Make, buy, organize: The interplay between research, external knowledge, and firm structure†
TLDR
This article explored the interplay between R&D, external knowledge, and organizational structure of a firm's innovation strategy, and found that centralized firms invest more in research, and patent more per research dollar, than decentralized firms.Abstract:
We bridge current streams of innovation research to explore the interplay between R&D, external knowledge, and organizational structure�three elements of a firm's innovation strategy, which we argue should logically be studied together. Using within-firm patent assignment patterns, we develop a novel measure of structure for a large sample of American firms. We find that centralized firms invest more in research, and patent more per R&D dollar, than decentralized firms. Both types access technology via mergers and acquisitions, but their acquisitions differ in terms of frequency, size, and integration. Consistent with our framework, their sources of value creation differ: while centralized firms derive more value from internal R&D, decentralized firms rely more on external knowledge. We discuss how these findings should stimulate more integrative work on theories of innovation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.read more
&61>-:;1<A7.!-66;A4>)61)&61>-:;1<A7.!-66;A4>)61)
$+074):4A75576;$+074):4A75576;
)6)/-5-6<!)8-:; '0):<76)+=4<A#-;-):+0
)3-=A :/)61B-%0-6<-:84)A*-<?--6#-;-):+0@<-:6)4)3-=A :/)61B-%0-6<-:84)A*-<?--6#-;-):+0@<-:6)4
67?4-,/-)6,1:5$<:=+<=:-67?4-,/-)6,1:5$<:=+<=:-
;01;0:7:)
$0):76-4-6B76
=1;#17;
&61>-:;1<A7.!-66;A4>)61)
7447?<01;)6,),,1<176)4?7:3;)<0<<8;:-87;1<7:A=8-66-,=5/5<(8)8-:;
!):<7.<0-=;16-;;,5161;<:)<176)6)/-5-6<)6, 8-:)<176;75576;=;16-;;6)4A<1+;
75576;=;16-;;)6,7:87:)<-755=61+)<176;75576;=;16-;;)?!=*41+#-;876;1*141<A)6,
<01+;75576;)6)/-5-6<6.7:5)<176$A;<-5;75576;)6)/-5-6<$+1-6+-;)6,"=)6<1<)<1>-
-<07,;75576; 8-:)<176;)6,$=884A0)16)6)/-5-6<75576; :/)61B)<176)4-0)>17:)6,
%0-7:A75576;)6,<0-$<:)<-/1+)6)/-5-6<!741+A75576;
#-+755-6,-,1<)<176#-+755-6,-,1<)<176
:7:)-4-6B76$#17;)3-=A :/)61B-%0-6<-:84)A*-<?--6#-;-):+0@<-:6)4
67?4-,/-)6,1:5$<:=+<=:-
$<:)<-/1+)6)/-5-6<7=:6)4
0<<8,@,717:/
;52
%01;8)8-:1;87;<-,)<$+074):4A75576;0<<8;:-87;1<7:A=8-66-,=5/5<(8)8-:;
7:57:-16.7:5)<17684-);-+76<)+<:-87;1<7:A87*7@=8-66-,=
)3-=A :/)61B-%0-6<-:84)A*-<?--6#-;-):+0@<-:6)467?4-,/-)6,)3-=A :/)61B-%0-6<-:84)A*-<?--6#-;-):+0@<-:6)467?4-,/-)6,
1:5$<:=+<=:-1:5$<:=+<=:-
*;<:)+<*;<:)+<
'-*:1,/-+=::-6<;<:-)5;7.1667>)<176:-;-):+0<7-@847:-<0-16<-:84)A*-<?--6#-@<-:6)4
367?4-,/-)6,7:/)61B)<176)4;<:=+<=:-D<0:---4-5-6<;7.)E:5;1667>)<176;<:)<-/A?01+0?-):/=-
