IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article

Technological Development and the Boundaries of the Firm: A Knowledge-Based Examination in Semiconductor Manufacturing

  • Jeffrey T. Macher

    ()

    (Robert E. McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. 20057)

Registered author(s):

    This paper examines how the knowledge-based view (KBV) can be applied to firm boundary decisions and the performance implications of those decisions. At the center of the paper is a theoretical and empirical examination of how firms most efficiently organize to solve different types of problems related to technological development, using the semiconductor industry as the empirical setting. Measures that capture important dimensions of performance support the proposition that organization affects performance in problem solving related to knowledge development. Integrated firms realize performance advantages when problem solving in technological development is ill structured and complex, while the same is true for specialized firms when problem solving in technological development is well structured and simple. Performance differences also arise from the presence of scale economies and scope economies.

    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://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0511
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.

    Volume (Year): 52 (2006)
    Issue (Month): 6 (June)
    Pages: 826-843

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:52:y:2006:i:6:p:826-843
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

    Phone: +1-443-757-3500
    Fax: 443-757-3515
    Web page: http://www.informs.org/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    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. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, . "Scale, Scope and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," Working Papers ec25/94, Department of Economics, University of Lancaster.
    2. Todd R. Zenger, 1994. "Explaining Organizational Diseconomies of Scale in R&D: Agency Problems and the Allocation of Engineering Talent, Ideas, and Effort by Firm Size," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 708-729, June.
    3. Teece, David J., 1996. "Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 193-224, November.
    4. Robert Gibbons, 2005. "Incentives Between Firms (and Within)," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(1), pages 2-17, January.
    5. Dolton, P. J. & Makepeace, G. H., 1987. "Interpreting sample selection effects," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 373-379.
    6. Armen A. Alchian & Harold Demsetz, 1971. "Production, Information Costs and Economic Organizations," UCLA Economics Working Papers 10A, UCLA Department of Economics.
    7. Frédéric Dalsace & Michael Leiblein & Jeffrey Reuer, 2002. "Do make or buy decisions matter? The influence of organizational governance on technological performance," Post-Print hal-00457649, HAL.
    8. Kirk Monteverde, 1995. "Technical Dialog as an Incentive for Vertical Integration in the Semiconductor Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(10), pages 1624-1638, October.
    9. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107 Elsevier.
    10. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    11. 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 678-90, September.
    12. Panzar, John C & Willig, Robert D, 1981. "Economies of Scope," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 268-72, May.
    13. Armour, Henry Ogden & Teece, David J, 1980. "Vertical Integration and Technological Innovation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 62(3), pages 470-74, August.
    14. Teece, David J., 1992. "Competition, cooperation, and innovation : Organizational arrangements for regimes of rapid technological progress," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-25, June.
    15. Masten, Scott E & Meehan, James W, Jr & Snyder, Edward A, 1991. "The Costs of Organization," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, Spring.
    16. Jeffrey Macher & David Mowery & Timothy Simcoe, 2002. "e-Business and Disintegration of the Semiconductor Industry Value Chain," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 155-181.
    17. Nile W. Hatch & David C. Mowery, 1998. "Process Innovation and Learning by Doing in Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-1), pages 1461-1477, November.
    18. Demsetz, Harold, 1988. "The Theory of the Firm Revisited," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 141-61, Spring.
    19. Rachelle C. Sampson, 2004. "The Cost of Misaligned Governance in R&D Alliances," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 484-526, October.
    20. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-51, July.
    21. Masten, Scott E, 1984. "The Organization of Production: Evidence from the Aerospace Industry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 403-17, October.
    22. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    23. Lung-Fei Lee, 1982. "Some Approaches to the Correction of Selectivity Bias," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 355-372.
    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:inm:ormnsc:v:52:y:2006:i:6:p:826-843. 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: (Mirko Janc)

    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.