IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v43y2022i10p1961-1982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How innovating firms manage knowledge leakage: A natural experiment on the threat of worker departure

Author

Listed:
  • Hyo Kang
  • Wyatt Lee

Abstract

Research Summary Knowledge protection strategies are crucial to innovating firms facing the risk of knowledge leakage. We examine the threat of worker departure as a key mechanism through which firms choose between patents and secrecy. We exploit a 1998 California court decision that ruled out‐of‐state noncompetes were not enforceable in California, thereby creating a loophole limiting non‐California firms in their enforcement of noncompetes against their workers. When facing a higher threat of worker departure, firms strategically increased patent filings, exchanging legal protection for public disclosure of the invention. These effects were magnified for large‐sized firms and for those in complex and fast‐growing industries. Further mechanism tests on the possession of trade secrets, inventor migration, saliency of the decision, and independent inventors support our theoretical account. Managerial Summary Innovating firms may use patents or secrecy, among other mechanisms, to protect their knowledge from leakage. How do firms make this important strategic choice? By using a natural experiment arising from a 1998 California court decision, we show the risk of worker departure can be a key driver. The decision significantly increased the risk of workers departing non‐California firms. Our findings show that, in response to the heightened risk, affected firms increasingly relied on patents, seeking legal protection although it meant public disclosure of the invention. The effects were greater for large‐sized firms and for those in complex and fast‐growing industries. We encourage managers to consider worker mobility and, more broadly, legal environments that govern labor market conditions when formulating knowledge protection strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyo Kang & Wyatt Lee, 2022. "How innovating firms manage knowledge leakage: A natural experiment on the threat of worker departure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(10), pages 1961-1982, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:43:y:2022:i:10:p:1961-1982
    DOI: 10.1002/smj.3404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3404
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/smj.3404?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. I. P. L. Png, 2017. "Secrecy and Patents: Theory and Evidence from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 176-193, September.
    2. Filippo Carlo Wezel & Gino Cattani & Johannes M. Pennings, 2006. "Competitive Implications of Interfirm Mobility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 691-709, December.
    3. Lori Rosenkopf & Paul Almeida, 2003. "Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 751-766, June.
    4. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    5. Seth Carnahan & Rajshree Agarwal & Benjamin A. Campbell, 2012. "Heterogeneity in turnover: the effect of relative compensation dispersion of firms on the mobility and entrepreneurship of extreme performers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(12), pages 1411-1430, December.
    6. Mark J. Garmaise, 2011. "Ties that Truly Bind: Noncompetition Agreements, Executive Compensation, and Firm Investment," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 376-425.
    7. 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..
    8. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    9. Heidi L. Williams, 2013. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from the Human Genome," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(1), pages 1-27.
    10. Marco Ceccagnoli, 2009. "Appropriability, preemption, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 81-98, January.
    11. Benjamin A. Campbell & Martin Ganco & April M. Franco & Rajshree Agarwal, 2012. "Who leaves, where to, and why worry? employee mobility, entrepreneurship and effects on source firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 65-87, January.
    12. Evan Starr & Natarajan Balasubramanian & Natarajan Balasubramanian, 2018. "Screening Spinouts? How Noncompete Enforceability Affects the Creation, Growth, and Survival of New Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 552-572, February.
    13. Arora, Ashish, 1997. "Patents, licensing, and market structure in the chemical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 391-403, December.
    14. Glaeser, Stephen, 2018. "The effects of proprietary information on corporate disclosure and transparency: Evidence from trade secrets," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 163-193.
    15. Neus Palomeras & Eduardo Melero, 2010. "Markets for Inventors: Learning-by-Hiring as a Driver of Mobility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 881-895, May.
    16. J. Myles Shaver & Fredrick Flyer, 2000. "Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(12), pages 1175-1193, December.
    17. Davide Cantoni & Jeremiah Dittmar & Noam Yuchtman, 2018. "Religious Competition and Reallocation: the Political Economy of Secularization in the Protestant Reformation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 2037-2096.
    18. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2018. "Propensity to Patent and Firm Size for Small R&D-Intensive Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(4), pages 561-587, June.
    19. Herbert A. Simon, 1991. "Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 125-134, February.
    20. 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.
    21. Michael Ewens & Matt Marx, 2018. "Founder Replacement and Startup Performance," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 1532-1565.
    22. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    23. Rajshree Agarwal & Martin Ganco & Rosemarie H. Ziedonis, 2009. "Reputations for toughness in patent enforcement: implications for knowledge spillovers via inventor mobility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(13), pages 1349-1374, December.
    24. Jaeyong Song & Paul Almeida & Geraldine Wu, 2003. "Learning--by--Hiring: When Is Mobility More Likely to Facilitate Interfirm Knowledge Transfer?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 351-365, April.
    25. Kitch, Edmund W, 1977. "The Nature and Function of the Patent System," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 265-290, October.
    26. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    27. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    28. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    29. Evan Starr, 2019. "Consider This: Training, Wages, and the Enforceability of Covenants Not to Compete," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 72(4), pages 783-817, August.
    30. Contigiani, Andrea & Hsu, David H. & Barankay, Iwan, 2018. "Trade secrets and innovation: Evidence from the "inevitable disclosure" doctrine," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2018-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    31. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2014. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation: Causal Evidence from the Courts," NBER Working Papers 20269, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. 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.
    33. Annamaria Conti & Jerry Thursby & Marie Thursby, 2013. "Patents as Signals for Startup Financing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 592-622, September.
    34. Barankay, Iwan & Contigiani, Andrea & Hsu, David, 2018. "Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the “Inevitable Disclosure†Doctrine," CEPR Discussion Papers 13077, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    35. Andrea Contigiani & David H. Hsu & Iwan Barankay, 2018. "Trade secrets and innovation: Evidence from the “inevitable disclosure” doctrine," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(11), pages 2921-2942, November.
    36. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    37. I. P. L. Png, 2017. "Law and Innovation: Evidence from State Trade Secrets Laws," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(1), pages 167-179, March.
    38. Kannan Srikanth & Anand Nandkumar & Deepa Mani & Prashant Kale, 2020. "How Firms Build Isolating Mechanisms for Knowledge: A Study in Offshore Research and Development Captives," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 98-116, June.
    39. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2004. "Little Patents and Big Secrets: Managing Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, Spring.
    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. Melody H. Chang, 2023. "Cascading innovation: R&D team design and performance implications of mobility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(5), pages 1218-1253, May.

    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. Hussingera, Katrin & Issahd, Wunnam, 2022. "Trade secret protection and R&D investment of family firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Dan Hu & Eunju Lee & Bingxin Li, 2023. "Trade secrets protection and stock price crash risk," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 395-421, May.
    3. Martin Ganco & Cameron D. Miller & Puay Khoon Toh, 2020. "From litigation to innovation: Firms' ability to litigate and technological diversification through human capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2436-2473, December.
    4. Contigiani, Andrea & Testoni, Marco, 2023. "Geographic isolation, trade secrecy, and innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    5. Simeth, Markus & Mohammadi, Ali, 2017. "The impact of open innovation on employee mobility and entrepreneurship," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 449, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    6. Jürgen Mihm & Fabian J. Sting & Tan Wang, 2015. "On the Effectiveness of Patenting Strategies in Innovation Races," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2662-2684, November.
    7. Wang, Runhua, 2021. "Information asymmetry and the inefficiency of informal ip strategies within employment relationships," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    8. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    9. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    10. Dai, Yanke & Du, Ting & Gao, Huasheng & Gu, Yan & Wang, Yongqin, 2024. "Patent pledgeability, trade secrecy, and corporate patenting," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    11. Telg, Nina & Lokshin, Boris & Letterie, Wilko, 2023. "How formal and informal intellectual property protection matters for firms' decision to engage in coopetition: The role of environmental dynamism and competition intensity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    12. Chila, Vilma & Devarakonda, Shivaram, 2024. "The effects of firm-specific incentives (stock options) on mobility and employee entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3).
    13. Aineas Kostas Mallios, 2024. "Licensing and secrecy under imperfect intellectual property protection," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 527-552, November.
    14. Chila, Vilma, 2021. "Knowledge dynamics in employee entrepreneurship : Implications for parents and offspring," Other publications TiSEM a1f5d18c-783b-4af6-8414-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Katrin Hussinger & Wunnam Basit Issah, 2022. "Trade Secret Protection and R&D Investment of Family Firms," DEM Discussion Paper Series 22-11, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    16. Simeth, Markus & Mohammadi, Ali, 2022. "Losing talent by partnering up? The impact of R&D collaboration on employee mobility," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    17. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    18. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.
    19. Reinhilde Veugelers & Cédric Schneider, 2018. "Which IP strategies do young highly innovative firms choose?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 113-129, January.
    20. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," 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 315-380, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    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:bla:stratm:v:43:y:2022:i:10:p:1961-1982. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    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.