Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What determines how long an innovative spell will last?

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper is set out to examine the temporal pattern of innovative activities: what might have affected a firm’s patenting from one period to the next. Based upon data on ‘information technology’ (IT) manufacturing firms in Taiwan covering the years 1990–2001, we develop a survival model to analyze the underlying drivers of patenting duration. Our results indicate that the level of the patent stock at the onset of the patent spell, defined as the number of successive years during which a firm produced at least one patent per year, has a non-linear effect on spell duration. Other factors, such as industrial growth, firm size and firm profitability, have a positive effect on patenting duration, while firm age and spell sequence affect negatively to spell duration. We conclude that state dependence is demonstrated by innovative behavior, yet the advantages gained from such creative accumulation can easily be dissipated, thereby illustrating the transient nature of dynamic capabilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. On the nature of technological change and consequent innovative activities, the Austrian economist, Joseph Schumpeter, first envisaged an uneven and random process in which progress was made in short bursts of innovation by new entrants (Mark I); 30 years later, a contrasting (Mark II) Schumpeter model suggested that innovation results from the accumulation of technological competencies, and that such accumulated competencies significantly affect the future technological performance of the firm (for further elaboration, see Malerba et al. 1997).

  2. Examples include Malerba et al. (1997), Cefis and Orsenigo (2001) and Alfranca et al. (2004).

  3. The term ‘spell’, which refers to a period of work or some certain other activity, can be used to capture the continuity and duration of such activities (Geroski et al. 1997; Alfranca et al. 2004).

References

  • Alfranca, O., Rama, R., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2002). A patent analysis of global food and beverage firms: The persistence of innovation. Agribusiness, 183, 349–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfranca, O., Rama, R., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2004). Innovation spells in the multinational agri-food sector. Technovation, 24, 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aw, B. Y., Chen, X., & Roberts, M. (2001). Firm-level evidence on productivity differentials, turnover and exports in Taiwanese manufacturing. Journal of Development Economics, 66, 51–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cefis, E. (2003). Is there persistence in innovative activities? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 489–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cefis, E., & Orsenigo, L. (2001). The persistence of innovative activities, a cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis. Research Policy, 30, 1139–1158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., Jang, S., Young, J. (2006). The determinants of innovative persistence: An empirical study on patent spells of technology firms. Presented at 48th Annual Conference, Academy of International Business, Beijing, China.

  • Chiu, Y. C., Lai, H. C., Liaw, Y. C., & Lee, T. Y. (2010). Technological scope: Diversified or specialized. Scientometrics, 82(1), 37–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. M., & Bower, J. L. (1996). Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strategic Management Journal, 173, 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K. B. (1985). The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Research Policy, 14(5), 235–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning, the two faces of R&D. The Economic Journal, 99, 569–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, W. (2005). Unemployment duration and individual heterogeneity: A regional study. Applied Economics, 37, 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fok, R. W., Chang, Y. C., & Lee, W. T. (2004). Bank relationships and their effects on firm performance around the Asian financial crisis: evidence from Taiwan. Financial Management, 33, 89–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P. A., Reenen, J. V., & Walters, C. F. (1997). How persistently do firms innovate? Research Policy, 26, 33–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S., Clements, E., Baldacci, E., & Granados, C. (2004). The persistence of fiscal adjustments in developing countries. Applied Economics Letters, 11, 209–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B., Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER citations data file, lessons, insights and methodological tools. Working paper no. 8498. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economics Research.

  • Hansen, J. A. (1992). Innovation, firm size, and firm age. Small Business Economics, 4, 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang, S. L., Tsai, Y. T., & Chen, J. (2008). Persistent innovation: A cross-country study of output and diversity over time. Applied Economics Letters, 15(4), 323–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. (2008). Patent licensability and life: A study of U.S. patents registered by South Korean public research institutes. Scientometrics, 75(3), 463–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., & Lee, J. (2008). Technology strategy for enhancing the public-to-private technology transfer: Evidence from the duration of patent. Applied Economics, 40, 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., & Orsenigo, L. (1999). Technological entry, exit and survival, an empirical analysis of patent data. Research Policy, 28, 643–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., Orsenigo, L., & Peretto, P. (1997). Persistence of innovative activities, sectoral patterns of innovation and international technological specialization. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 15, 801–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfied, E. (1968). Industrial research and technological innovation: An econometric analysis. New York: Norton & Co. Inc.

  • Martinez-Ros, E. (2000). Explaining the decision to carry out product and process innovation: The Spanish case. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 10(2), 223–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Peters, B. (2009). Persistence of innovation: Stylized facts and panel data evidence. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(2), 226–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quintana-García, C., & Benavides-Velasco, C. (2008). Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification. Research Policy, 37(3), 492–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roper, S., & Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2008). Innovation persistence: Survey and case-study evidence. Research Policy, 37, 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C. H., Motohashi, K., & Chen, J. R. (2009). Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative? Evidence from Taiwan. Research Policy, 38, 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye, F. (2007). A quantitative relationship between per capita GDP and scientometric criteria. Scientometrics, 71(3), 407–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors thank the data assistance provided by Jui-Chung Young and Che-Jung Hsu. Financial support was provided by Taiwan’s National Science Council, Project No. 95-2415-H-002-009 and School of Social Sciences, National Taiwan University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Show-Ling Jang

  2. Department of NPO Management, Nanhua University, No. 55 Sec 1 Nanhua Road, Dalin, Chiayi, 62248, Taiwan

    Jennifer H. Chen

Authors
  1. Show-Ling Jang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer H. Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer H. Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jang, SL., Chen, J.H. What determines how long an innovative spell will last?. Scientometrics 86, 65–76 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0247-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0247-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation