IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/rvmgts/v14y2020i1d10.1007_s11846-018-0294-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Automating profitably together: Is there an impact of open innovation and automation on firm turnover?

Author

Listed:
  • Petra A. Nylund

    (University of Vic)

  • Xavier Ferras-Hernandez

    (ESADE)

  • Alexander Brem

    (Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU))

Abstract

Technologies like computer vision, advanced sensors, internet of things, 3D printing, big data, or artificial intelligence are penetrating all facets of the industrial value chains. Hence, industry is engaged in an accelerated automation race where industrial automation converts value chains into intelligent, data-driven systems. This generates new business models and spurs firm competitiveness in general. Companies thus pay attention to the development, acquisition, and incorporation of related technologies to profit from these developments in specific. For this, they must incorporate external flows of knowledge to succeed in innovation. Yet, there is a dearth of research that links open innovation to the incorporation of industrial automation, and to firm performance. Hence, this paper takes a knowledge-based view of the firm and sheds light on the moderating role of the processes of open innovation on the economic results of firms’ subject to automation. In order to do so, we estimate the impact of the interaction of open innovation and automation on firm turnover using panel data for 5287 Spanish firms from a variety of manufacture and service industries. We separate the effects for different open-innovation partners and find that turnover is increased for those automating firms that engage in open innovation with suppliers. These results indicate that suppliers possess the knowledge required for successful automation, and firms that innovate together with suppliers fare better at leveraging investments in automation. In addition, automating firms should exercise caution when choosing collaboration partners from the same country.

