventures. Journal of Business Venturing 6 (3): 189-203.
82. McDougall, P. P., and, R. B. Robinson,. 1990. New venture strategies: An empirical identification of eight "archetypes" of competitive strategies of entry. Strategic Management Journal 11 (6): 447-467.
83. Miller, A., and, B. Camp,. 1985. Exploring determinants of success in corporate ventures. Journal of Business Venturing 1 (1): 87-105.
84. Mowery, D. C., 1983. The relationship between intrafirm and contractual forms of industrial research in American manufacturing, 1900-1940. Explorations in Economic History 20: 351-374.
85. Narver, J. C., S. F. Slater, and, D. L. MacLachlan,. 2004. Responsive and proactive market orientation and new product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management 21: 334-347.
86. National Science Foundation (NSF). 2006. Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: NSF.
87. Oakey, R. P., 2003. Technical entrepreneurship in high technology small firms: Some observations on the implications for management. Technovation 23: 679-688.
88. Office for National Statistics (ONS). 2002. Research and development in the UK. London.
89. Office for National Statistics (ONS). 2003. Press release, unique reference number 03/92, London.
90. Paladino, A., 2007. Investigating the drivers of innovation and new product success: A comparison of strategic orientations. Journal of Product Innovation Management 24: 534-553. (Pubitemid 47561746)
91. Pittaway, L., M. Robertson, K. Munir, D. Denyer, and, A. Neely,. 2004. Networking and innovation: A systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews 5 (3/4): 137-168. (Pubitemid 40004916)
92. Podsakoff, P. M., and, D. W. Organ,. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management 12: 531-544.
93. Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, J. Y. Lee, and, N. P. Podsakoff,. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88: 879-903. (Pubitemid 37239703)
94. Porter, M. E., and, C. Ketels,. 2003. UK competitiveness: Moving to the next stage. DTI Economics Paper No. 3. London: Department of Trade and Industry.
95. Quince, T., and, H. Whittaker,. 2002. High tech firms in the UK: Performance and niche markets. ESRC centre for business research. Working Paper No. 234, University of Cambridge.
96. Roper, S., 1998. Entrepreneurial characteristics, strategic choice and small business performance. Small Business Economics 11: 11-24. (Pubitemid 128113633)
97. Roper, S., and, S. Arvanitis,. 2009. From knowledge to added value: A comparative, panel-data analysis of the innovation value chain in Irish and Swiss manufacturing firms. Paper presented at DRUID Summer Conference, Copenhagen.
98. Roper, S., J. Du, and, J. H. Love,. 2008. Modelling the innovation value chain. Research Policy 37: 961-977.
99. Roper, S., and, N. Hewitt-Dundas,. 2005. Measuring the impact of grant support for innovation: Panel data evidence for Irish firms. Amsterdam: European Regional Science Association.
100. Roper, S., N. Hewitt-Dundas, and, J. H. Love,. 2004. An ex ante evaluation framework for the regional benefits of publicly supported R&D projects. Research Policy 33: 487-509.
101. Roper, S., and, J. H. Love,. 2005. Innovation success and business performance-an all-Island analysis. All Island Business Model Research Report, Inter Trade Ireland, July.
102. Sandberg, W. R., 1986. New venture performance. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
103. Schmidt, T., 2005. Absorptive capacity-one size fits all? A firm-level analysis of absorptive capacity for different kinds of knowledge. ZEW Discussion Paper 05-72. Mannheim: ZEW.
104. Shearman, C., and, G. Burrell,. 1998. New technology-based firms and the emergence of new industries: Some employment implications. New Technology Work and Employment 3: 87-99.
105. Shelanski, H. A., and, P. G. Klein,. 1995. Empirical research in transaction cost economics: A review and assessment. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 11: 335-361. (Pubitemid 126002185)
106. Siegel, D. S., P. Westhead, and, M. Wright,. 2003. Science parks and the performance of new technology-based firms: A review of recent U.K. evidence and an agenda for future research. Small Business Economics 20: 177-184.
107. Smith, D. J., and, D. Tranfield,. 2005. Talented suppliers? Strategic change and innovation in the UK aerospace industry. R&D Management 35: 37-49. (Pubitemid 40239753)
108. Song, M., and, C. A. Di Benedetto,. 2008. Supplier's involvement and success of radical new product development in new ventures. Journal of Operations Management 26: 1-22. (Pubitemid 350256867)
109. Song, M., K. Podoynitsyna, H. van der Bij, and, J. I. M. Halman,. 2008. Success factors in new ventures: A meta-analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management 25: 7-27. (Pubitemid 350212661)
110. Spithoven, A., D. Frantzen, and, B. Clarysse,. 2010. Heterogeneous firm-level effects of knowledge exchanges on product innovation: Differences between dynamic and lagging product innovators. Journal of Product Innovation Management 27: 362-381.
111. Squicciarini, M., 2009. Science parks: Seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms patenting activity. Small Business Economics 32: 169-190.
112. Storey, D. J., and, B. S. Tether,. 1998. Public policy measures to support new technology-based firms in the European Union. Research Policy 26: 1037-1057. (Pubitemid 128430983)
113. Tan, B. W., 1990. Using the supplier relationship to develop the support industry. Omega- International Journal of Management Science 18: 151-158.
114. Tether, B. S., 2002. Who co-operates for innovation and why: An empirical analysis. Research Policy 31 (6): 947-967.
115. Tsai, W. M., I. C. MacMillan, and, M. B. Low,. 1991. Effects of strategy and environment on corporate venture success in industrial markets. Journal of Business Venturing 6 (1): 9-28.
116. Un, C. A., A. Cuervo-Cazurra, and, K. Asakawa,. 2010. R&D collaborations and product innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management 27: 673-689.
117. Van Biesebroeck, J., 2005. Exporting raises productivity in sub-Saharan African manufacturing firms. Journal of International Economics 67: 373-391. (Pubitemid 41683827)
118. Venkataraman, S., A. H. Van de Ven, J. Buckeye, and, R. Hudson,. 1990. Starting up in a turbulent environment: A process model of failure among firms with high customer dependence. Journal of Business Venturing 5: 277-295.
119. Veugelers, R., and, B. Cassiman,. 1999. Make and buy in innovation strategies: Evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Research Policy 28: 63-80. (Pubitemid 129536956)
120. Wagner, J., 2007. Exports and productivity: A survey of the evidence from firm-level data. The World Economy 30: 60-82. (Pubitemid 46128813)
121. Westhead, P., 1997. R&D inputs and outputs of technology based firms located on and off science parks. R&D Management 27 (1): 45-62.
122. Westhead, P., and, S. Batstone,. 1999. Perceived benefits of a managed science park location. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 11: 129-154. (Pubitemid 29346413)
123. Westhead, P., and, S. Birley,. 1995. Employment growth in new independent owner-managed firms in Great Britain. International Small Business Journal 13 (11): 11-34.
124. Wong, P. K., 1992. Technological development through subcontracting linkages: Evidence from Singapore. Scandinavian International Business Review 1: 28-40.
125. Wooldridge, J. M., 2003. Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Thomson Learning South-Western.
126. Zahra, S. A., and, G. George,. 2002. Absorptive capacity: A review, re-conceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review 27: 185-203.