Resource complementarity and value capture in firm acquisitions: The role of intellectual property rights

Strategic Management Journal

Volumn 35, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1762-1780

  Grimpe, Christoph ^a,b   Hussinger, Katrin ^c,d,e  

^a Department of International Economics and Management   (Denmark)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^d CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH ZEW   (Germany)

^e UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

intellectual property rights; resource complementarity; technology acquisitions; value capture; value creation

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS; PATENTS AND INVENTIONS; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; RESOURCE COMPLEMENTARITY; TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITIONS; VALUE CAPTURES; VALUE CREATION;

LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

EID: 84911366461     PISSN: 01432095     EISSN: 10970266     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/smj.2181     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Adegbesan JA,. 2009. On the origins of competitive advantage: strategic factor markets and heterogeneous resource complementarity. Academy of Management Review 34 (3): 463-475.
2. Adegbesan JA, Higgins MJ,. 2010. The intra-alliance division of value created through collaboration. Strategic Management Journal 32: 187-211.
3. Ahuja G, Katila R,. 2001. Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal 22 (3): 197-220.
4. Aiken LS, West SG,. 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Sage Publications, Inc.: Newbury Park, CA.
5. Alchian AA, Demsetz H,. 1973. The property rights paradigm. Journal of Economic History 33: 16-27.
6. Arrow KJ,. 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Nelson RR, (ed). Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ; 609-625.
7. Barney JB,. 1986. Strategic factor markets. Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science 32 (10): 1231-1241.
8. Barney JB,. 1988. Returns to bidding firms in mergers and acquisitions: reconsidering the relatedness hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal 9: 71-78.
9. Barney JB,. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17 (1): 99-120.
10. Barney JB,. 2001. Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: a ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management 27 (6): 643-650.
11. Blind K, Cremers K, Müller E,. 2009. The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios. Research Policy 38 (2): 428-436.
12. Brandenburger AM, Stuart HW,. 1996. Value-based business strategy. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 5 (1): 5-24.
13. Cardinal LB, Miller CC, Palich LE,. 2011. Breaking the cycle of iteration: forensic failures of international diversification and firm performance research. Global Strategy Journal 1: 175-186.
14. Cassiman B, Colombo MG, Garrone P, Veugelers R,. 2005. The impact of M&A on the R&D process. An empirical analysis of the role of technological- and market-relatedness. Research Policy 34: 195-220.
15. Ceccagnoli M,. 2009. Appropriability, preemption, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal 30 (1): 81-98.
16. Cloodt M, Hagedoorn J, van Kranenburg H,. 2006. Mergers and acquisitions: their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries. Research Policy 35: 642-654.
17. Cockburn I, MacGarvie MJ,. 2011. Entry and patenting in the software industry. Management Science 57: 915-933.
18. Coff RW,. 1999. When competitive advantage doesn't lead to performance: the resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power. Organization Science 10 (2): 119-133.
19. Cohen WM, Goto A, Nagata A, Nelson RR, Walsh JP,. 2002. R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States. Resarch Policy 31: 1349-1367.
20. Cohen WM, Levinthal DA,. 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1): 128-152.
21. Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP., 2000. Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working paper 7552, NBER, Cambridge, MA.
22. Conner KR,. 1991. 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): 121-154.
23. Criscuolo P, Verspagen B,. 2008. Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents. Resarch Policy 37: 1892-1908.
24. Czarnitzki D, Hussinger K, Leten B., 2011. The market value of blocking patent citations. ZEW Discussion paper 11-021, ZEW, Mannheim, Germany.
25. Dernis H, Khan M., 2004. Triadic patent families methodology. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working paper 2004/02, OECD, Paris, France.
