IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/30354.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Invention Value, Inventive Capability and the Large Firm Advantage

Author

Listed:
  • Ashish Arora
  • Wesley M. Cohen
  • Honggi Lee
  • Divya Sebastian

Abstract

Do large firms produce more valuable inventions, and if so, why? After confirming that large firms indeed produce more valuable inventions, we consider two possible sources: a superior ability to invent, or a superior ability to extract value from their inventions. We develop a simple model that discriminates between the two explanations. Using a sample of 2,786 public corporations, and measures of both patent quality and patent value, we find that, while average invention value rises with size, average invention quality declines, suggesting, per our model, that the large firm advantage is not due to superior inventive capability, but due to the superior ability to extract value. We provide evidence suggesting that this superior ability to extract value is due to greater commercialization capabilities of larger firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashish Arora & Wesley M. Cohen & Honggi Lee & Divya Sebastian, 2022. "Invention Value, Inventive Capability and the Large Firm Advantage," NBER Working Papers 30354, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:30354
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w30354.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    2. Holmstrom, Bengt, 1989. "Agency costs and innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 305-327, December.
    3. Brav, Alon & Jiang, Wei & Ma, Song & Tian, Xuan, 2018. "How does hedge fund activism reshape corporate innovation?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 237-264.
    4. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Evans, David S, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Growth, Size, and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 567-581, June.
    6. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    7. Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2019. "Firm growth and R&D investment: SVAR evidence from the world’s top R&D investors," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(5), pages 508-533, May.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    9. Josh Feng & Xavier Jaravel, 2020. "Crafting Intellectual Property Rights: Implications for Patent Assertion Entities, Litigation, and Innovation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 140-181, January.
    10. Lei, Zhen & Wright, Brian D., 2017. "Why weak patents? Testing the examiner ignorance hypothesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 43-56.
    11. David Autor & David Dorn & Lawrence F Katz & Christina Patterson & John Van Reenen, 2020. "The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms [“Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 645-709.
    12. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    13. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-951, July.
    15. William R. Kerr & William F. Lincoln, 2010. "The Supply Side of Innovation: H-1B Visa Reforms and U.S. Ethnic Invention," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(3), pages 473-508, July.
    16. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1988. "Committees, Hierarchies and Polyarchies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 451-470, June.
    17. Holmström, Bengt, 1989. "Agency Costs and Innovation," Working Paper Series 214, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    18. Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2000. "Leadership, Capabilities, and Technological Change: The Transformation of NCR in the Electronic Era," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1083-1103, October.
    19. Arora, Ashish & Belenzon, Sharon & Dionisi, Bernardo, 2023. "First-mover advantage and the private value of public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    20. Anne Marie Knott & Carl Vieregger, 2020. "Reconciling the Firm Size and Innovation Puzzle," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 477-488, March.
    21. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1986. "The Economics of Price Scissors: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1195-1199, December.
    22. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley M. & Walsh, John P., 2016. "The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1113-1128.
    23. Birger Wernerfelt, 1984. "A resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 171-180, April.
    24. Harhoff, Dietmar & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "The Value of European Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 6848, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    25. Ajit Singh & Geoffrey Whittington, 1975. "The Size and Growth of Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 42(1), pages 15-26.
    26. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    27. Stoffman, Noah & Woeppel, Michael & Yavuz, M. Deniz, 2022. "Small innovators: No risk, No return," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1).
    28. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
    29. Victor M. Bennett & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2017. "Firm Lifecycles: Linking Employee Incentives and Firm Growth Dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(10), pages 2005-2018, October.
    30. repec:eme:asei11:s1048-4736(07)00001-x is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Michael D. Frakes & Melissa F. Wasserman, 2017. "Is the Time Allocated to Review Patent Applications Inducing Examiners to Grant Invalid Patents? Evidence from Microlevel Application Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(3), pages 550-563, July.
