In this paper, we argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities. We label this capability a firm's absorptive capacity and suggest that it is largely a function of the firm's level of prior related knowledge. The discussion focuses first on the cognitive basis for an individual's absorptive capacity including, in particular, prior related knowledge and diversity of background. We then characterize the factors that influence absorptive capacity at the organizational level, how an organization's absorptive capacity differs from that of its individual members, and the role of diversity of expertise within an organization. We argue that the development of absorptive capacity, and, in turn, innovative performance are history- or path-dependent and argue how lack of investment in an area of expertise early on may foreclose the future development of a technical capability in that area. We formulate a model of firm investment in research and development (R&D), in which R&D contributes to a firm's absorptive capacity, and test predictions relating a firm's investment in R&D to the knowledge underlying technical change within an industry. Discussion focuses on the implications of absorptive capacity for the analysis of other related innovative activities, including basic research, the adoption and diffusion of innovations, and decisions to participate in cooperative R&D ventures. **

/pdf/absorptive-capacity-a-new-perspective-on-learning-and-1n1c9gg9x0.pdf

Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation

Given assumptions about the characteristics of knowledge and the knowledge requirements of production, the firm is conceptualized as an institution for integrating knowledge. The primary contribution of the paper is in exploring the coordination mechanisms through which firms integrate the specialist knowledge of their members. In contrast to earlier literature, knowledge is viewed as residing within the individual, and the primary role of the organization is knowledge application rather than knowledge creation. The resulting theory has implications for the basis of organizational capability, the principles of organization design (in particular, the analysis of hierarchy and the distribution of decision-making authority), and the determinants of the horizontal and vertical boundaries of the firm. More generally, the knowledge-based approach sheds new light upon current organizational innovations and trends and has far-reaching implications for management practice.

Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal (17), pp.

https://memberfiles.freewebs.com/84/90/65819084/documents/TOWARD%20A%20KNOWLEDGE-BASED%20THEORY%20OF%20THE.pdf

Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm

The authors assume that firms invest in R&D not only to generate innovations, but also to learn from competitors and extraindustry knowledge sources (e.g., university and government labs). This argument suggests that the ease of learning within an industry will both affect R&D spending, and condition the influence of appropriability and technological opportunity conditions on R&D. For example, they show that, contrary to the traditional result, intraindustry spillovers may encourage equilibrium industry R&D investment. Regression results confirm that the impact of appropriability and technological opportunity conditions on R&D is influenced by the ease and character of learning. Copyright 1989 by Royal Economic Society.

Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R & D

A central part of the innovation process concerns the way firms go about organizing search for new ideas that have commercial potential. New models of innovation have suggested that many innovative firms have changed the way they search for new ideas, adopting open search strategies that involve the use of a wide range of external actors and sources to help them achieve and sustain innovation. Using a large-scale sample of industrial firms, this paper links search strategy to innovative performance, finding that searching widely and deeply is curvilinearly (taking an inverted U-shape) related to performance. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

/pdf/open-for-innovation-the-role-of-openness-in-explaining-2llii2909h.pdf

Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms

To HAVE the incentive to undertake research and development, a firm must be able to appropriate returns sufficient to make the investment worthwhile. The benefits consumers derive from an innovation, however, are increased if competitors can imitate and improve on the innovation to ensure its availability on favorable terms. Patent law seeks to resolve this tension between incentives for innovation and widespread diffusion of benefits. A patent confers, in theory, perfect appropriability (monopoly of the invention) for a limited time in return for a public

/pdf/appropriating-the-returns-from-industrial-research-and-1f4rskj2t7.pdf

Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development

On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities

In this paper, we describe the results of an inquiry into the nature of appropriability conditions in over one hundred manufacturing industries, and we discuss how this information has been and might be used to cast light on important issues in the economics of innovation and public policy. Our data, derived from a survey of high-level R&D executives, are informed opinions about the nature of an industry's technological and economic environment rather than quantitative measures of inputs and outputs.

Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D

This article reviews the substance of the literature stemming from the Averch-Johnson model of the firm under rate-of-return regulation. It examines a number of propositions, among them the following: (1) The profit-maximizing firm under rate-of-return regulation will tend to use a capital-labor ratio greater than that which minimizes cost for its output level; (2) The profit-maximizing firm under regulatory constraint will use a capital-labor ratio and produce an output greater than it would in the absence of regulation; (3) The closer the "fair rate of return" is to the true cost of capital, the greater the quantity of capital the firm will want to use; and (4) The sales (total revenue)-maximizing firm under regulatory constraint will use a labor-capital ratio greater than it would when unconstrained. The second of these propositions, which has been widely taken to have been proved by Averch and Johnson, is shown to be false. The paradoxical assertion in the third proposition is explained and its regulatory implications discussed. Two models involving regulatory lag are described along with their implications for policy. Finally, some evaluative comments are offered on the entire issue of what has come to be known as the "A-J effect" and its importance in regulatory economics.

Alvin K. Klevorick

Papers

Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development

On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities

Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D

Input choices and rate-of-return regulation : an overview of the discussion

Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices under Uncertainty