;07=4,47/1+)44A*-;<=,1-,<7/-<0-:&;16/?1<016E:58)<-6<);;1/65-6<8)<<-:6;?-,->-478)67>-4
5-);=:-7.;<:=+<=:-.7:)4):/-;)584-7.5-:1+)6E:5;'-E6,<0)<+-6<:)41B-,E:5;16>-;<57:-16
:-;-):+0)6,8)<-6<57:-8-:#,744):<0)6,-+-6<:)41B-,E:5;7<0<A8-;)++-;;<-+06747/A>1)
5-:/-:;)6,)+9=1;1<176;*=<<0-1:)+9=1;1<176;,1..-:16<-:5;7..:-9=-6+A;1B-)6,16<-/:)<176
76;1;<-6<?1<07=:.:)5-?7:3<0-1:;7=:+-;7.>)4=-+:-)<176,1..-:?014-+-6<:)41B-,E:5;,-:1>-57:-
>)4=-.:7516<-:6)4#,-+-6<:)41B-,E:5;:-4A57:-76-@<-:6)4367?4-,/-'-,1;+=;;07?<0-;-
E6,16/;;07=4,;<15=4)<-57:-16<-/:)<1>-?7:376<0-7:1-;7.1667>)<176
-A?7:,;-A?7:,;
,-+-6<:)41B)<1767:/)61B)<176)4;<:=+<=:-5-:/-:;)6,)+9=1;1<176;8)<-6<;#5):3-<>)4=-
1;+18416-;1;+18416-;
=;16-;;,5161;<:)<176)6)/-5-6<)6, 8-:)<176;C=;16-;;6)4A<1+;C=;16-;;)6,7:87:)<-
755=61+)<176;C=;16-;;)?!=*41+#-;876;1*141<A)6,<01+;C)6)/-5-6<6.7:5)<176$A;<-5;C
)6)/-5-6<$+1-6+-;)6,"=)6<1<)<1>--<07,;C 8-:)<176;)6,$=884A0)16)6)/-5-6<C
:/)61B)<176)4-0)>17:)6,%0-7:AC$<:)<-/1+)6)/-5-6<!741+A
%01;27=:6)4):<1+4-1;)>)14)*4-)<$+074):4A75576;0<<8;:-87;1<7:A=8-66-,=5/5<(8)8-:;
Make, Buy, Organize: The Interplay Between Research,
External Knowledge, and Firm Structure
Ashish Arora
y
Sharon Belenzon
z
Luis A. Rios
x
December 11, 2012
Abstract
We bridge current streams of innovation research to explore the interplay between
R&D, external knowledge, an d organizational structure–three elements of a …rm’s inno-
vation strategy which we argue should logically be studied together. Using within-…rm
patent assignment patterns, we develop a novel measure of structure for a large sample of
American …rms. We …nd that centralized …rms invest more in research and patent more
per R&D dollar than decentralized …rms. Both types acc ess technology via mergers and
acquisitions, but their acquisitions di¤er in terms of frequency, size, and integration. Con-
sistent with our framework, their sources of value creation di¤er: while centralized …rms
derive more value from internal R&D, decentralized …rms rely more on external knowl-
edge. We discuss how these …ndings s hould stimulate more integrative work on theories of
innovation.
Keywords: decentralization, organizational structure, mergers and acquisitions, patents,
R&D, market value
JEL Classi…cation: D23 D83 L22
1 Intro duction
How do …rms allocate resources between R&D and external technology in order to maximize
value and drive growth? And in turn, do their ensuing growth trajectories themselves shape
such future resource allocation? Over the past three decades, the …eld of innovation strategy
All authors contributed equally and are listed in alphabetical order.
