IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2020i1p328-d473351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of R&D Intensity on the Innovation Performance of Artificial Intelligence Enterprises-Based on the Moderating Effect of Patent Portfolio

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanyuan Dong

    (School of Economics and Management, Harbin University of Science and Technology, Harbin 150001, China)

  • Zepeng Wei

    (School of Economics and Management, Harbin University of Science and Technology, Harbin 150001, China)

  • Tiansen Liu

    (School of Economics and Management, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China
    School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
    State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China)

  • Xinpeng Xing

    (School of Business, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China)

Abstract

The patent portfolio affects the research and development (R&D) decisions of artificial intelligence enterprises, and provides rights protection for the enterprise’s product market, which is of great practical significance for the realization of innovation performance. The aim of this paper is to discover how the patent portfolio of artificial intelligence enterprises affects the relationship between R&D intensity and innovation performance. Based on the panel data of 164 listed enterprises in the A-share artificial intelligence concept sector of China, using the panel fixed effect regression method, the impact of R&D intensity on innovation performance was analyzed, and the moderating effect of the three dimensions of the patent portfolio on the two was examined. Studies have shown that the impact of R&D intensity on innovation performance is in an inverted U-shaped relationship. In addition, the diversity characteristics of the patent portfolio have a moderating effect on the relationship between R&D intensity and innovation performance, and when the enterprise is at a high level of diversity, the two have a U-shaped flip relationship. The size of the patent portfolio has a positive impact on innovation performance. The research results have theoretical and practical significance for the implementation of effective R&D management in artificial intelligence enterprise organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanyuan Dong & Zepeng Wei & Tiansen Liu & Xinpeng Xing, 2020. "The Impact of R&D Intensity on the Innovation Performance of Artificial Intelligence Enterprises-Based on the Moderating Effect of Patent Portfolio," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:328-:d:473351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/328/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/328/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    2. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie & Elisabeth Müller, 2010. "Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 899-925, June.
    3. Blazsek, Szabolcs & Escribano, Alvaro, 2016. "Patent propensity, R&D and market competition: Dynamic spillovers of innovation leaders and followers," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 191(1), pages 145-163.
    4. Richard F. J. Haans & Constant Pieters & Zi-Lin He, 2016. "Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1177-1195, July.
    5. Wakelin, Katharine, 2001. "Productivity growth and R&D expenditure in UK manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1079-1090, August.
    6. Lin, Chinho & Chang, Chia-Chi, 2015. "The effect of technological diversification on organizational performance: An empirical study of S&P 500 manufacturing firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 575-586.
    7. Christoph Grimpe & Katrin Hussinger, 2014. "Resource complementarity and value capture in firm acquisitions: The role of intellectual property rights," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(12), pages 1762-1780, December.
    8. Blind, Knut & Cremers, Katrin & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 428-436, March.
    9. Siebert, Ralph & von Graevenitz, Georg, 2010. "Jostling for advantage or not: Choosing between patent portfolio races and ex ante licensing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 225-245, February.
    10. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich, 2010. "Determinants of proactive and reactive technology licensing: A contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 55-66, February.
    11. P. Vinkler, 2010. "Indicators are the essence of scientometrics and bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 861-866, December.
    12. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
    13. Geert Duysters & John Hagedoorn, 2001. "Do Company Strategies and Structures Converge in Global Markets? Evidence from the Computer Industry," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 32(2), pages 347-356, June.
    14. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Oriani, Raffaele, 2006. "Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 971-993, September.
    15. Wu, Jie & Ma, Zhenzhong & Liu, Zhiyang, 2019. "The moderated mediating effect of international diversification, technological capability, and market orientation on emerging market firms' new product performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 524-533.
    16. Lin, Bou-Wen & Lee, Yikuan & Hung, Shih-Chang, 2006. "R&D intensity and commercialization orientation effects on financial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(6), pages 679-685, June.
    17. Wagner, Stefan & Wakeman, Simon, 2016. "What do patent-based measures tell us about product commercialization? Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 1091-1102.
    18. Gabjo Kim & Joonhyuck Lee & Dongsik Jang & Sangsung Park, 2016. "Technology Clusters Exploration for Patent Portfolio through Patent Abstract Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Kyungsuk Lee & Taewoo Roh, 2020. "Proactive Divestiture and Business Innovation: R&D Input and Output Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, May.
