IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v24y2015i5p981-1011..html

Quantity or quality? Knowledge alliances and their effects on patenting

Author

Listed:
  • Hanna Hottenrott
  • Cindy Lopes-Bento

Abstract

This study examines a sample of R&D-active manufacturing firms over the period 2000–2009 and shows that knowledge alliances have a positive effect on patenting in terms of both quantity and quality. More interestingly, we distinguish between alliances that aim at joint creation of new knowledge and alliances that seek knowledge exchange. The results suggest that firms engaged in creation alliances subsequently file more valuable patents as measured by the number of forward citations. On the other hand, knowledge exchange alliances are associated with patent quantity, but not quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanna Hottenrott & Cindy Lopes-Bento, 2015. "Quantity or quality? Knowledge alliances and their effects on patenting," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(5), pages 981-1011.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:24:y:2015:i:5:p:981-1011.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtu019
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    2. Kleine, Marco & Heite, Jonas & Huber, Laura Rosendahl, 2022. "Subsidized R&D collaboration: The causal effect of innovation vouchers on innovation outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    3. Jian Wang & Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2015. "Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2016. "Openness and innovation in the US: Collaboration form, idea generation and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1660-1671.
    5. Xie, Xuemei & Wu, Yonghui & Martínez, José Manuel Guaita, 2023. "More is not always better: Reconciling the dilemma of R&D collaboration in high-tech industries in transition economies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    6. Spanos, Yiannis E., 2021. "Exploring heterogeneous returns to collaborative R&D: A marginal treatment effects perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:oup:indcch:v:24:y:2015:i:5:p:981-1011.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.