Suggested Citation

  • Petra A. Nylund & Xavier Ferras-Hernandez & Alexander Brem, 2020. "Automating profitably together: Is there an impact of open innovation and automation on firm turnover?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 269-285, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:rvmgts:v:14:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11846-018-0294-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11846-018-0294-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11846-018-0294-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11846-018-0294-z?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. Kai-Ingo Voigt & Oana Buliga & Kathrin Michl, 2017. "Business Model Pioneers," Management for Professionals, Springer, number 978-3-319-38845-8, March.
    2. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    3. 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..
    4. West, Joel, 2003. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1259-1285, July.
    5. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Nov.
    6. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    7. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    8. Pablo D'Este & Francesco Rentocchini & Jaider Vega-Jurado, 2014. "The Role of Human Capital in Lowering the Barriers to Engaging in Innovation: Evidence from the Spanish Innovation Survey," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Lechevalier, Sébastien & Nishimura, Junichi & Storz, Cornelia, 2014. "Diversity in patterns of industry evolution: How an intrapreneurial regime contributed to the emergence of the service robot industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1716-1729.
    10. Joe Whittaker & Chris Whitehead & Mark Somers, 2005. "The neglog transformation and quantile regression for the analysis of a large credit scoring database," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 54(5), pages 863-878, November.
    11. Björn Remneland-Wikhamn & Jan Ljungberg & Magnus Bergquist & Jonas Kuschel, 2011. "Open Innovation, Generativity And The Supplier As Peer: The Case Of Iphone And Android," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 205-230.
    12. Trigo, Alexandre & Vence, Xavier, 2012. "Scope and patterns of innovation cooperation in Spanish service enterprises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 602-613.
    13. Daron Acemoglu & David Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson & Brendan Price, 2014. "Return of the Solow Paradox? IT, Productivity, and Employment in US Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 394-399, May.
    14. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May.
    15. Alexander Brem & Joe Tidd (ed.), 2012. "Perspectives on Supplier Innovation:Theories, Concepts and Empirical Insights on Open Innovation and the Integration of Suppliers," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number p852, December.
    16. Seth G. Benzell & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo LaGarda & Jeffrey D. Sachs, 2015. "Robots Are Us: Some Economics of Human Replacement," NBER Working Papers 20941, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. André Spithoven & Wim Vanhaverbeke & Nadine Roijakkers, 2013. "Open innovation practices in SMEs and large enterprises," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 537-562, October.
    18. Marcel Bogers & Stephane Lhuillery, 2011. "A Functional Perspective on Learning and Innovation: Investigating the Organization of Absorptive Capacity," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 581-610, August.
    19. Toke Reichstein & Ammon Salter, 2006. "Investigating the sources of process innovation among UK manufacturing firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 15(4), pages 653-682, August.
    20. Seth G. Benzell & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo LaGarda & Jeffrey D. Sachs, 2015. "Robots Are Us: Some Economics of Human Replacement," NBER Working Papers 20941, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Alexander Brem & Daniel A. Gerhard & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2014. "Strategic Technological Sourcing Decisions in the Context of Timing and Market Strategies: An Empirical Analysis," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(03), pages 1-23.
    22. Brem, Alexander & Nylund, Petra A. & Schuster, Gerd, 2016. "Innovation and de facto standardization: The influence of dominant design on innovative performance, radical innovation, and process innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 79-88.
    23. Aija Leiponen & Constance E. Helfat, 2010. "Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 224-236, February.
    24. Birger Wernerfelt, 1984. "A resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 171-180, April.
    25. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
    26. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    27. Ricarda Bouncken & Boris Plüschke & Robin Pesch & Sascha Kraus, 2016. "Entrepreneurial orientation in vertical alliances: joint product innovation and learning from allies," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 381-409, March.
    28. Kathleen R. Conner & C. K. Prahalad, 1996. "A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 477-501, October.
    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. Wang, Xinxin & Qin, Yong & Xu, Zeshui & Škare, Marinko, 2022. "A look at the focus shift in innovation literature due to Covid-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 1-20.
    2. Wang, Linhui & Cao, Zhanglu & Dong, Zhiqing, 2023. "Are artificial intelligence dividends evenly distributed between profits and wages? Evidence from the private enterprise survey data in China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 342-356.
    3. Galvin, Peter & Burton, Nicholas & Nyuur, Richard, 2020. "Leveraging inter-industry spillovers through DIY laboratories: Entrepreneurship and innovation in the global bicycle industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    4. Nylund, Petra A. & Brem, Alexander & Agarwal, Nivedita, 2022. "Enabling technologies mitigating climate change: The role of dominant designs in environmental innovation ecosystems," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    2. Edwards-Schachter, Mónica & Anlló, Guillermo & Castro-Martínez, Elena & Sánchez-Barrioluengo, Mabel & Fernández De Lucio, Ignacio, 2012. "Motives for inter-firm cooperation on R&D and innovation: empirical evidence from Argentine and Spain," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201204, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), revised 04 Jun 2012.
    3. Soufiane Mezzourh & Walid A Nakara, 2009. "Governance and innovation : A Knowledge-based approach [La gouvernance de l'innovation : une approche par la connaissance]," Post-Print halshs-01955966, HAL.
    4. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    5. Pushpananthan, Gouthanan & Elmquist, Maria, 2022. "Joining forces to create value: The emergence of an innovation ecosystem," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    6. Aliasghar, Omid & Rose, Elizabeth L. & Asakawa, Kazuhiro, 2022. "Sources of knowledge and process innovation: The moderating role of perceived competitive intensity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(2).
    7. Santoro, Gabriele & Mazzoleni, Alberto & Quaglia, Roberto & Solima, Ludovico, 2021. "Does age matter? The impact of SMEs age on the relationship between knowledge sourcing strategy and internationalization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 779-787.
    8. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Der-Fang Hung, 2015. "Sustained Competitive Advantage and Organizational Inertia: The Cost Perspective of Knowledge Management," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(4), pages 769-789, December.
    10. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    11. Anu Wadhwa & Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & M. B. Sarkar, 2017. "The Paradox of Openness and Value Protection Strategies: Effect of Extramural R&D on Innovative Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 873-896, October.
    12. Alex Eapen & Rekha Krishnan, 2019. "Transferring Tacit Know-How: Do Opportunism Safeguards Matter for Firm Boundary Decisions?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 715-734, July.
    13. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2016. "Complementarities in the search for innovation—Managing markets and relationships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2036-2053.
    14. J. Nils Foege & Erk P. Piening & Torsten-Oliver Salge, 2017. "Don’T Get Caught On The Wrong Foot: A Resource-Based Perspective On Imitation Threats In Innovation Partnerships," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-42, April.
    15. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.
    16. Bruce Heiman & Jack Nickerson, 2002. "Towards Reconciling Transaction Cost Economics and the Knowledge-based View of the Firm: The Context of Interfirm Collaborations," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 97-116.
    17. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    18. Shi, Xing & Wu, Yanrui & Fu, Dahai, 2020. "Does University-Industry collaboration improve innovation efficiency? Evidence from Chinese Firms⋄," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 39-53.
    19. 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.
    20. Fonseca, Tiago & de Faria, Pedro & Lima, Francisco, 2019. "Human capital and innovation: the importance of the optimal organizational task structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 616-627.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Open innovation; Knowledge; Automation; Process innovation; Supplier innovation; Community innovation survey;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M20 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • 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:spr:rvmgts:v:14:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11846-018-0294-z. 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.