    32. Natalya Vinokurova & Rahul Kapoor, 2020. "Converting inventions into innovations in large firms: How inventors at Xerox navigated the innovation process to commercialize their ideas," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2372-2399, December.
    33. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    34. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Lia Sheer, 2021. "Knowledge Spillovers and Corporate Investment in Scientific Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 871-898, March.
    35. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    36. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    37. Patrick Kline & Neviana Petkova & Heidi Williams & Owen Zidar, 2019. "Who Profits from Patents? Rent-Sharing at Innovative Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1343-1404.
    38. Gabriel Popkin, 2019. "How scientists can team up with big tech," Nature, Nature, vol. 565(7741), pages 665-667, January.
    39. Andrea Filippetti & Beatrice D’Ippolito, 2017. "Appropriability of design innovation across organisational boundaries: exploring collaborative relationships between manufacturing firms and designers in Italy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 613-632, August.
    40. Richard Makadok, 2001. "Toward a synthesis of the resource‐based and dynamic‐capability views of rent creation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 387-401, May.
    41. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, April.
    42. Cockburn, Iain M. & Henderson, Rebecca M., 2001. "Scale and scope in drug development: unpacking the advantages of size in pharmaceutical research," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 1033-1057, November.
    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. Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Sorg & Georg von Graevenitz, 2024. "Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation: Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 494, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. Michele Battisti & Filippo Belloc & Massimo Del Gatto, 2023. "COVID-19, Innovative Firms and Resilience," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 73, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    3. Lee, Honggi, 2023. "The heterogeneous effects of patent scope on licensing propensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    4. Kox, Henk L.M., 2023. "Testing an extended knowledge-capital model of foreign direct investment," MPRA Paper 117266, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Lee, Honggi, 2023. "The heterogeneous effects of patent scope on licensing propensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    2. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    3. Masatoshi Kato & Koichiro Onishi & Yuji Honjo, 2022. "Does patenting always help new firm survival? Understanding heterogeneity among exit routes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 449-475, August.
    4. Gao, Wenlian & Chou, Julia, 2015. "Innovation efficiency, global diversification, and firm value," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 278-298.
    5. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    6. Sun, Zhen & Wright, Brian D., 2022. "Citations backward and forward: Insights into the patent examiner's role," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    7. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    8. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    9. 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.
    10. Wu, Qiang & Dbouk, Wassim & Hasan, Iftekhar & Kobeissi, Nada & Zheng, Li, 2021. "Does gender affect innovation? Evidence from female chief technology officers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    11. Younge, Kenneth A. & Tong, Tony W., 2018. "Competitive pressure on the rate and scope of innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 162-181.
    12. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Yann Ménière & Myra Mohnen, 2017. "International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 793-828, May.
    13. 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).
    14. M. D. Beneish & C. R. Harvey & A. Tseng & P. Vorst, 2022. "Unpatented innovation and merger synergies," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 706-744, June.
    15. Minniti, Antonio, 2011. "Knowledge appropriability, firm size, and growth," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 438-454, September.
    16. Blanco, Iván & Wehrheim, David, 2017. "The bright side of financial derivatives: Options trading and firm innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 99-119.
    17. Joan Farre‐Mensa & Deepak Hegde & Alexander Ljungqvist, 2020. "What Is a Patent Worth? Evidence from the U.S. Patent “Lottery”," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(2), pages 639-682, April.
    18. repec:izm:wpaper:1207 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Dosi, Giovanni & Marengo, Luigi & Staccioli, Jacopo & Virgillito, Maria Enrica, 2023. "Big Pharma and monopoly capitalism: A long-term view," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 15-35.
    20. Stephane Lhuillery & Julio Raffo & Intan Hamdan-Livramento, 2016. "Measuring creativity: Learning from innovation measurement," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 31, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    21. Benjamin F. Jones, 2021. "Where Innovation Happens, and Where It Does Not," NBER Chapters, in: The Role of Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Economic Growth, pages 577-601, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nbr:nberwo:30354. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.