IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v48-49y2016ip13-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Blind, Knut
  • Mangelsdorf, Axel

Abstract

In this paper, we identify the strategic motives of German manufacturing companies in the electrical engineering and machinery industry to be involved in standards development organizations. First, we present the general motives for the formation of strategic alliances and relate them to specific standardization motives. Then, we identify pursuing specific company interests, solving technical problems, knowledge seeking, influencing regulation, and facilitating market access as motives to standardize by means of factor analysis. In a second step, we test hypotheses on the relationship between the importance of strategic motives and firm level variables, e.g. R&D intensity, innovation activities, and firm size. The results reveal that firms in electric engineering and machinery have a particularly strong interest in ensuring industry-friendly design of regulations, which can be achieved by standards. Moreover, the results confirm that small firms also from these two sectors are active in standardization alliances to access knowledge from other involved stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:48-49:y:2016:i::p:13-24
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016649721600002X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.001?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
    ---><---

    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. Khazam, Jonathan & Mowery, David, 1994. "The commercialization of RISC: Strategies for the creation of dominant designs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 89-102, January.
    2. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1991. "The Politics of Government Decision-Making: A Theory of Regulatory Capture," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1089-1127.
    3. Marc Rysman & Timothy Simcoe, 2008. "Patents and the Performance of Voluntary Standard-Setting Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1920-1934, November.
    4. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    5. Knut Blind & Stephan Gauch, 2009. "Research and standardisation in nanotechnology: evidence from Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 320-342, June.
    6. Knut Blind, 2006. "Explanatory factors for participation in formal standardisation processes: Empirical evidence at firm level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 157-170.
    7. Chen, Maggie Xiaoyang & Otsuki, Tsunehiro & Wilson, John S., 2006. "Do standards matter for export success ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3809, The World Bank.
    8. Knut Blind & Andre Jungmittag, 2008. "The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: a panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 51-60, February.
    9. Benjamin Chiao & Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2007. "The rules of standard-setting organizations: an empirical analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 905-930, December.
    10. Delcamp, Henry & Leiponen, Aija, 2014. "Innovating standards through informal consortia: The case of wireless telecommunications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 36-47.
    11. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    12. Henry Delcamp & Aija Leiponen, 2014. "Innovating standards through informal consortia: The case of wireless telecommunications," Post-Print hal-01111055, HAL.
    13. Mark Easterby‐Smith & Marjorie A. Lyles & Eric W. K. Tsang, 2008. "Inter‐Organizational Knowledge Transfer: Current Themes and Future Prospects," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 677-690, June.
    14. Tassey, Gregory, 2000. "Standardization in technology-based markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 587-602, April.
    15. Shurmer, M & Swann, P, 1995. "An Analysis of the Process Generating De Facto Standards in the PC Spreadsheet Software Market," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 119-132, June.
    16. David, Paul A. & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 1994. "Economics of compatibility standards and competition in telecommunication networks," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 217-241, December.
    17. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    18. Cabral, Luís & Salant, David, 2014. "Evolving technologies and standards regulation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 48-56.
    19. Gina Dokko & Lori Rosenkopf, 2010. "Social Capital for Hire? Mobility of Technical Professionals and Firm Influence in Wireless Standards Committees," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 677-695, June.
    20. Pek‐Hooi Soh, 2010. "Network patterns and competitive advantage before the emergence of a dominant design," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 438-461, April.
    21. Bruce Kogut, 1988. "Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 319-332, July.
    22. Keith W. Glaister & Peter J. Buckley, 1996. "Strategic Motives For International Alliance Formation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 301-332, May.
    23. Raymond Van Wijk & Justin J. P. Jansen & Marjorie A. Lyles, 2008. "Inter‐ and Intra‐Organizational Knowledge Transfer: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Assessment of its Antecedents and Consequences," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 830-853, June.
    24. Belleflamme, Paul, 2002. "Coordination on formal vs. de facto standards: a dynamic approach," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 153-176, March.
    25. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, 1996. "Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 136-150, April.
    26. Sykes, Alan O, 1999. "The (Limited) Role of Regulatory Harmonization in International Goods and Services Markets," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 49-70, March.
