IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/25051.html

Inventive Capabilities in the Division of Innovative Labor

Author

Listed:
  • Ashish Arora
  • Wesley M. Cohen
  • Colleen M. Cunningham

Abstract

We study how the inventive capability of a firm conditions its participation in a division of innovative labor. Capable firms are, by definition, able to invent; for them, external inventions substitute for their own R&D. However, external knowledge is an input into internal invention, and thus, more valuable to firms with inventive capability. Using a simple model of innovation and imitation, we explore how inventive capability affects a firm’s R&D investments, and thus whether and how it innovates, imitates, or does neither. Further, we study how these outcomes are conditioned by the supply of external knowledge as well as the supply of external inventions. In an advance over the literature, we treat firm inventive capability as unobserved, and use a latent class multinomial model to infer its value. Using a recent survey of product innovation and the division of innovative labor among US manufacturing firms, we find that high capability firms tend to use internal, rather than externally generated inventions, to innovate, and they use external knowledge to enhance their internal inventive activity. By contrast, lower capability firms are more likely to introduce “me-too” or imitative products, and when they innovate, are more likely to rely on external sources of inventions. Our findings suggest the successful pursuit of R&D-led growth depends both on firm inventive capability and the external knowledge environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashish Arora & Wesley M. Cohen & Colleen M. Cunningham, 2018. "Inventive Capabilities in the Division of Innovative Labor," NBER Working Papers 25051, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25051
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25051.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
    2. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 1999. "Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 63-80, January.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    4. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2009. "Search patterns and absorptive capacity: Low- and high-technology sectors in European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 495-506, April.
    5. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    6. Delgado, Mercedes & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2014. "Clusters, convergence, and economic performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1785-1799.
    7. Juan Alcácer & Wilbur Chung, 2007. "Location Strategies and Knowledge Spillovers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 760-776, May.
    8. Audretsch, David B. & Feldman, Maryann P., 2004. "Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 61, pages 2713-2739, Elsevier.
    9. Henk W. Volberda & Nicolai J. Foss & Marjorie A. Lyles, 2010. "PERSPECTIVE---Absorbing the Concept of Absorptive Capacity: How to Realize Its Potential in the Organization Field," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 931-951, August.
    10. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    11. Richard A. Colombo & Donald G. Morrison, 1989. "Note—A Brand Switching Model with Implications for Marketing Strategies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 89-99.
    12. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    13. Wagner A. Kamakura & Byung-Do Kim & Jonathan Lee, 1996. "Modeling Preference and Structural Heterogeneity in Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 152-172.
    14. Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2001. "Specialized technology suppliers, international spillovers and investment: evidence from the chemical industry," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 31-54, June.
    15. Robert F. Bordley, 1989. "Note—Relaxing the Loyalty Condition in the Colombo/Morrison Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 100-103.
    16. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    17. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    18. repec:bof:bofrdp:urn:nbn:fi:bof-201512111472 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    22. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley M. & Walsh, John P., 2016. "The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1113-1128.
    23. 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.
    24. April M. Franco & MB Sarkar & Rajshree Agarwal & Raj Echambadi, 2009. "Swift and Smart: The Moderating Effects of Technological Capabilities on the Market Pioneering-Firm Survival Relationship," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(11), pages 1842-1860, November.
    25. Carlos Vivas & Andrés Barge-Gil, 2015. "Impact On Firms Of The Use Of Knowledge External Sources: A Systematic Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 943-964, December.
    26. Cockburn, Iain M. & Henderson, Rebecca M., 2001. "Scale and scope in drug development: unpacking the advantages of size in pharmaceutical research," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 1033-1057, November.
    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. Crown, Daniel & Faggian, Alessandra & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2020. "Foreign-Born graduates and innovation: Evidence from an Australian skilled visa program✰,✰✰,★,★★," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    2. Nilanjana Dutt & Will Mitchell, 2020. "Searching for knowledge in response to proximate and remote problem sources: Evidence from the U.S. renewable electricity industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1412-1449, August.
    3. Randolph Luca Bruno & Riccardo Crescenzi & Saul Estrin & Sergio Petralia, 2022. "Multinationals, innovation, and institutional context: IPR protection and distance effects," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(9), pages 1945-1970, December.
    4. Riccardo Crescenzi & Simona Iammarino & Carolin Ioramashvili & Andres Rodriguez-Pose & Michael Storper, 2019. "The Geography of Innovation: Local Hotspots and Global Innovation Networks," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 57, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.

    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. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley & Lee, Honggi & Sebastian, Divya, 2023. "Invention value, inventive capability and the large firm advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    2. Stefan, Ioana & Bengtsson, Lars, 2017. "Unravelling appropriability mechanisms and openness depth effects on firm performance across stages in the innovation process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 252-260.
    3. Ceccagnoli, Marco & Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P., 2024. "Reaching beyond low-hanging fruit: Basic research and innovativeness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    4. Pindado, Emilio & Sánchez, Mercedes & García Martínez, Marian, 2023. "Entrepreneurial innovativeness: When too little or too much agglomeration hurts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    5. Stephane Lhuillery & Julio Raffo & Intan Hamdan-Livramento, 2016. "Measuring creativity: Learning from innovation measurement," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 31, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    9. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    10. Tobias Schlegel & Curdin Pfister & Dietmar Harhoff & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2022. "Innovation effects of universities of applied sciences: an assessment of regional heterogeneity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 63-118, February.
    11. Adelheid Holl & Bettina Peters & Christian Rammer, 2023. "Local knowledge spillovers and innovation persistence of firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(6), pages 826-850, August.
    12. Hanne Peeters & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2020. "Do firms profit from involving academics when developing technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 494-521, April.
    13. Kannan Srikanth & Anand Nandkumar & Deepa Mani & Prashant Kale, 2020. "How Firms Build Isolating Mechanisms for Knowledge: A Study in Offshore Research and Development Captives," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 98-116, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    16. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley M. & Walsh, John P., 2016. "The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1113-1128.
    17. Wen-Jung Liang & Chao-Cheng Mai & Jacques-François Thisse & Ping Wang, 2019. "On the Economics of Science Parks," NBER Working Papers 25595, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Venturini, Roberto & Ceccagnoli, Marco & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Knowledge integration in the shadow of tacit spillovers: Empirical evidence from U.S. R&D labs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 180-205.
    19. Stephen Roper & Helen Xia, 2014. "Unpacking open innovation: Absorptive capacity, exploratory and exploitative openness and the growth of entrepreneurial biopharmaceutical firms," Research Papers 0019, Enterprise Research Centre.
    20. Shivaram V. Devarakonda & Brian T. McCann & Jeffrey J. Reuer, 2018. "Marshallian Forces and Governance Externalities: Location Effects on Contractual Safeguards in Research and Development Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1112-1129, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:nbr:nberwo:25051. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.