IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison

Listed author(s):
  • de Faria, Pedro
  • Sofka, Wolfgang

International knowledge spillovers, especially through multinational companies (MNCs), have recently been a major topic of discussion among academics and practitioners. Most research in this field focuses on knowledge sharing activities of MNC subsidiaries. Relatively little is known about their capabilities for protecting valuable knowledge from spilling over to host country competitors. We extend this stream of research by investigating both formal protection strategies (e.g. patenting) as well as strategic ones (secrecy, lead time, complex design). We conceptualize the breadth of firm's knowledge protection strategies and relate it to the particular situation of MNC subsidiaries. Moreover, we argue that their approaches differ with regard to host country challenges and opportunities. We address these issues empirically, based on a harmonized survey of innovation activities of more than 1800 firms located in Portugal and Germany. We find evidence that MNCs prefer broader sets of knowledge protection strategies in a host country with fewer opportunities for knowledge sourcing (Portugal). In Germany, though, they opt for narrower sets of knowledge protection strategies if they invest in innovation activities themselves. We deduce that these results are due to a need for reciprocity in knowledge exchanges to benefit fully from promising host country knowledge flows.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(10)00078-8
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Research Policy.

Volume (Year): 39 (2010)
Issue (Month): 7 (September)
Pages: 956-968

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:39:y:2010:i:7:p:956-968
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gaechter, "undated". "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocitys," IEW - Working Papers 040, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  2. Jonathan E. Haskel & Sonia C. Pereira & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2002. "Does Inward Foreign Direct Investment Boost the Productivity of Domestic Firms?," Working Papers 452, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
  3. Barak S. Aharonson & Joel A. C. Baum & Maryann P. Feldman, 2007. "Desperately seeking spillovers? Increasing returns, industrial organization and the location of new entrants in geographic and technological space ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 89-130, February.
  4. Yang, Chih-Hai & Kuo, Nai-Fong, 2008. "Trade-related influences, foreign intellectual property rights and outbound international patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 446-459, April.
  5. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
  6. Walter Kuemmerle, 1999. "The Drivers of Foreign Direct Investment into Research and Development: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 30(1), pages 1-24, March.
  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. Minyuan Zhao, 2006. "Conducting R& D in Countries with Weak Intellectual Property Rights Protection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1185-1199, August.
  9. Jaffe, A.B. & Trajtenberg, M., 1992. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," Papers 14-92, Tel Aviv.
  10. Wolfgang Keller, 2000. "Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 7509, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Edwin Mansfield & John Rapoport & Anthony Romeo & Samuel Wagner & George Beardsley, 1977. "Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 91(2), pages 221-240.
  12. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  13. Buckley, Peter J & Casson, Mark, 1981. "The Optimal Timing of a Foreign Direct Investment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(361), pages 75-87, March.
  14. Ann E. Harrison & Brian J. Aitken, 1999. "Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 605-618, June.
  15. Bas, Christian Le & Sierra, Christophe, 2002. "'Location versus home country advantages' in R&D activities: some further results on multinationals' locational strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 589-609, May.
  16. 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.
  17. Ginarte, Juan C. & Park, Walter G., 1997. "Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-301, October.
  18. David Encaoua & Dominique Guellec & Catalina Martínez, 2006. "Patent Systems for Encouraging Innovation: Lessons from Economic Analysis," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00177614, HAL.
  19. Gunnthorsdottir, Anna & McCabe, Kevin & Smith, Vernon, 2002. "Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 49-66, February.
  20. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," Working Papers 93-31, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  21. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
  22. Griliches, Zvi, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 1661-1707, December.
  23. Wolfgang Keller, 2001. "International Technology Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 8573, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
  25. Robert Salomon & Byungchae Jin, 2008. "Does knowledge spill to leaders or laggards? Exploring industry heterogeneity in learning by exporting," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(1), pages 132-150, January.
  26. Juan Alcácer & Wilbur Chung, 2007. "Location Strategies and Knowledge Spillovers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 760-776, May.
  27. Saviotti, Pier Paolo, 1998. "On the dynamics of appropriability, of tacit and of codified knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 843-856, April.
  28. Wesley M Cohen & Richard R Nelson & John P Walsh, 2003. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (Or Not)," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000624, David K. Levine.
  29. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1993. "Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 24(4), pages 625-645, December.
  30. Ito, Banri & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2007. "What factors determine the mode of overseas R&D by multinationals? Empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1275-1287, October.
  31. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
  32. Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 1997. "Keeping Organizational Secrets: Protective Institutional Mechanisms and Their Costs," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 623-663, September.
  33. Paul Romer, 1989. "Endogenous Technological Change," NBER Working Papers 3210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  34. David Encaoua & Dominique Guellec & Catalina Martínez, 2006. "Patent Systems for Encouraging Innovation: Lessons from Economic Analysis," Post-Print halshs-00177614, HAL.
  35. Cassiman, Bruno & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2000. "Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments," IESE Research Papers D/428, IESE Business School.
  36. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  37. Rene Belderbos & Kyoji Fukao & Hyeog Ug Kwon, 2006. "Intellectual Property Rights Protection and the Location of Research and Development Activities by Multinational Firms," Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series d06-167, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  38. Leiponen, Aija & Byma, Justin, 2009. "If you cannot block, you better run: Small firms, cooperative innovation, and appropriation strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1478-1488, November.
  39. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
  40. Keld Laursen & Ammon Salter, 2005. "My Precious. The Role of Appropriability Strategies in Shaping Innovative Performance," DRUID Working Papers 05-02, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
  41. James D. Adams & Adam B. Jaffe, 1996. "Bounding the Effects of R&D: An Investigation Using Matched Establishment-Firm Data," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 700-721, Winter.
  42. 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.
  43. Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily & Vincenzo Perrone, 1998. "Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 141-159, April.
  44. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
  45. Klaus E Meyer & Evis Sinani, 2009. "When and where does foreign direct investment generate positive spillovers? A meta-analysis," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 40(7), pages 1075-1094, September.
  46. Cameron, A Colin & Trivedi, Pravin K, 1986. "Econometric Models Based on Count Data: Comparisons and Applications of Some Estimators and Tests," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(1), pages 29-53, January.
  47. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2002. "An empirical test of models explaining research expenditures and research cooperation: evidence for the German service sector," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 747-774, June.
  48. Branstetter, Lee G. & Fisman, Raymond & Foley, C. Fritz, 2004. "Do stronger intellectual property rights increase international technology transfer? Empirical evidence from U.S. firm-level panel data," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3305, The World Bank.
  49. Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
  50. Park, Walter G., 2008. "International patent protection: 1960-2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 761-766, May.
  51. Odagiri, Hiroyuki & Yasuda, Hideto, 1996. "The determinants of overseas R&D by Japanese firms: an empirical study at the industry and company levels," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1059-1079, October.
  52. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring.
  53. Belderbos, Rene, 2001. "Overseas innovations by Japanese firms: an analysis of patent and subsidiary data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 313-332, February.
  54. J. Scott Long & Jeremy Freese, 2006. "Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, edition 2, number long2, September.
  55. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
  56. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:39:y:2010:i:7:p:956-968. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.