IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v40y2015i4p696-722.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hybrid alliances and radical innovation: the performance implications of integrating exploration and exploitation

Author

Listed:
  • Massimo Colombo
  • Liliana Doganova
  • Evila Piva
  • Diego D’Adda
  • Philippe Mustar

Abstract

In this paper we examine the innovation performance of hybrid alliances, that is, alliances that combine exploration and exploitation activities. While previous research has emphasized the tensions engendered by the combination of exploration and exploitation, we claim that the integration of these two types of activities can generate synergies as well. We argue that, in the case of alliances involving academic spin-offs (ASOs), these synergies may outweigh the tensions under specific conditions, and thus improve alliance innovation performance. Specifically, we hypothesize that the relative performance of exploitation activities is greater in hybrid alliances when the alliance has radical innovation outcomes. Conversely, the relative performance of exploration activities is greater in hybrid alliances when the alliance has incremental innovation outcomes. These hypotheses are tested using fine-grained data on a sample of 149 alliances involving European ASOs. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Massimo Colombo & Liliana Doganova & Evila Piva & Diego D’Adda & Philippe Mustar, 2015. "Hybrid alliances and radical innovation: the performance implications of integrating exploration and exploitation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 696-722, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:40:y:2015:i:4:p:696-722
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-014-9363-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-014-9363-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-014-9363-x?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. Vohora, Ajay & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy, 2004. "Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 147-175, January.
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. Joel A. C. Baum & Tony Calabrese & Brian S. Silverman, 2000. "Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 267-294, March.
    4. Paul R. Carlile, 2004. "Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 555-568, October.
    5. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Weijan Shan & Gordon Walker & Bruce Kogut, 1994. "Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 387-394, June.
    7. Murray, Fiona, 2004. "The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 643-659, May.
    8. Cassiman, Bruno & Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The impact of M&A on the R&D process: An empirical analysis of the role of technological- and market-relatedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 195-220, March.
    9. Mustar, Philippe & Renault, Marie & Colombo, Massimo G. & Piva, Evila & Fontes, Margarida & Lockett, Andy & Wright, Mike & Clarysse, Bart & Moray, Nathalie, 2006. "Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multi-dimensional taxonomy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-308, March.
    10. Glenn Hoetker & Thomas Mellewigt, 2009. "Choice and performance of governance mechanisms: matching alliance governance to asset type," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(10), pages 1025-1044, October.
    11. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hanel, Petr & Rosa, Julio Miguel, 2011. "Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credits on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 217-229, March.
    12. Steven Postrel, 2002. "Islands of Shared Knowledge: Specialization and Mutual Understanding in Problem-Solving Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 303-320, June.
    13. Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola, 1998. "Common carriers' entry into multimedia services," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 77-105, March.
    14. Koza, Mitchell & Lewin, Arie, 2000. "Managing partnerships and strategic alliances: raising the odds of success," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 146-151, April.
    15. Colombo, Massimo G. & Piva, Evila, 2012. "Firms’ genetic characteristics and competence-enlarging strategies: A comparison between academic and non-academic high-tech start-ups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 79-92.
    16. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart, 2006. "Exploration and exploitation in innovation systems: The case of pharmaceutical biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    18. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    19. Camerer, Colin & Knez, Marc, 1996. "Coordination, Organizational Boundaries and Fads in Business Practices," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 89-112.
    20. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
    21. Rothaermel, Frank T., 2001. "Complementary assets, strategic alliances, and the incumbent's advantage: an empirical study of industry and firm effects in the biopharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1235-1251, October.
    22. Mary Tripsas, 1997. "Unraveling The Process Of Creative Destruction: Complementary Assets And Incumbent Survival In The Typesetter Industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 119-142, July.
    23. Mitchell P. Koza & Arie Y. Lewin, 1998. "The Co-Evolution of Strategic Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 255-264, June.
    24. Djordje Djokovic & Vangelis Souitaris, 2008. "Spinouts from academic institutions: a literature review with suggestions for further research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 225-247, June.
    25. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    26. Jean-Jacques Degroof & Edward B. Roberts, 2004. "Overcoming Weak Entrepreneurial Infrastructures for Academic Spin-Off Ventures," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 327-352, August.
    27. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    28. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    29. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    30. Philippe Mustar, 1997. "How French academics create hi-tech companies: The conditions for success or failure," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 37-43, February.
    31. Massimo Colombo & Diego D’Adda & Evila Piva, 2010. "The contribution of university research to the growth of academic start-ups: an empirical analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 113-140, February.
    32. Mike Wright & Ajay Vohora & Andy Lockett, 2004. "The Formation of High-Tech University Spinouts: The Role of Joint Ventures and Venture Capital Investors," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 287-310, August.
    33. 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.
    34. Ghiyoung Im & Arun Rai, 2008. "Knowledge Sharing Ambidexterity in Long-Term Interorganizational Relationships," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1281-1296, July.
    35. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    36. Amrit Tiwana, 2008. "Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 251-272, March.
    37. 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.
    38. Zhiang (John) Lin & Haibin Yang & Irem Demirkan, 2007. "The Performance Consequences of Ambidexterity in Strategic Alliance Formations: Empirical Investigation and Computational Theorizing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1645-1658, October.
    39. Toby E. Stuart, 2000. "Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 791-811, August.
    40. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    41. Corey C. Phelps, 2010. "A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation," Post-Print hal-00528392, HAL.
    42. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    43. Mitchell, Will & Singh, Kulwant, 1992. "Incumbents' use of pre-entry alliances before expansion into new technical subfields of an industry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 347-372, August.
    44. Wright, Mike & Clarysse, Bart & Lockett, Andy & Knockaert, Mirjam, 2008. "Mid-range universities' linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1205-1223, September.
    45. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    46. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    47. Coombs, Joseph E. & Mudambi, Ram & Deeds, David L., 2006. "An examination of the investments in U.S. biotechnology firms by foreign and domestic corporate partners," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 405-428, July.
    48. Philippe Mustar & Mike Wright, 2010. "Convergence or path dependency in policies to foster the creation of university spin-off firms? A comparison of France and the United Kingdom," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 42-65, February.
    49. 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.
    50. Rasmussen, Einar & Borch, Odd Jarl, 2010. "University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 602-612, June.
    51. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1969. "The Direction of Technological Change: Inducement Mechanisms and Focusing Devices," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, Part I Oc.
    52. Cédric Schneider & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2010. "On young highly innovative companies: why they matter and how (not) to policy support them," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 969-1007, August.
    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. Ioanna Kastelli & Aggelos Tsakanikas & Yannis Caloghirou, 2018. "Technology transfer as a mechanism for dynamic transformation in the food sector," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 882-900, August.
    2. Buffart, Mickaël & Croidieu, Grégoire & Kim, Phillip H. & Bowman, Ray, 2020. "Even winners need to learn: How government entrepreneurship programs can support innovative ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    3. Zhiwei Wang & Hui Sun & Chenxin Ding & Long Xin & Xuechao Xia & Yuanyuan Gong, 2023. "Do Technology Alliance Network Characteristics Promote Ambidextrous Green Innovation? A Perspective from Internal and External Pressures of Firms in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-23, February.
    4. James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Katharine Wirsching, 2019. "Entrepreneurial ecosystem governance: a principal investigator-centered governance framework," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 545-562, February.
    5. Manuel Guisado-González & Len Tiu Wright & Manuel Guisado-Tato, 2017. "Product–process matrix and complementarity approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 441-459, June.
    6. Piotr Trąpczyński & Łukasz Puślecki & Michał Staszków, 2018. "Determinants of Innovation Cooperation Performance: What Do We Know and What Should We Know?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-32, November.
    7. Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.
    8. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    9. Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen, 2019. "The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: a critical review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1891-1938, December.
    10. Ekaterina Albats & Irina Fiegenbaum & James A. Cunningham, 2018. "A micro level study of university industry collaborative lifecycle key performance indicators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 389-431, April.
    11. Telma Mendes & Vítor Braga & Carina Silva & Vanessa Ratten, 2023. "Taking a closer look at the regionally clustered firms: How can ambidexterity explain the link between management, entrepreneurship, and innovation in a post-industrialized world?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2007-2053, December.

    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. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    2. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    3. Dovev Lavie & Jingoo Kang & Lori Rosenkopf, 2011. "Balance Within and Across Domains: The Performance Implications of Exploration and Exploitation in Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1517-1538, December.
    4. Belderbos, Rene & Faems, Dries & Leten, Bart & Van Looy, Bart, 2009. "Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of the firm: Exploitation and exploration within and between firms," MERIT Working Papers 2009-067, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Stephanie Lange & Marcus Wagner, 2021. "The influence of exploratory versus exploitative acquisitions on innovation output in the biotechnology industry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 659-680, February.
    6. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    7. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Beerkens, B.E. & Duysters, G.M., 2003. "Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks," Working Papers 03.22, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    8. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    9. Catherine Beaudry, 2011. "Collaboration and contracting out versus funding and support – Impact on the propensity to patent of Canadian biotechnology firms 1999-2005," CIRANO Working Papers 2011s-62, CIRANO.
    10. 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.
    11. Rasmussen, Einar & Borch, Odd Jarl, 2010. "University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 602-612, June.
    12. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.
    13. Liliana Doganova, 2009. "Entrepreneurship as a process of collective exploration," Working Papers halshs-00431695, HAL.
    14. Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen, 2019. "The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: a critical review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1891-1938, December.
    15. Mauro Sciarelli & Giovanni Catello Landi & Lorenzo Turriziani & Mario Tani, 2021. "Academic entrepreneurship: founding and governance determinants in university spin-off ventures," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1083-1107, August.
    16. Alexander Zimmermann & Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw, 2015. "How Is Ambidexterity Initiated? The Emergent Charter Definition Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 1119-1139, August.
    17. Gilsing, V.A. & van Burg, E. & Romme, A.G.L., 2010. "Policy principles for the creation and success of corporate and academic spin-offs," Other publications TiSEM 4f828c53-0ac2-4ea7-9f90-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Liliana Doganova, 2009. "Entrepreneurship as a process of collective exploration," Post-Print halshs-00431695, HAL.
    19. Marco Ferretti & Salvatore Ferri & Raffaele Fiorentino & Adele Parmentola & Alessandro Sapio, 2020. "What drives the growth of academic spin-offs? Matching academics, universities, and non-research organizations," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 137-163, March.
    20. Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2019. "Trading knowledge for status: Conceptualizing R&D alliance formation to achieve ambidexterity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 36-42.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Alliances; Exploration; Radical innovation; Academic spin-offs; Ambidexterity; L26; O31; O32;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L26 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Entrepreneurship
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • 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:kap:jtecht:v:40:y:2015:i:4:p:696-722. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.