    27. Robert Axelrod & Will Mitchell & Robert E. Thomas & D. Scott Bennett & Erhard Bruderer, 1995. "Coalition Formation in Standard-Setting Alliances," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(9), pages 1493-1508, September.
    28. Knut Blind, 2004. "The Economics of Standards," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3392.
    29. Blind, Knut, 2011. "An economic analysis of standards competition: The example of the ISO ODF and OOXML standards," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 373-381, May.
    30. Cusumano, Michael A. & Mylonadis, Yiorgos & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1992. "Strategic Maneuvering and Mass-Market Dynamics: The Triumph of VHS over Beta," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(1), pages 51-94, April.
    31. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    32. Aija Elina Leiponen, 2008. "Competing Through Cooperation: The Organization of Standard Setting in Wireless Telecommunications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1904-1919, November.
    33. Tim Büthe & Walter Mattli, 2011. "The New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9470.
    34. Robert M. Grant & Charles Baden‐Fuller, 2004. "A Knowledge Accessing Theory of Strategic Alliances," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 61-84, January.
    35. Deeds, David L. & Hill, Charles W. L., 1996. "Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 41-55, January.
    36. Paul Wakke & Knut Blind & Henk J. De Vries, 2015. "Driving factors for service providers to participate in standardization: Insights from the Netherlands," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 299-320, May.
    37. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    38. Gary Hamel, 1991. "Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(S1), pages 83-103, June.
    39. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1990. "Complementarity and External Linkages: The Strategies of the Large Firms in Biotechnology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 361-379, June.
    40. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Bruijn, Hans, 2015. "Platforms and incentives for consensus building on complex ICT systems: The development of WiFi," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 580-589.
    41. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    2. Raven, Michael & Blind, Knut, 2017. "The characteristics and impacts of scientific publications in biotechnology research referenced in standards," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 167-179.
    3. Deng, Xin & Li, Qian Cher & Mateut, Simona, 2022. "Participation in setting technology standards and the implied cost of equity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    4. Teubner, Lisa K. & Henkel, Joachim & Bekkers, Rudi, 2021. "Industry consortia in mobile telecommunications standards setting: Purpose, organization and diversity," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3).
    5. Susan K. Cohen & Sean T. Hsu & Kristina B. Dahlin, 2016. "With Whom Do Technology Sponsors Partner During Technology Battles? Social Networking Strategies for Unproven (and Proven) Technologies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 846-872, August.
    6. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    7. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    8. Justus Baron & Jorge Contreras & Martin Husovec & Pierre Larouche, 2019. "Making the Rules: The Governance of Standard Development Organizations and their Policies on Intellectual Property Rights," JRC Research Reports JRC115004, Joint Research Centre.
    9. Hussinger, Katrin & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "The value of disclosing IPR to open standard setting organizations," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-060, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Foucart, Renaud & Li, Qian Cher, 2021. "The role of technology standards in product innovation: Theory and evidence from UK manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    11. Blind, Knut & Krieger, Bastian & Pellens, Maikel, 2022. "The interplay between product innovation, publishing, patenting and developing standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    12. Tulin Dzhengiz, 2020. "A Literature Review of Inter-Organizational Sustainability Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-52, June.
    13. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & Eggers, Felix & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2022. "Competing Standard-Setting Organizations: A Choice Experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    14. Cameron D. Miller & Puay Khoon Toh, 2022. "Complementary components and returns from coordination within ecosystems via standard setting," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 627-662, March.
    15. Gastón Llanes & Joaquín Poblete, 2020. "Technology Choice and Coalition Formation in Standards Wars," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 270-297, June.
    16. Jaideep Anand & Raffaele Oriani & Roberto S. Vassolo, 2010. "Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1213-1232, December.
    17. Knut Blind & Maximilian Laer, 2022. "Paving the path: drivers of standardization participation at ISO," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1115-1134, August.
    18. Colombo, Massimo G. & Grilli, Luca & Piva, Evila, 2006. "In search of complementary assets: The determinants of alliance formation of high-tech start-ups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1166-1199, October.
    19. Justus Baron & Cher Li & Shukhrat Nasirov, 2019. "Why do R&D-intensive firms participate in standards organizations? The role of patents and product-market position," Discussion Papers 2019-16, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    20. Kim, Dong-hyu, 2022. "Effects of catch-up and incumbent firms’ SEP strategic manoeuvres," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).

    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:techno:v:48-49:y:2016:i::p:13-24. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.