http://calitc.pbworks.com/f/TechTransferStudy.pdf

Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory

Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis

(1975). The Limits of Organization. Journal of Economic Issues: Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 543-544.

The Limits of Organization

New products provide increased sales, profits, and competitive strength for most organizations. However, nearly 50% of the new products that are introduced each year fail. Organizations thus find themselves in a double bind. On the one hand they must innovate consistently to remain competitive, but on the other hand innovation is risky and expensive. Many organizations are forming business alliances to quicken the pace of and reduce risks associated with innovation. Yet by some estimates, 70% of these alliances fail. Many of the prescriptions for successful alliance management clash with recommendations for effective innovation management. The authors develop testable hypotheses by integrating the new products and alliance literature. A construct—cooperative competency—derived from related concepts of mutual adjustment, absorptive capacity, and relational capability is posited as the key factor affecting new product development success, regardless of whether it is an intra- or interfirm endeavor....

An Examination of Organizational Factors Influencing New Product Success in Internal and Alliance-Based Processes

Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study

The drivers of cooperation between buyers and suppliers for product innovation

In this paper we have analysed the innovation processes occurring in several cross-industry technology partnerships in order to suggest some key managerial issues pertaining to the effectiveness of these increasingly popular initiatives. Our general proposition, based on an extensive literature review and clinical research, is that the managerial hurdles in partnerships frequently offset, and in some cases eliminate, the expected innovation advantages. We submit that there is a fundamental tension between the dynamics of innovation and the logic of partnering. The extent of the tension, however, depends on the nature of the innovation project and on the characteristics of the partnership. Thus we recommend that managers involved in the formation of joint-R&D agreements should carry out an innovation-partnering assessment to design an appropriate management structure that would minimise the ‘tension’. Lastly, we suggest some ingredients for carrying out such an assessment, and directions for further research.



Alliances seem to be today's answer to most management challenges. As recent surveys show, companies all over the world are forming partnerships to alleviate difficulties met in nearly every business activity —design, manufacturing, distribution, service… (e.g. Hergert & Morris, 1987; Urban, 1989), The popularity of such strategic initiatives in the 1980's has led to a dramatic increase in the number as well as in the forms of alliances (Hagedoorn and Schakenraad, 1990).

Innovating through alliances: expectations and limitations

In this article we report on the design, prototyping and results of a research effort aimed at identifying whether and how trust affects the innovativeness of a partnership between two players. The methodology combined an experiment and two questionnaires. The research aimed to increase our understanding of trust and its impact on the innovative outcome of cooperation and to derive some guidance for economic actors, namely RD if the level of mutual trust is below or above this threshold, their joint creativity seems to increase less or even to decrease. Our findings suggest that joint development projects should always include explicit trust development activities at the beginning of the project, and that the amount of trust in the joint team should be monitored to avoid the negative consequences of excessive trust.

Trust and creativity: understanding the role of trust in creativity-oriented joint developments

There is a widespread belief in the business community that firms can rely on the market for buying and selling technological opportunities. The argument is: with so much technology development going on in the world, 'there must be somebody some- where who has the technology we need.' According to this belief, acquiring new tech- nology just boils down to finding the sup- plier, possibly with the help of a specialized intermediary. Several large firms have indeed developed ambitious mechanisms for acquiring the needed technological know-how as they proceed to make and market a new product. We contend that this concept of the tech- nology transfer process is erroneous, as it conflicts with actual practice. The very high transaction costs entailed leave consider- able room for opportunistic behavior and are more likely to occur when the parties do not know each other. An effective way to reduce transaction costs, therefore, is to limit technology transfers to the firm's part- ners, i.e. organizations with which the firm has already interacted in the past. Our research provides evidence that successful technology transfers typically take place between suppliers and buyers who had business relationships before considering a technology agreement. In addition, we report findings that companies using inter- mediaries (technological opportunities cata- logues, databases, fairs, etc.) have been disappointed in their attempts to find new technologies from unknown sources. Because of the high risk of opportunistic behavior, it is practically impossible to assess the value of a technology without knowing who sells it. Similarly, the tech- nology transfer capabilities of a company are difficult to appraise without prior knowl- edge through business interaction. To a certain extent, it may be better to buy any technology from a partner that one knows well than to buy a supposedly good tech- nology from a firm with which one has had no experience. To put it bluntly: the identity of the partner may actually matter more than the technology being traded! Consequently, the relevant framework for technology transfer is built on a 'network concept' rather than the 'market concept'. Firms wishing to acquire new technology should turn first to their network of trusted business partners, looking for available technological opportunities instead of trying to buy technology from unrelated organizations.

Technology transactions: networks over markets

This paper reports the results of an empirical study that probed the adoption of early supplier involvement (ESI) in the product development process. ESI is defined as a form of vertical co-operation in which manufacturers involve suppliers at an early stage in the product development/innovation process, generally at the level of concept and design. Previous research has shown that Western automobile manufacturers obtained significant benefits by emulating the ESI practices of their Japanese competitors; the bulk of research knowledge is, in fact, located in this domain. This study focused on a group of assembly-based industries outside the automotive setting to determine if the adoption and benefits of ESI are found in other domains as well. Twenty-five companies in three non-automotive industries participated in the research. A model of ESI adoption was developed and tested, and an ESI index created to determine the degree to which this practice was applied. The results reveal, among other things, that the level of ESI practice is strongly related to a higher number of supplier base initiatives, lower product integration, broader supplier scope and a higher proportion of parts purchased. Significant results were also obtained in comparisons between industry sectors and geographic regions (USA, Western Europe and Japan). We suggest that promising directions for future research include broad-based samples across industrial sectors and industry-focused empirical study.

Francis Bidault

Papers

The drivers of cooperation between buyers and suppliers for product innovation

Innovating through alliances: expectations and limitations

Trust and creativity: understanding the role of trust in creativity-oriented joint developments

Technology transactions: networks over markets

New product development and early supplier involvement (ESI): the drivers of ESI adoption