y
Duke University, Fuqua School of Business, 100 Fuqua Drive, Durham, NC 27708, U.S.A. E-mail:
ashish.arora@duke.edu
z
Duke University, Fuqua School of Business, 100 Fuqua Drive, Durham, NC 27708, U.S.A. E-mail:
sharon.belenzon@duke.edu
x
Corresponding author. Duke University, Fuqua School of Business, 100 Fuqua Drive, Durham, NC 27708,
U.S.A. E-mail: luis.rios@duke.edu
1
has isolated a set of important dyadic relationships in an e¤ort to understand these interrelated
questions. For example, a substantial body of work has advanced our understanding of the
relationship b etween internal R&D and external knowledge, (e.g. Cohen and Levinthal, 1990;
Pisano, 1990; Katz and Allen, 1982). More recently, a small literature on the structure of R&D
has explored how the resource allocation decision is related to the centralization or decentraliza-
tion of R&D (e.g. Argyres and Silverman, 2004; Lerner and Wulf, 2007). Separately, work on
structural integration and resource recon…guration has lo oked at how organizations are shaped
by acquisitions and absorption (e.g., Ahuja and Katila, 2001; Puranam, Singh, and Zollo, 2006;
Karim and Mitchell, 2000).
Surprisingly, there remains little integration of the aforementioned streams. This lack of
synthesis may be due to data constrains, since most work that considers such organizational
dynamics tends to rely on small samples (Karim and Mitchell, 2004, and Cohen and Levinthal,
1990 are notable exceptions). Understandably, researchers must often cede the pursuit of a richer
understanding of strategic interrelationships in exchange for "analytical precision and theoretical
rigor" (Zollo and Singh, 2004). Nonetheless, this lacuna is an important and understudied
limitation, since the very word "organization"–from the Greek organon ("tool, instrument, set
of rules")–denotes a coherent system or unit where interdependent parts work as one. In fact,
a central tenet of organization theory holds that the structures, systems, and processes of a …rm
should be interdependent and must be mutually supportive and coherent (Drazin and Van de
Ven, 1985; Nadler and Tushman, 1997; Rivkin and Siggelkow, 2003; Siggelkow, 2011).
It is the pursuit of this coherence logic that motivates our paper. Using a novel large-
scale dataset, we explore whether …rms demonstrate distinct and coherent combinations of
R&D organizational structure and knowledge-sourcing strategies, as would be expected given
the concatenated predictions of these emerging theories of innovation. We propose that …rms
pursuing a particular approach to innovation (e.g., a strong focus on internal research like
IBM or an "acquire and develop" approach like Cisco) also need a well-matched supporting
organizational structure (e.g., centralized or decentralized). Empirically, we exploit a sample
that includes nearly all patenting public American …rms, and develop a new measure of R&D
organizational structure which uses the ratio of patents assigned to a¢ liates versus corporate
parents as a proxy for the decentralization of R&D. This involves matching 576,052 patents
to 1,014 publicly traded American corporations and their 2,768 a¢ liates. By do cumenting the
types of choices that …rms make, we bridge streams of the literature that have previously studied
dyadic relationships b etween internal and external knowledge sourcing, between organizational
2
structure and innovation, and between acquisitions and structure.
Our …ndings extend and clarify prior results. We …nd evidence that strongly supports the
coherence logic. Knowledge sourcing strategies appear to be systematically related to orga-
nizational structure. Moreover, the market valuation of these knowledge sourcing strategies
strongly correlates with structure. We …nd con…rmatory large-scale evidence that research-
oriented …rms are signi…cantly more centralized than others, consistent with earlier small-sample
…ndings (Hoskisson, et al. 1993; Kay, 1988; Argyres and Silverman, 2004). But we also …nd
that organizational structure seems to strongly condition the relationship between …rms’ re-
search focus and their external knowledge acquisition strategy. Though both centralized and
decentralized …rms acquire external technology, centralized …rms do so less frequently and tend
to make smaller acquisitions. Moreover, they manage acquisitions di¤erently. Acquisitions by
centralized …rms frequently undergo full structural integration (Puranam et al., 2006), whereas
decentralized …rms tend to keep acquisitions as discrete entities.
Importantly, the logic underlying these patterns of choice is re‡ected in measurable di¤er-
ences in the composition of …rms’market value. Whereas centralized …rms draw most of their
intangible value from internal R&D stocks, decentralized …rms derive relatively more value
from externally acquired patents. This …nding is especially strong for large …rms and …rms with
higher technological diversity.
