IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/esm/wpaper/esmt-11-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technology commercialization strategy in a dynamic context: Developing specialized complementary assets in entrepreneurial firms

Author

Listed:
  • David H. Hsu

    (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania)

  • Simon Wakeman

    (ESMT European School of Management and Technology)

Abstract

A firm that lacks the specialized complementary assets necessary to commercialize an innovation faces a trade-off between contracting with an incumbent to access those assets and integrating downstream into commercialization. According to the framework developed in the prior literature, under a strong appropriability regime the innovator is likely to be better off contracting with an incumbent (as long as it can negotiate reasonable terms). However, we argue that if the innovator can learn from its experience in product commercialization, and thereby build its own commercialization capabilities, then the benefits of integrating downstream may outweigh the opportunity costs of learning and foregone profits. Alternatively, by engaging in joint commercialization, the innovator may be able to avoid these opportunity costs, albeit at the expense of higher inter-organizational governance costs. We illustrate the relationship between the choice of commercialization mode, commercialization experience, and performance in the context of the pharmaceutical industry. Specifically, we study how commercialization mode and experience affects the likelihood of drug approval. We find that when innovators lacking commercialization experience participate in the commercialization process though either joint commercialization or by commercializing alone, the product is less likely to be approved. However, innovators that have participated in the commercialization process in the past are more likely to successfully commercialize subsequent innovations under joint commercialization than those which have only contracted the commercialization to an incumbent. The results suggest that in some circumstances participating in the commercialization process, either through self-commercialization or by engaging in joint commercialization, may be the optimal strategy even for firms without the requisite complementary assets.

Suggested Citation

  • David H. Hsu & Simon Wakeman, 2011. "Technology commercialization strategy in a dynamic context: Developing specialized complementary assets in entrepreneurial firms," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-11-02 (R4), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 02 Dec 2013.
  • Handle: RePEc:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://static.esmt.org/publications/workingpapers/ESMT-11-02_R4.pdf
    File Function: Revised version, 2013
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gomes-Casseres, Benjamin & Hagedoorn, John & Jaffe, Adam B., 2006. "Do alliances promote knowledge flows?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 5-33, April.
    2. Joel A. C. Baum & Tony Calabrese & Brian S. Silverman, 2000. "Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 267-294, March.
    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. Tarun Khanna, 1998. "The Scope of Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 340-355, June.
    5. Sean Nicholson, 2005. "Biotech-Pharmaceutical Alliances as a Signal of Asset and Firm Quality," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(4), pages 1433-1464, July.
    6. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    7. Newey, Whitney K., 1987. "Efficient estimation of limited dependent variable models with endogenous explanatory variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 231-250, November.
    8. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    9. David H. Hsu, 2004. "What Do Entrepreneurs Pay for Venture Capital Affiliation?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(4), pages 1805-1844, August.
    10. Josh Lerner & Ulrike Malmendier, 2010. "Contractibility and the Design of Research Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 214-246, March.
    11. Ranjay Gulati & Dovev Lavie & Harbir Singh, 2009. "The nature of partnering experience and the gains from alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(11), pages 1213-1233, November.
    12. Van de Ven, Wynand P. M. M. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1981. "The demand for deductibles in private health insurance : A probit model with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 229-252, November.
    13. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    14. Prashant Kale & Harbir Singh & Howard Perlmutter, 2000. "Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 217-237, March.
    15. Bharat N. Anand & Tarun Khanna, 2000. "Do firms learn to create value? The case of alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 295-315, March.
    16. Joanne E. Oxley & Rachelle C. Sampson, 2004. "The scope and governance of international R&D alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 723-749, August.
    17. Toby E. Stuart, 2000. "Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 791-811, August.
    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. Shantala Samant & Jongwook Kim, 2021. "Determinants of common benefits and private benefits in innovation alliances," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(2), pages 294-307, March.

    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. David H. Hsu, 2006. "Venture Capitalists and Cooperative Start-up Commercialization Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 204-219, February.
    2. Shantala Samant & Jongwook Kim, 2021. "Determinants of common benefits and private benefits in innovation alliances," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(2), pages 294-307, March.
    3. Reuer, Jeffrey & Devarakonda, S.V., 2015. "Mechanisms of hybrid governance : Administrative committees in non-equity alliances," Other publications TiSEM 063d9ccc-59c8-4e76-a77d-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Shivaram V. Devarakonda & Jeffrey J. Reuer, 2019. "Safeguarding from the Sharks: Board Representation in Minority Equity Partnerships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 981-999, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Wadhwa, Anu & Phelps, Corey & Kotha, Suresh, 2016. "Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 95-112.
    7. M. C. Guardo & K. R. Harrigan, 2016. "Shaping the path to inventive activity: the role of past experience in R&D alliances," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 250-269, April.
    8. Steffen Runge & Christian Schwens & Matthias Schulz, 2022. "The invention performance implications of coopetition: How technological, geographical, and product market overlaps shape learning and competitive tension in R&D alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 266-294, February.
    9. Kavusan, K., 2015. "Essays on capability development through alliances," Other publications TiSEM 8eb736a5-b217-4718-ac13-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Dovev Lavie & Stewart R. Miller, 2008. "Alliance Portfolio Internationalization and Firm Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 623-646, August.
    11. Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2016. "The role of diversification profiles and dyadic characteristics in the formation of technological alliances: Differences between exploitation and exploration in a low-tech industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 517-532.
    12. Dovev Lavie & Randi Lunnan & Binh Minh T. Truong, 2022. "How does a partner's acquisition affect the value of the firm's alliance with that partner?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1897-1926, September.
    13. Müller, Dirk, 2010. "Alliance Coordination, Dysfunctions, and the Protection of Idiosyncratic Knowledge in Strategic Learning Alliances," EconStor Preprints 41039, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    14. Chou, Ting-Kai & Ou, Chin-Shyh & Tsai, Shu-Huan, 2014. "Value of strategic alliances: Evidence from the bond market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 42-59.
    15. Li, Dan, 2013. "Multilateral R&D alliances by new ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-260.
    16. Müller, Jens & Weinrich, Arndt, 2020. "Tax knowledge diffusion via strategic alliances," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 253, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    17. Devarakonda, Ramakrishna & Reuer, Jeffrey J. & Tadikonda, Harsha, 2022. "Founder social capital and value appropriation in R&D alliance agreements," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    18. Niron Hashai & Sarit Markovich, 2017. "Market Entry by High Technology Startups: The Effect of Competition Level and Startup Innovativeness," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 141-160, September.
    19. Umit Ozmel & Deniz Yavuz & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Todd Zenger, 2017. "Network Prominence, Bargaining Power, and the Allocation of Value Capturing Rights in High-Tech Alliance Contracts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 947-964, October.
    20. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Complementary assets; technology commercialization strategy; entrepreneurial firms; strategic alliances; alliance structure;
    All these keywords.

    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:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-02. 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: ESMT Faculty Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/emstbde.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.