IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijimxx/v20y2016i02ns136391961650016x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intellectual Property Appropriation Strategy And Its Impact On Innovation Performance

Author

Listed:
  • SAIRAH HUSSAIN

    () (Curtin University of Technology Perth, WA 6102, Australia)

  • MILE TERZIOVSKI

    () (University of South Australia, Australia)

Abstract

How should intellectual property (IP) be protected and appropriated to gain value for the firm? This study aims to answer this question by examining the impact of the key determinants of IP appropriability, namely organizational resources, IP management practices and organizational learning culture, on innovation performance. The study uses quantitative survey data obtained from the Australian biotechnology, pharmaceutical and ICT industries in order to test several hypotheses. Our results show that exploitation and protection of IP within an organisational learning culture have a significant effect on the firm’s innovation performance. The implication for managers is that IP appropriation is likely to be most successful when trade secrets and profits from innovation are applied simultaneously within an organizational learning culture.

Suggested Citation

  • Sairah Hussain & Mile Terziovski, 2016. "Intellectual Property Appropriation Strategy And Its Impact On Innovation Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-28, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:20:y:2016:i:02:n:s136391961650016x
    DOI: 10.1142/S136391961650016X
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S136391961650016X
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    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. Petra Moser, 2005. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1214-1236, September.
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. Edwin Mansfield, 1964. "Industrial Research and Development Expenditures: Determinants, Prospects, and Relation to Size of Firm and Inventive Output," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72, pages 319-319.
    4. Minyuan Zhao, 2006. "Conducting R& D in Countries with Weak Intellectual Property Rights Protection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1185-1199, August.
    5. Comanor, William S, 1986. "The Political Economy of the Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 24(3), pages 1178-1217, September.
    6. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    7. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    8. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    10. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-918, December.
    11. Greenhalgh, Christine & Rogers, Mark, 2006. "The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 562-580, May.
    12. Subramanian, A. & Nilakanta, S., 1996. "Organizational innovativeness: Exploring the relationship between organizational determinants of innovation, types of innovations, and measures of organizational performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 631-647, December.
    13. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1962. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 155-173.
    14. Choi, Jay Pil, 1998. "Patent Litigation as an Information-Transmission Mechanism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1249-1263, December.
    15. Nelson, Richard R & Winter, Sidney G, 1982. "The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 114-132, March.
    16. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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:wsi:ijimxx:v:20:y:2016:i:02:n:s136391961650016x. 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: (Tai Tone Lim). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijim/ijim.shtml .

    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.