IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/asiapa/v33y2016i1d10.1007_s10490-015-9439-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does the partner type in R&D alliances impact technological innovation performance? A study on the Korean biotechnology industry

Author

Listed:
  • Kwangsoo Shin

    () (Seoul National University)

  • Sang Ji Kim

    () (Samsung Economic Research Institute)

  • Gunno Park

    () (Samsung SDS)

Abstract

Abstract The number of strategic alliances for R&D activities in the biotechnology industry is sharply increasing. Some studies show that each alliance partner type has different alliance motives, resources and capabilities, organizational structures and cultures, and degrees of competition with partners, which can lead to different performances of strategic alliances. In this regard, this study conducts an empirical analysis of the different impact of each type of alliance partner on technological innovation performance and finds the moderating effect of absorptive capacity and potential competition by categorizing strategic alliances for R&D activities in the biotechnology industry into three types: vertical-downstream alliances, vertical-upstream alliances, and horizontal alliances. This study analyzed 206 Korean biotechnology firms and their strategic alliances for a total of 292 R&D activities. The results of the analysis showed that vertical alliances have a positive impact on technological innovation performance, while horizontal alliances have an inverted U-shaped relationship with technological innovation performance caused by the effect of competition. Additionally, it was confirmed that the R&D intensity of biotechnology firms has a moderating effect of increasing the impact of vertical-upstream alliances on technological innovation performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwangsoo Shin & Sang Ji Kim & Gunno Park, 2016. "How does the partner type in R&D alliances impact technological innovation performance? A study on the Korean biotechnology industry," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 141-164, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:asiapa:v:33:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10490-015-9439-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10490-015-9439-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10490-015-9439-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    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. Birgit Aschhoff & Tobias Schmidt, 2008. "Empirical Evidence on the Success of R&D Cooperation—Happy Together?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 33(1), pages 41-62, August.
    2. Lin, Bou-Wen & Lee, Yikuan & Hung, Shih-Chang, 2006. "R&D intensity and commercialization orientation effects on financial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(6), pages 679-685, June.
    3. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jeff S. Armstrong, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    4. Xiaowei Luo & Lina Deng, 2009. "Do Birds of a Feather Flock Higher? The Effects of Partner Similarity on Innovation in Strategic Alliances in Knowledge-Intensive Industries," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 1005-1030, September.
    5. Klepper, Steven & Simons, Kenneth L., 2005. "Industry shakeouts and technological change," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-2), pages 23-43, February.
    6. Helen Lawton Smith & Saverio Romeo & Shamistha Bagchi-Sen, 2008. "Oxfordshire biomedical university spin-offs: an evolving system," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 1(2), pages 303-319.
    7. Feldman, Maryann P. & Kelley, Maryellen R., 2006. "The ex ante assessment of knowledge spillovers: Government R&D policy, economic incentives and private firm behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1509-1521, December.
    8. Benjamin Coriat & Fabienne Orsi & Olivier Weinstein, 2003. "Does Biotech Reflect a New Science-based Innovation Regime?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 231-253.
    9. Oliver, Amalya L., 2004. "Biotechnology entrepreneurial scientists and their collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 583-597, May.
    10. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R., 1997. "Present at the biotechnological revolution: transformation of technological identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 429-446, December.
    11. Oxley, Joanne E., 1999. "Institutional environment and the mechanisms of governance: the impact of intellectual property protection on the structure of inter-firm alliances," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 283-309, March.
    12. repec:hal:journl:hal-00424512 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & van den Oord, Ad, 2008. "Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1717-1731, December.
    14. Gurney, Thomas & Horlings, Edwin & van den Besselaar, Peter & Sumikura, Koichi & Schoen, Antoine & Laurens, Patricia & Pardo, Daniel, 2014. "Analysing knowledge capture mechanisms: Methods and a stylised bioventure case," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 259-272.
    15. Tether, Bruce S., 2002. "Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 947-967, August.
    16. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    17. Dirk Fornahl & Tom Broekel & Ron Boschma, 2011. "What drives patent performance of German biotech firms? The impact of R&D subsidies, knowledge networks and their location," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 90(2), pages 395-418, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
    20. Katrin Hussinger, 2008. "R&D and subsidies at the firm level: an application of parametric and semiparametric two-step selection models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(6), pages 729-747.
    21. De Man, Ard-Pieter, 2005. "Alliance Capability:: A Comparison of the Alliance Strength of European and American Companies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 315-323, June.
    22. Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
    23. Souitaris, Vangelis, 2002. "Technological trajectories as moderators of firm-level determinants of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 877-898, August.
    24. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Lokshin, Boris, 2004. "Cooperative R&D and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1477-1492, December.
    25. Mowery, David C. & Oxley, Joanne E. & Silverman, Brian S., 1998. "Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 507-523, September.
    26. Ulrich Lichtenthaler & Eckhard Lichtenthaler, 2009. "A Capability-Based Framework for Open Innovation: Complementing Absorptive Capacity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(8), pages 1315-1338, December.
    27. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    28. Fosfuri, Andrea & Tribø, Josep A., 2008. "Exploring the antecedents of potential absorptive capacity and its impact on innovation performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 173-187, April.
    29. Haeussler, Carolin & Patzelt, Holger & Zahra, Shaker A., 2012. "Strategic alliances and product development in high technology new firms: The moderating effect of technological capabilities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 217-233.
    30. Zhang, Jing & Baden-Fuller, Charles & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological knowledge base, R&D organization structure and alliance formation: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 515-528, May.
    31. 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.
    32. Wedel, M, et al, 1993. "A Latent Class Poisson Regression Model for Heterogeneous Count Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 397-411, Oct.-Dec..
    33. Carayannopoulos, Sofy & Auster, Ellen R., 2010. "External knowledge sourcing in biotechnology through acquisition versus alliance: A KBV approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 254-267, March.
    34. Casper, Steven, 2007. "How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable?: Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 438-455, May.
    35. Lee, Yong S., 1996. "'Technology transfer' and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 843-863, September.
    36. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    37. Pierre Azoulay, 2002. "Do Pharmaceutical Sales Respond to Scientific Evidence?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 551-594, December.
    38. Park, Gunno & Kim, Marco JinHwan & Kang, Jina, 2015. "Competitive embeddedness: The impact of competitive relations among a firm's current alliance partners on its new alliance formations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 196-208.
    39. Stuart, Toby E. & Ozdemir, Salih Zeki & Ding, Waverly W., 2007. "Vertical alliance networks: The case of university-biotechnology-pharmaceutical alliance chains," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 477-498, May.
    40. Melissa A. Schilling & Corey C. Phelps, 2007. "Interfirm Collaboration Networks: The Impact of Large-Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1113-1126, July.
    41. George, Gerard & Zahra, Shaker A. & Wood, D. Jr., 2002. "The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 577-609, October.
    42. Rothaermel, Frank T. & Deeds, David L., 2006. "Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 429-460, July.
    43. Scott J. Wallsten, 2000. "The Effects of Government-Industry R&D Programs on Private R&D: The Case of the Small Business Innovation Research Program," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 82-100, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Minkyung Choy & Gunno Park, 2016. "Sustaining Innovative Success: A Case Study on Consumer-Centric Innovation in the ICT Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(10), pages 1-13, September.
    2. repec:eee:iburev:v:26:y:2017:i:5:p:896-907 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:kap:asiapa:v:33:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10490-015-9439-7. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.