26. Foss K, Foss NJ,. 2005. Resources and transaction costs: how property rights economics furthers the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 26: 541-553.
27. Gambardella A, Harhoff D, Verspagen B,. 2008. The value of patents. European Management Review 5 (2): 69-84.
28. Graebner M,. 2004. Momentum and serendipity: how acquired leaders create value in the integration of technology firms. Strategic Management Journal 25: 751-777.
29. Graff GD, Rausser GC, Small AA,. 2003. Agricultural biotechnology's complementary intellectual assets. Review of Economics and Statistics 85 (2): 349-363.
30. Grimpe C, Hussinger K,. 2008. Pre-empting technology competition through firm acquisitions. Economics Letters 100 (2): 189-191.
31. Grimpe C, Kaiser U,. 2010. Balancing internal and external knowledge acquisition: the gains and pains from R&D outsourcing. Journal of Management Studies 47 (8): 1483-1509.
32. Guellec D, Martinez C, Zuniga MP,. 2012. Pre-emptive patenting: securing market exclusion and freedom of operation. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 21 (1): 1-29.
33. Hall BH,. 1990. The impact of corporate restructuring on industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1990: 85-124.
34. Hall BH, Harhoff D,. 2004. Post-grant reviews in the U.S. patent system: design choices and expected impact. Berkeley Technology Law Journal 19 (3): 989-1015.
35. Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M,. 2005. Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics 36 (1): 16-38.
36. Harhoff D, von Graevenitz G, Wagner S,. 2008. Incidence and growth of patent thickets: the impact of technological opportunities and complexity. CEPR Discussion paper 6900, CEPR, London, UK.
37. Harhoff D, Hoisl K, Webb C., 2005. Analysing European and international patent citations: a set of EPO patent database building blocks. OECD STI Working paper 2005/9, OECD, Paris, France.
38. Harhoff D, Narin F, Scherer FM, Vopel K,. 1999. Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. Review of Economics and Statistics 81 (3): 511-515.
39. Harhoff D, Reitzig M,. 2004. Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants-the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. International Journal of Industrial Organization 22 (4): 443-480.
40. Henderson R, Cockburn I,. 1994. Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal 15 (8): 63-84.
41. Hitt M, Bierman L, Uhlenbruck K, Shimizu K,. 2006. The importance of resources for the internationalization of professional service firms: the good, the bad and the ugly. Academy of Management Journal 49: 1137-1157.
42. Hitt MA, Harrison JS, Ireland RD,. 2001. Mergers and Acquisitions: A Guide to Creating Value for Shareholders. Oxford University Press: New York.
43. Hitt MA, Hoskisson RE, Johnson RA, Moesel DD,. 1996. The market for corporate control and firm innovation. Academy of Management Journal 39 (5): 1084-1119.
44. Jaffe AB,. 1986. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms' patents, profits, and market values. American Economic Review 76 (5): 984-1001.
45. Kogut R, Zander U,. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organization Science 33 (3): 383-397.
46. Lanjouw JO, Schankerman M,. 2001. Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition. RAND Journal of Economics 32 (1): 129-151.
47. Lippman SA, Rumelt RP,. 2003. A bargaining perspective on resource advantage. Strategic Management Journal 24: 1069-1086.
48. Makri M, Hitt MA, Lane PJ,. 2010. Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal 31: 602-628.
49. Mansfield E,. 1986. Patents and innovation. An empirical study. Management Science 32 (2): 173-181.
50. Michel J, Bettels B,. 2001. Patent citation analysis. Scientometrics 51 (1): 185-201.
51. Oriani R, Sobrero M,. 2008. Uncertainty and the market valuation of R&D within a real options logic. Strategic Management Journal 29: 343-361.
52. Peteraf MA,. 1993. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 14 (3): 179-191.
53. Rothaermel FT, Boeker W,. 2008. Old technology meets new technology: complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal 29 (1): 47-77.
54. Saloner G, Shepard A, Podolny J,. 2001. Strategic Management. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York.
55. Teece DJ,. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation. Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy 15: 285-305.
56. Trajtenberg M,. 1990. A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovation. RAND Journal of Economics 21 (1): 172-187.
57. Ziedonis RH,. 2004. Don't fence me in: fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms. Management Science 50 (6): 804-820.