IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v44y2023i6p3199-3214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation performance feedback and patent acquisition from the market: A behavioral perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Jongseon Lee
  • Nami Kim

Abstract

Firms can facilitate external technology sourcing through transactions from the market. This study focuses on determinants of demand‐side motivation to join the technology transactions market. Drawing on the behavioral theory of the firm, we suggest that one of such determinants is the desire of a firm, whose innovation performance is below its aspiration level, to find a technology that will help improve its performance. Furthermore, we suggest that inconsistent feedback on its multiple goals and the type of R&D structure as moderating factors that can influence a firm's acquisition of technology in response to its poor performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Jongseon Lee & Nami Kim, 2023. "Innovation performance feedback and patent acquisition from the market: A behavioral perspective," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(6), pages 3199-3214, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:44:y:2023:i:6:p:3199-3214
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.3872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3872
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.3872?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2010. "Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 472-503, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    4. Tsai, Kuen-Hung & Wang, Jiann-Chyuan, 2008. "External technology acquisition and firm performance: A longitudinal study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 91-112, January.
    5. John Joseph & Vibha Gaba, 2015. "The fog of feedback: Ambiguity and firm responses to multiple aspiration levels," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(13), pages 1960-1978, December.
    6. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Vibha Gaba & Henrich R. Greve, 2019. "Safe or Profitable? The Pursuit of Conflicting Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 647-667, July.
    8. Josh Lerner & Julie Wulf, 2007. "Innovation and Incentives: Evidence from Corporate R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(4), pages 634-644, November.
    9. Raghu Garud & Praveen R. Nayyar, 1994. "Transformative capacity: Continual structuring by intertemporal technology transfer," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 365-385, June.
    10. Maria Isabella Leone & Toke Reichstein, 2012. "Licensing‐in fosters rapid invention! the effect of the grant‐back clause and technological unfamiliarity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(8), pages 965-985, August.
    11. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    12. Véronique Ambrosini & Cliff Bowman, 2001. "Tacit Knowledge: Some Suggestions for Operationalization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 811-829, September.
    13. Vibha Gaba & John Joseph, 2013. "Corporate Structure and Performance Feedback: Aspirations and Adaptation in M-Form Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1102-1119, August.
    14. Henrich R. Greve, 2003. "Investment and the behavioral theory of the firm: evidence from shipbuilding," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(5), pages 1051-1076, October.
    15. Wu, Ming-Cheng, 2011. "Antecedents of patent value using exchange option models: Evidence from a panel data analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 81-86, January.
    16. Korcan Kavusan & Hans T. W. Frankort, 2019. "A behavioral theory of alliance portfolio reconfiguration: Evidence from pharmaceutical biotechnology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(10), pages 1668-1702, October.
    17. Marianna Makri & Michael A. Hitt & Peter J. Lane, 2010. "Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 602-628, June.
    18. Gautam Ahuja & Riitta Katila, 2001. "Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 197-220, March.
    19. David J. Teece, 2003. "Towards an Economic Theory of the Multiproduct Firm," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Essays In Technology Management And Policy Selected Papers of David J Teece, chapter 15, pages 419-446, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, 2006. "Mindfulness and the Quality of Organizational Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 514-524, August.
    21. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    22. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2008. "The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 982-997, May.
    23. Beverly B. Tyler & Turanay Caner, 2016. "New product introductions below aspirations, slack and R&D alliances: A behavioral perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 896-910, May.
    24. Marco Ceccagnoli & Stuart J.H. Graham & Matthew J. Higgins & Jeongsik Lee, 2010. "Productivity and the role of complementary assets in firms' demand for technology innovations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 839-869, June.
    25. Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Fredrich, Viktor & Kraus, Sascha & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Innovation alliances: Balancing value creation dynamics, competitive intensity and market overlap," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 240-247.
    26. Oliver Alexy & Elif Bascavusoglu-Moreau & Ammon J. Salter, 2016. "Toward an aspiration-level theory of open innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(2), pages 289-306.
    27. Harhoff, Dietmar & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "The Value of European Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 6848, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    28. Razvan Lungeanu & Ithai Stern & Edward J. Zajac, 2016. "When do firms change technology-sourcing vehicles? The role of poor innovative performance and financial slack," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 855-869, May.
