IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v47y2001i9p1173-1190.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology Regimes and New Firm Formation

Author

Listed:
  • Scott Shane

    (R.H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742)

Abstract

At least since Schumpeter (1934 and 1942), researchers have been interested in identifying the dimensions of technology regimes that facilitate new firm formation as a mode of technology exploitation. Using data on 1,397 patents assigned to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology during the 1980-1996 period, I show that four hypothesized dimensions of the technology regime---the age of the technical field, the tendency of the market toward segmentation, the effectiveness of patents, and the importance of complementary assets in marketing and distribution---influence the likelihood that new technology will be exploited through firm formation.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Shane, 2001. "Technology Regimes and New Firm Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1173-1190, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:9:p:1173-1190
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.47.9.1173.9785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.9.1173.9785
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.47.9.1173.9785?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. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    2. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    3. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    4. Gartner, William B. & Shane, Scott A., 1995. "Measuring entrepreneurship over time," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 283-301, July.
    5. Richard E. Caves, 1998. "Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1947-1982, December.
    6. Von Hippel, Eric, 1982. "Appropriability of innovation benefit as a predictor of the source of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 95-115, April.
    7. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297-297.
    8. Joshua Lerner, 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 319-333, Summer.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    10. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    11. Richard R. Nelson, 1995. "Recent Evolutionary Theorizing about Economic Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 48-90, March.
    12. Highfield, Richard & Smiley, Robert, 1987. "New business starts and economic activity : An empirical investigation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 51-66, March.
    13. Levin, Richard C & Cohen, Wesley M & Mowery, David C, 1985. "R&D Appropriability, Opportunity, and Market Structure: New Evidence on Some Schumpeterian Hypotheses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 20-24, May.
    14. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1997. "Technological Regimes and Sectoral Patterns of Innovative Activities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 83-117.
    15. Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December.
    16. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovation are technology-specific," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 451-478, May.
    17. Richard Nelson, 1962. "Introduction to "The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors"," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 1-16, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2, 00.
    19. Gort, Michael & Klepper, Steven, 1982. "Time Paths in the Diffusion of Product Innovations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(367), pages 630-653, September.
    20. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1, 00.
    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. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," 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 51-127, Elsevier.
    2. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technological Opportunities and New Firm Creation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 205-220, February.
    3. Kim, Jungho & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2016. "Technological regimes and firm survival," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 232-243.
    4. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    5. Murat YILDIZOGLU, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches of economic dynamics (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-16, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    6. Alfred Haid & Markus Thomas Münter, 1999. "Neuere Entwicklungen in der industrieökonomischen Forschung und die aktuelle Berichterstattung über die technologische Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 188, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. 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.
    8. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    9. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    10. Hugo A. Hopenhayn, 2011. "Firm Microstructure and Aggregate Productivity," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(s1), pages 111-145, August.
    11. David Audretsch & Roy Thurik, 0000. "Sources of Growth," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 97-109/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Leiponen, Aija & Drejer, Ina, 2007. "What exactly are technological regimes?: Intra-industry heterogeneity in the organization of innovation activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1221-1238, October.
    13. Guidi, Francesco & Solomon, Edna & Trushin, Eshref & Ugur, Mehmet, 2015. "Inverted-U relationship between innovation and survival: Evidence from firm-level UK data," EconStor Preprints 110896, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    14. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    15. Agarwal, Rajshree & Shah, Sonali K., 2014. "Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1109-1133.
    16. Faria, Lourenço Galvão Diniz & Andersen, Maj Munch, 2017. "Sectoral patterns versus firm-level heterogeneity - The dynamics of eco-innovation strategies in the automotive sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 266-281.
    17. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Fulvio Castellacci & Jinghai Zheng, 2010. "Technological regimes, Schumpeterian patterns of innovation and firm-level productivity growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(6), pages 1829-1865, December.
    19. Dario Diodato & Andrea Morrison, 2019. "Technological regimes and the geography of innovation: a long-run perspective on US inventions," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1924, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2019.
    20. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2012. "Going, going, gone. Exit forms and the innovative capabilities of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 795-807.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:9:p:1173-1190. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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: Matthew Walls (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.