Our results imply that a successful innovation strategy requires careful alignment both be-
tween internal and external knowledge sourcing, and between the internal/external mix of inputs
and organizational structure. The implied coherence, however, does not necessarily imply a par-
ticular causal structure. Establishing causality is important, but given the nature of our data,
it is beyond the scope of our project. Furthermore, it is just as important to develop a fuller
theory of innovation that accounts for the dynamics we highlight in this study. By developing a
new empirical measure and systematically exposing the relationships between internal research,
external knowledge, and organizational structure among a nearly comprehensive set of …rms,
we take an important step towards the development of such theory.
2 Three Pillars of Innovation Strategy
We draw upon important streams in the innovation literature that have explored dyadic relation-
ships between research, external knowledge and structure. The …rst explores how the nature of
research inside a …rm is related to how the activity itself is organized. Firms that invest heavily
3
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners
Rene Belderbos,Rene Belderbos,Bruno Cassiman,Bruno Cassiman,Bruno Cassiman,Dries Faems,Dries Faems,Bart Leten,Bart Van Looy,Bart Van Looy +9 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of R&D collaboration resulting in the co-ownership of intellectual property (i.e. co-patents).
Journal ArticleDOI
Organizing for knowledge generation: internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing
TL;DR: It is found that external sourcing strategies are less effective when firms can already internally generate new knowledge or if they have high internal coordination costs, therefore, when considering external sourcing, managers must carefully weigh the benefits of it vis-a-vis its commensurate costs.
Journal ArticleDOI
The decline of science in corporate R&D
TL;DR: This article found that publications by company scientists have declined over time in a range of industries and that the value attributable to scientific research has dropped, whereas the value attributed to technical knowledge has remained stable.
Journal ArticleDOI
Top management team nationality diversity, corporate entrepreneurship, and innovation in multinational firms
TL;DR: It is confirmed that the positive effects of TMT nationality diversity on corporate entrepreneurship and innovation are only unleashed in TMTs with low social stratification and in MNCs located in home countries that are low in national power distance.
Journal ArticleDOI
The external knowledge sourcing process in multinational corporations
TL;DR: This study describes the development of a European telecom firm's scouting unit in Silicon Valley during the 2000s, focusing on the specific approaches used by the scouting managers to build effective connections between Silicon Valley start-ups and the firm's business units back in Europe.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D and External Knowledge Acquisition
TL;DR: This paper uses a productivity and an adoption approach, while including a search for contextual variables in the firms strategy that affects complementarity, to analyze complementarity between innovation activities: internal research and development (R&D) and external knowledge acquisition.
Journal ArticleDOI
Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging
Mary Tripsas,Giovanni Gavetti +1 more
TL;DR: The authors examined the relationship between managers' understanding of the world and the accumulation of organizational capabilities through an in-depth case study of the response of the Polaroid Corporation to the ongoing shift from analog to digital imaging.
Journal ArticleDOI
Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study
Gautam Ahuja,Riitta Katila +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the impact of acquisitions on the subsequent innovation performance of acquiring firms in the chemicals industry is examined, and the authors distinguish between technological acquisitions, acquisitions in which technology is a component of the acquired firm's assets, and non-technological acquisitions: acquisitions that do not involve a technological component.
Journal ArticleDOI
Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search
TL;DR: It is proposed that purely technological uncertainty derives from inventors' search processes with unfamiliar components and component combinations, which leads to less useful inventions on average and implies an increase in the variability that can result in both failure and breakthrough.
Related Papers (5)
Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation
Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology
Bruce Kogut,Udo Zander +1 more
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Q2. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "Make, buy, organize: the interplay between research, external knowledge, and firm structure" ?
The authors bridge current streams of innovation research to explore the interplay between R & D, external knowledge, and organizational structure–three elements of a firm 's innovation strategy which they argue should logically be studied together. The authors discuss how these findings should stimulate more integrative work on theories of innovation. Using within-firm patent assignment patterns, the authors develop a novel measure of structure for a large sample of American firms.