IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v45y2016i4p816-829.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In-house versus external basic research and first-to-market innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Añón Higón, Dolores

Abstract

This paper explores to what extent conducting internal basic research, as opposed to external basic research (i.e. outsourcing and collaboration with universities) encourages firms to bring new products into the market ahead of competitors, and contributes to innovation performance. The analysis is based on a sample of Spanish manufacturing firms over the period 2006–2012. Our findings suggest that conducting in-house basic research affects firm's propensity to introduce product novelties. Furthermore, performing this activity continuously affects the probability of being product-pioneer in low and medium–low tech sectors. Collaboration with universities also helps in introducing new products ahead of competitors, but contracting scientific research from universities does not lead to a pioneer strategy. Results also reveal the absence of complementarities.

Suggested Citation

  • Añón Higón, Dolores, 2016. "In-house versus external basic research and first-to-market innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 816-829.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:4:p:816-829
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733316000068
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2010. "Persistence of Innovation in Dutch Manufacturing: Is It Spurious?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(3), pages 495-504, August.
    2. David J. Teece, 2003. "Competition, Cooperation, and Innovation Organizational Arrangements for Regimes of Rapid Technological Progress," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Essays In Technology Management And Policy Selected Papers of David J Teece, chapter 16, pages 447-474 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 1999. "Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 63-80, January.
    4. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1988. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 678-690, September.
    5. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2005. "The Importance of R&D for Innovation: A Reassessment Using French Survey Data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 183-197, January.
    6. Maria Guadalupe & Olga Kuzmina & Catherine Thomas, 2012. "Innovation and Foreign Ownership," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3594-3627, December.
    7. Slivko, Olga, 2012. "Innovation strategies of German firms: The effect of competition and intellectual property protection," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-089, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    8. Mansfield, Edwin, 1980. "Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 863-873, December.
    9. Werner Bonte, 2003. "R&D and productivity: Internal vs. external R&D - evidence from west german manufacturing industries," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 343-360.
    10. Josh Lerner, 2009. "The Empirical Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Innovation: Puzzles and Clues," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 343-348, May.
    11. Glen L. Urban & Theresa Carter & Steven Gaskin & Zofia Mucha, 1986. "Market Share Rewards to Pioneering Brands: An Empirical Analysis and Strategic Implications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 645-659, June.
    12. Balconi, Margherita & Brusoni, Stefano & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2010. "In defence of the linear model: An essay," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-13, February.
    13. Gambardella, Alfonso, 1992. "Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 391-407, October.
    14. Schankerman, Mark, 1981. "The Effects of Double-Counting and Expensing on the Measured Returns to R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(3), pages 454-458, August.
    15. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2012. "Productivity effects of basic research in low-tech and high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1555-1564.
    16. Alfred Kleinknecht & Kees Van Montfort & Erik Brouwer, 2002. "The Non-Trivial Choice between Innovation Indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 109-121.
    17. Gary P. Pisano, 2010. "The evolution of science-based business: innovating how we innovate," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 465-482, April.
    18. Griliches, Zvi, 1986. "Productivity, R&D, and the Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970's," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(1), pages 141-154, March.
    19. Lim, Kwanghui, 2004. "The relationship between research and innovation in the semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries (1981-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 287-321, March.
    20. Hicks, Diana, 1995. "Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 401-424.
    21. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    22. Cassiman, Bruno & Perez-Castrillo, David & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2002. "Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 775-799, June.
    23. Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos & Martin Carree, 2008. "The Productivity Effects of Internal and External R&D: Evidence from a Dynamic Panel Data Model," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(3), pages 399-413, June.
    24. Philippe Cuneo & Jacques Mairesse, 1984. "Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing," NBER Chapters,in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 375-392 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. López, Alberto, 2011. "The effect of microaggregation on regression results: an application to Spanish innovation data," MPRA Paper 30403, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    26. Mueller, Dennis C., 1997. "First-mover advantages and path dependence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 827-850, October.
    27. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297-297.
    28. Joanna Poyago-Theotoky & John Beath & Donald S. Siegel, 2002. "Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University--Industry Partnerships," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 10-21, Spring.
    29. Vega-Jurado, Jaider & Gutiérrez-Gracia, Antonio & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio & Manjarrés-Henri­quez, Liney, 2008. "The effect of external and internal factors on firms' product innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 616-632, May.
    30. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    31. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers & Pluvia Zuniga, 2008. "In search of performance effects of (in)direct industry science links," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 611-646, August.
    32. 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.
    33. Pavitt, Keith, 1991. "What makes basic research economically useful?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 109-119, April.
    34. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    35. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1962. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 155-173.
    36. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-632, Nov.-Dec..
    37. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    38. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi, 2015. "Killing the Golden Goose? The Decline of Science in Corporate R&D," NBER Working Papers 20902, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    39. Jaider Vega-Jurado & Antonio Gutiérrez-Gracia & Ignacio Fernández-de-Lucio, 2009. "Does external knowledge sourcing matter for innovation? Evidence from the Spanish manufacturing industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 637-670, August.
    40. Jungho Kim & Chang-Yang Lee, 2011. "Technological regimes and the persistence of first-mover advantages," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(5), pages 1305-1333, October.
    41. Anker Lund Vinding, 2006. "Absorptive capacity and innovative performance: A human capital approach," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 507-517.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Basic research; In-house; Outsourcing; Collaboration; Pioneer; Imitation;

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:4:p:816-829. 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). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.