    29. Zoltan J. Acs & Luc Anselin & Attila Varga, 2008. "Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 11, pages 135-151, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    30. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    31. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    32. Songcui Hu & Richard A. Bettis, 2018. "Multiple Organization Goals with Feedback from Shared Technological Task Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 873-889, October.
    33. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    34. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 4-21, February.
    35. Nicholas Argyres & Luis A. Rios & Brian S. Silverman, 2020. "Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: Formal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(11), pages 2015-2049, November.
    36. Marco, Antonio De & Scellato, Giuseppe & Ughetto, Elisa & Caviggioli, Federico, 2017. "Global markets for technology: Evidence from patent transactions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1644-1654.
    37. Ashish Arora, 1995. "Licensing Tacit Knowledge: Intellectual Property Rights And The Market For Know-How," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 41-60.
    38. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    39. Keld Laursen & Maria Isabella Leone & Salvatore Torrisi, 2010. "Technological exploration through licensing: new insights from the licensee's point of view," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 871-897, June.
    40. John Joseph & Ronald Klingebiel & Alex James Wilson, 2016. "Organizational Structure and Performance Feedback: Centralization, Aspirations, and Termination Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1065-1083, October.
    41. Seongkyoon Jeong & Sungki Lee & Yeonbae Kim, 2013. "Licensing versus selling in transactions for exploiting patented technological knowledge assets in the markets for technology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 251-272, June.
    42. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1990. "Complementarity and External Linkages: The Strategies of the Large Firms in Biotechnology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 361-379, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. Martínez-Noya, Andrea & García-Canal, Esteban, 2021. "Innovation performance feedback and technological alliance portfolio diversity: The moderating role of firms’ R&D intensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    5. Kim, Nami & Kim, Eonsoo & Lee, Jongseon, 2021. "Innovating by eliminating: Technological resource divestiture and firms’ innovation performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 176-187.
    6. Bae, Joonhyung & Ozmel, Umit, 2024. "The interplay between product development failures and alliance portfolio properties in the formation of exploration versus exploitation alliances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Elona Marku, 2019. "M&A and diversification strategies: what effect on quality of inventive activity?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(3), pages 669-692, September.
    8. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Elona Marku, 2018. "Patent value and the Tobin’s q ratio in media services," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Daniel A. Levinthal & Claus Rerup, 2021. "The Plural of Goal: Learning in a World of Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 527-543, May.
    10. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara DiGuardo, 2017. "Sustainability of patent-based competitive advantage in the U.S. communications services industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1334-1361, December.
    11. Lee, Jong-Seon & Park, Ji-Hoon & Bae, Zong-Tae, 2017. "The effects of licensing-in on innovative performance in different technological regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 485-496.
    12. Wang, Yuandi & Ning, Lutao & Chen, Jin, 2014. "Product diversification through licensing: Empirical evidence from Chinese firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 577-586.
    13. Lee, Honggi, 2023. "The heterogeneous effects of patent scope on licensing propensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    14. Vikas A. Aggarwal, 2020. "Resource congestion in alliance networks: How a firm's partners’ partners influence the benefits of collaboration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 627-655, April.
    15. Eungdo Kim & InGyu Lee & Hongbum Kim & Kwangsoo Shin, 2021. "Factors Affecting Outbound Open Innovation Performance in Bio-Pharmaceutical Industry-Focus on Out-Licensing Deals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Maria Isabella Leone & Raffaele Oriani & Toke Reichstein, 2015. "How much are flexibility and uncertainty worth in patent licensing?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 42(4), pages 371-394, December.
    17. Karen Ruckman & Ian McCarthy, 2017. "Why do some patents get licensed while others do not?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(4), pages 667-688.
    18. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Keld Laursen & Solon Moreira & Toke Reichstein & Maria Isabella Leone, 2017. "Evading the Boomerang Effect: Using the Grant-Back Clause to Further Generative Appropriability from Technology Licensing Deals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 514-530, June.
    20. Sandro Mendonca & Hugo Confraria & Manuel Mira Godinho, 2021. "Appropriating the returns of patent statistics: Take-up and development in the wake of Zvi Griliches," SPRU Working Paper Series 2021-07, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:44:y:2023:i:6:p:3199-3214. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.