Small Business Economics

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 413–429 | Cite as

What do firms know? What do they produce? A new look at the relationship between patenting profiles and patterns of product diversification

Article

Abstract

In this work, we analyze the relationship between the patterns of firm diversification, if any, across product lines and across bodies of innovative knowledge, proxied by the patent classes where the firm is present. Putting it more emphatically, we investigate the relationship between “what a firm does” and “what a firm knows.” Using a newly developed dataset matching information on patents and products at the firm level, we provide evidence concerning firms’ technological and product scope, their relationships, the size-scaling and coherence properties of diversification itself. Our analysis shows that typically firms are much more diversified in terms of products than in terms of technologies, with their main products more related to the exploitation of their innovative knowledge. The scaling properties show that the number of products and technologies increases log-linearly with firm size. And the directions of diversification themselves display coherence between neighboring activities also at relatively high degrees of diversification. These findings are well in tune with a capability-based theory of the firm.

Keywords

Diversification Coherence Patents Products Capabilities 

JEL Classifications

C81 D22 L20 L25 O31 

References

  1. Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1987). Innovation, market structure and firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 69, 567–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1990). Innovation and small firms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1994). R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Audretsch, D. B., & Vivarelli, M. (1996). Firms size and R&D spillovers: Evidence from Italy. Small Business Economics, 8(3), 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernard, A. B., Grazzi, M., & Tomasi, C. (2015). Intermediaries in international trade: Products and destinations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(4), 916–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., Redding, S. J., & Schott, P. K. (2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bottazzi, G., Dosi, G., Lippi, M., Pammolli, F., & Riccaboni, M. (2001). Innovation and corporate growth in the evolution of the drug industry. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19(7), 1161–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bottazzi, G., & Pirino, D. (2010). Measuring industry relatedness and corporate coherence. In LEM papers series 2010/10, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.Google Scholar
  9. Bottazzi, G., & Secchi, A. (2006). Gibrat’s law and diversification. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(5), 847–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32(1), 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brouwer, E., & Kleinknecht, A. (1999). Innovative output, and a firm’s propensity to patent: An exploration of CIS micro data. Research Policy, 28(6), 615–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Knowledge specialisation, organizational coupling and the boundaries of the firm: Why firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 597–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Corradini, C., Demirel, P., & Battisti, G. (2016). Technological diversification within UK’s small serial innovators. Small Business Economics, 47(1), 163–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dernis, H., Dosso, M., Hervas, F., Millot, V., Squicciarini, M., & Vezzani, A. (2015). World Corporate Top R&D investors: Innovation and IP bundles. In JRC-IPTS working papers JRC94932, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Joint Research Centre.Google Scholar
  15. Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3), 1120–1171.Google Scholar
  16. Dosi, G., Faillo, M., & Marengo, L. (2008). Organizational capabilities, patterns of knowledge accumulation and governance structures in business firms: An introduction. Organization Studies, 29(8–9), 1165–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dosi, G., Grazzi, M., & Moschella, D. (2015). Technology and costs in international competitiveness: From countries and sectors to firms. Research Policy, 44(10), 1795–1814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dosi, G., Marengo, L., & Pasquali, C. (2010). How much should society fuel the greed of innovators? On the relations between appropriability, opportunities and rates of innovation. In R. Viale & H. Etzkowitz (Eds.), The capitalization of knowledge. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  19. Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. (2000). Introduction. In G. Dosi, R. R. Nelson, & S. Winter (Eds.), The nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goldschlag, N., Lybbert, T. J., & Zolas, N. J. (2016). An algorithmic links with probabilities crosswalk for uspc and cpc patent classifications with an application towards industrial technology composition. In US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies paper no. CES-WP-16-15.Google Scholar
  21. Grazzi, M., Sanzo, R., Secchi, A., & Zeli, A. (2013). The building process of a new integrated system of business micro-data 1989–2004. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 38(4), 291–324.Google Scholar
  22. Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661–1707.Google Scholar
  23. Hall, B. H., & Mairesse, J. (1995). Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms. Journal of Econometrics, 65(1), 263–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hirsch, S., & Lev, B. (1971). Sales stabilization through export diversification. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 53(3), 270–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kim, W. C., Hwang, P., & Burgers, W. P. (1993). Multinationals’ diversification and the risk-return trade-off. Strategic Management Journal, 14(4), 275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lybbert, T. J., & Zolas, N. J. (2014). Getting patents and economic data to speak to each other: An algorithmic links with probabilities approach for joint analyses of patenting and economic activity. Research Policy, 43(3), 530–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller, D. J. (2006). Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7), 601–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Montgomery, C. A. (1994). Corporate diversification. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(3), 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Nesta, L., & Saviotti, P. P. (2006). Firm knowledge and market value in biotechnology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(4), 625–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1997). The technological competencies of the world’s largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy, 26(2), 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pavitt, K. (1998). Technologies, products and organization in the innovating firm: What Adam Smith tells us and Joseph Schumpeter doesn’t. Industrial and Corporate Change, 7(3), 433–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Piscitello, L. (2000). Relatedness and coherence in technological and product diversification of the world’s largest firms. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 11(3), 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Piscitello, L. (2004). Corporate diversification, coherence and economic performance. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(5), 757–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schmoch, U., Laville, F., Patel, P., & Frietsch, R. (2003). Linking technology areas to industrial sectors. DG research: Final report to the European commission.Google Scholar
  36. Teece, D. J., Rumelt, R., Dosi, G., & Winter, S. (1994). Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 23(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Valvano, S., & Vannoni, D. (2003). Diversification strategies and corporate coherence evidence from Italian leading firms. Review of Industrial Organization, 23(1), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wakelin, K. (1998). Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level. Research Policy, 26(7), 829–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Dosi
    • 1
  • Marco Grazzi
    • 2
  • Daniele Moschella
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of EconomicsScuola Superiore Sant’AnnaPisaItaly
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations