IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cme/wpaper/1405.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The dark side of R&D collaborations

Author

Listed:
  • Enrico Guzzini

    (Università degli Studi eCampus)

  • Donato Iacobucci

    (Università Politecnica delle Marche)

Abstract

Collaboration with firms and public research institutions (PRI) is expected to raise the innovative performance of firms. Collaboration is also likely to increase the cost of innovation because of leakages of strategic information, appropriability and coordination problems. When collaborating with PRI the latter problem is expected to be stronger thus raising the probability of project failure. The aim of this paper is to investigate if and to what extent collaboration in R&D projects raises the probability of failure: i.e. abandoning or delaying innovative projects. It also aims at verifying if and to what extent the collaboration with PRI increases the likelihood of failure. We use data from the fourth Italian Community Innovation Survey (CIS 4) which collected data for the three-year period 2002-2004. The empirical results support the hypothesis that collaboration significantly impacts the probability of abandoning or delaying innovative projects, thus raising the cost of innovation. Collaboration with PRI does not raise the likelihood of failure more than what observed for the collaboration with other partners. Moreover, delaying is influenced by cost factors (such as the lack of financial resources) and knowledge factors (such as the lack of qualified personnel); abandonment is significantly associated with market factors (such as uncertain demand).

Suggested Citation

  • Enrico Guzzini & Donato Iacobucci, 2014. "The dark side of R&D collaborations," Working Papers 1405, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
  • Handle: RePEc:cme:wpaper:1405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://193.205.129.80/repec/cme/wpaper/cmetwp_05_2014.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2014
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Birgit Aschhoff & Tobias Schmidt, 2008. "Empirical Evidence on the Success of R&D Cooperation—Happy Together?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 33(1), pages 41-62, August.
    2. Sonja Radas & Ljiljana Bozic, 2012. "Overcoming Failure: Abandonments and Delays of Innovation Projects in SMEs," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 649-669, November.
    3. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 2005. "R&D cooperation between firms and universities. Some empirical evidence from Belgian manufacturing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 355-379, June.
    4. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    5. Lokshin, Boris & Hagedoorn, John & Letterie, Wilko, 2011. "The bumpy road of technology partnerships: Understanding causes and consequences of partnership mal-functioning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 297-308, March.
    6. Cameron,A. Colin & Trivedi,Pravin K., 2005. "Microeconometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521848053.
    7. Alessandro Muscio & Andrea Pozzali, 2013. "The effects of cognitive distance in university-industry collaborations: some evidence from Italian universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 486-508, August.
    8. anonymous, 2011. "Low interest rates have benefits …and costs," Inside the Vault, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Spring.
    9. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    10. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    11. Cuijpers, Maarten & Guenter, Hannes & Hussinger, Katrin, 2011. "Costs and benefits of inter-departmental innovation collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 565-575, May.
    12. D’Este, Pablo & Iammarino, Simona & Savona, Maria & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2012. "What hampers innovation? Revealed barriers versus deterring barriers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 482-488.
    13. Simona Iammarino & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli & Nick Von Tunzelmann, 2012. "Technological Capabilities and Patterns of Innovative Cooperation of Firms in the UK Regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(10), pages 1283-1301, November.
    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. Enrico Guzzini & Donato Iacobucci, 2017. "Project failures and innovation performance in university–firm collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 865-883, August.
    2. van Criekingen, Kristof & Freel, Mark & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2021. "Open innovation deficiency: Evidence on project abandonment and delay," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-006, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Yindan Ye & Thomas Crispeels, 2022. "The role of former collaborations in strengthening interorganizational links: evidence from the evolution of the Chinese innovation network," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1343-1372, October.
    4. René Belderbos & Martin Carree & Boris Lokshin & Juan Fernández Sastre, 2015. "Inter-temporal patterns of R&D collaboration and innovative performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 123-137, February.
    5. Gianluca Murgia, 2021. "The impact of collaboration diversity and joint experience on the reiteration of university co-patents," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1108-1143, August.
    6. Timo Kleiner-Schaefer & Kerstin J. Schaefer, 2022. "Barriers to university–industry collaboration in an emerging market: Firm-level evidence from Turkey," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 872-905, June.
    7. Natália L. Figueiredo & João J. M. Ferreira, 2022. "More than meets the partner: a systematic review and agenda for University–Industry cooperation," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 231-273, February.
    8. Taheri, Mozhdeh & van Geenhuizen, Marina, 2016. "Teams' boundary-spanning capacity at university: Performance of technology projects in commercialization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 31-43.
    9. Spyros Arvanitis & Areti Gkypali & Kostas Tsekouras, 2014. "Knowledge Base, Exporting Activities, Innovation Openness and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 14-361, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    10. R. Núñez-Sánchez & A. Barge-Gil & A. Modrego-Rico, 2012. "Performance of knowledge interactions between public research centres and industrial firms in Spain: a project-level analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 330-354, June.
    11. Ivana Bilić & Vlatka Škokić & Marina Lovrinčević, 2021. "Academic Entrepreneurship in Post-transition Country—Case Study of Croatia," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(1), pages 41-55, March.
    12. Ankrah, Samuel & AL-Tabbaa, Omar, 2015. "Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 387-408.
    13. Nasirov, Shukhrat & Joshi, Amol M., 2023. "Minding the communications gap: How can universities signal the availability and value of their scientific knowledge to commercial organizations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    14. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    15. Ángela Vásquez-Urriago & Andrés Barge-Gil & Aurelia Rico & Evita Paraskevopoulou, 2014. "The impact of science and technology parks on firms’ product innovation: empirical evidence from Spain," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 835-873, September.
    16. Albats, Ekaterina & Bogers, Marcel & Podmetina, Daria, 2020. "Companies’ human capital for university partnerships: A micro-foundational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    17. Davide Antonioli & Alberto Marzucchi & Maria Savona, 2017. "Pain shared, pain halved? Cooperation as a coping strategy for innovation barriers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 841-864, August.
    18. Carsten Schultz & Oliver Gretsch & Alexander Kock, 2021. "The influence of shared R&D-project innovativeness perceptions on university-industry collaboration performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1144-1172, August.
    19. Yongli Tang & Kazuyuki Motohashi & Xinyue Hu & Angeles Montoro-Sanchez, 2020. "University-industry interaction and product innovation performance of Guangdong manufacturing firms: the roles of regional proximity and research quality of universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 578-618, April.
    20. Riccardo Crescenzi & Andrea Filippetti & Simona Iammarino, 2017. "Academic inventors: collaboration and proximity with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 730-762, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D collaboration; project failure; public research institutions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cme:wpaper:1405. 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: Donato Iacobucci (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmettit.html .

    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.