    20. Sang Ho Kook & Ki Hong Kim & Chulung Lee, 2017. "Dynamic Technological Diversification and Its Impact on Firms’ Performance: An Empirical Analysis of Korean IT Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-16, July.
    21. Zhenzhong Ma & Quan Jin, 2019. "Success Factors for Product Innovation in China’s Manufacturing Sector: Strategic Choice and Environment Constraints," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(2), pages 213-231, April.
    22. Turanay Caner & Olga Bruyaka & John E. Prescott, 2018. "Flow Signals: Evidence from Patent and Alliance Portfolios in the US Biopharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 232-264, March.
    23. Nicky J. Welton & Howard H. Z. Thom, 2015. "Value of Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(5), pages 564-566, July.
    24. Pan, Xin & Chen, Xuanjin & Li, Xibao, 2019. "To fit in or stand out? How optimal distinctiveness in technological diversification affects firm performance," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 67-77.
    25. Huang, Wei-Chi & Lai, Ching-Chong & Chen, Ping-Ho, 2017. "International R&D funding and patent collateral in an R&D-based growth model," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 545-561.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chunlian Chen & Babar Nawaz Abbasi & Ali Sohail, 2022. "Scientific Research of Innovation Ability of Universities in the United States of America and China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Xiaoli Li & Kun Li & Hao Zhou, 2022. "Impact of Inventor’s Cooperation Network on Ambidextrous Innovation in Chinese AI Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesco Paolo Appio & Luigi de Luca & Robert Morgan & Antonella Martini, 2019. "Patent portfolio diversity and firm profitability: A question of specialization or diversification?," Post-Print halshs-02292360, HAL.
    2. Jun Hong Park & Sang Ho Kook & Hyeonu Im & Soomin Eum & Chulung Lee, 2018. "Fabless Semiconductor Firms’ Financial Performance Determinant Factors: Product Platform Efficiency and Technological Capability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Jun Hong Park & Hyunseog Chung & Ki Hong Kim & Jin Ju Kim & Chulung Lee, 2021. "The Impact of Technological Capability on Financial Performance in the Semiconductor Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    4. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    5. Moaniba, Igam M. & Lee, Pei-Chun & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2020. "How does external knowledge sourcing enhance product development? Evidence from drug commercialization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2020. "Does geographic distance to partners affect firm R&D spending? The moderating roles of individuals, firms, and countries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 12-23.
    7. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Capturing the economic value of triadic patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 127-157, January.
    8. Achim Walter & Nicole Coviello & Monika Sienknecht & Thomas Ritter, 2024. "Leveraging the Lab: How Pre-Founding R&D Collaboration Influences the Internationalization Timing of Academic Spin-Offs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 48(1), pages 71-103, January.
    9. Huang, Kenneth Guang-Lih & Huang, Can & Shen, Huijun & Mao, Hao, 2021. "Assessing the value of China's patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    10. Caviggioli, Federico & De Marco, Antonio & Montobbio, Fabio & Ughetto, Elisa, 2020. "The licensing and selling of inventions by US universities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    11. Bo Kyeong Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1203-1227, September.
    12. Yi Zhang & Yue Qian & Ying Huang & Ying Guo & Guangquan Zhang & Jie Lu, 2017. "An entropy-based indicator system for measuring the potential of patents in technological innovation: rejecting moderation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1925-1946, June.
    13. Cappelli, Riccardo & Corsino, Marco & Laursen, Keld & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2023. "Technological competition and patent strategy: Protecting innovation, preempting rivals and defending the freedom to operate," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    14. Li, Shuying & Zhang, Xian & Xu, Haiyun & Fang, Shu & Garces, Edwin & Daim, Tugrul, 2020. "Measuring strategic technological strength :Patent Portfolio Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    15. Ming-Liang Yeh & Hsiao-Ping Chu & Peter Sher & Yi-Chia Chiu, 2010. "R&D intensity, firm performance and the identification of the threshold: fresh evidence from the panel threshold regression model," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 389-401.
    16. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    17. Neuhäusler , Peter & Schubert, Torben & Frietsch , Rainer & Blind , Knut, 2015. "Managing Portfolio Risk in Strategic Technology Management: Evidence from a Panel Data Set of the World’s Largest R&D Performers," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/41, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    18. Marte C.W. Solheim & Ron Boschma & Sverre Herstad, 2018. "Related variety, unrelated variety and the novelty content of firm innovation in urban and non-urban locations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1836, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2018.
    19. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    20. Baomin Chen & Xinyun Yang & Zhenzhong Ma, 2022. "Fintech and Financial Risks of Systemically Important Commercial Banks in China: An Inverted U-Shaped Relationship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:328-:d:473351. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.