Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Coordinate the Networked Enterprise in a Context of Open Innovation? A New Function for Intellectual Property Rights

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The networked enterprise simultaneously seeks to develop new knowledge in order to compete on international markets thanks to its innovation capacity and to improve its allocation of resources, notably by reducing its production and organisational costs. In this paper, we study the functions of intellectual property rights in these productive and organisational objectives of the networked enterprise. We consider that they have an important ‘coordination function’, making easier the relationships between the fragmented parts of the networked enterprise. This coordination role is gaining ground in the context of open innovation. It is, thus, associated to the more traditional ‘incentive/defensive’ function of IPRs, which aims at giving incentives to the constitution of the firm’s ‘knowledge capital’. This coordination function is also associated to the ‘offensive’ one, relying on the construction and the reinforcement of entry barriers which contribute to position the firm within the innovation network to which it usually belongs.

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.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. First posed with the Ronald Coase’s contribution [17], who opposed market and hierarchy.

  2. Including the evolutionist approach, the resource-based theory, the strategic competence-based approach and the social-anthropology of learning approach (see [21]).

  3. Theoretically, the notion of “knowledge capital” is based on the definitions and/or on the economic developments of three key concepts/notions: knowledge, firm and capital (see [42]).

  4. The types of IPRs agreement may depend on the type of commitment between the partners. Whereas licence agreements may be used in exploitation strategies that involve important exchange of information, exploration strategies may rely on lower commitment (as shown by [23] in the case of IBM), notably at the beginning of the project (trade secrets could be used first—however, if from exploration strategies are generated new technological inventions, these ones would surely result in shared patents or cross licences).

  5. A good example of the blocking impact of a patent thicket in the biotechnology sector is the case of the Golden Rice. This variety of rice is produced through genetic engineering to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of pro-vitamin A in the edible parts of rice. While created at the University of Zurich, Golden Rice uses technological means protected by patents. For its exploitation, licences had to be negotiated with more than 70 patent owners [37]

  6. This was for example the solution chosen to solve the problem of the exploitation of the Golden Rice [9].

References

  1. Aglietta M, Rébérioux A (2004) Les dérives du capitalisme financier. Albin Michel, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alchian AA, Demsetz H (1972) Production information costs and economic organization. Am Econ Rev 62:777–795

    Google Scholar 

  3. Antonelli C (1998) The emergence of the network firm. In: Antonelli C (ed) New information technology and industrial change: the Italian case. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 13–26

    Google Scholar 

  4. Antonelli C (2005) Models of knowledge and systems of governance. J Inst Econ 1:51–73

    Google Scholar 

  5. Archibugi D, Iammarino S (2002) The globalisation of technological innovation: definition and evidence. Rev Intl Political Econ 9(1):98–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barjot D (2007) Lafarge (1993–2004) comment on devient firme mondiale. Revue économique 58(1):79–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Baudry B (2004) La question des frontières de la firme. Incitation et coordination dans la firme réseau. Revue économique 55:247–274

    Google Scholar 

  8. Berger S (2005) How we compete what companies around the world are doing to make it in today’s global economy? MIT Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bonneuil C, Demeulenaere E, Thomas F, Joly P-B, Allaire G, Goldringer I (2006) Innover autrement? La recherche face à l’avènement d’un nouveau régime de production et de régulation des savoirs en génétique végétale. In: Gasselin P, Clément O (eds) Quelles variétés et semences pour des agricultures paysannes durables? INRA, Paris, pp 29–51

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brousseau E, Foray D (1997) Une introduction à l’analyse économique de la propriété intellectuelle. Working Papers, IMRI 97/03, Paris

  11. Chandler AD (1977) The visible hand: the managerial revolution in American business. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chandler AD (1990) Scale and scope: the dynamics of industrial capitalism. MIT Press, Cambridge MA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chesbrough H (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chesbrough H, Vanhaverbeke W, West J (2006) (eds.) Open innovation researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  15. Choi JP (2003) Patent pools and cross-licensing in the shadow of patent litigation, Michigan State University. Available at: <http://www.msu.edu>. Accessed 13 July 2004

  16. Clark J, Piccolo J, Stanton B, Tyson K (2000) Patent pools: a solution to the problem of access in biotech patents? USPTO. Available at: <http://www.uspto.gov>. Accessed 13 July 2004

  17. Coase RH (1937) The nature of the firm. Economica 16(4):386–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Coase RH (1960) The problem of the social cost. J Law Econ 3:1–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cohen W, Levinthal D (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q 35:128–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not)? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 7552

  21. Cohendet P, Llerena P (2005) A dual theory of the firm between transactions and competences: conceptual analysis and empirical considerations. Revue d’économie industrielle 110:175–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cohendet P, Kern F, Mehmanpazir B, Munier F (1999) ‘Knowledge coordination competence creation and integrated networks in globalised firms’. Camb J Econ 23:225–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dittrich K, Dusters G, de Man AP (2007) Strategic Repositioning by means of alliances networks: the case of IBM. Res Policy 36:1496–1511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Foray D (1990) Exploitation des externalités de réseau versus évolution des normes. Revue d’économie industrielle 51:113–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Foss N (1999) ‘Networks capabilities and competitive advantage’. Scandinavian J Manag 15:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fransman M (1994) Information, knowledge, vision and theories of the firm. Ind Corp Chang 3(3):713–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gaffard JL (2003) ‘Coordination, marché et organisation. Essai sur l’efficacité et la stabilité des économies de marché’. Revue de l’OFCE 85:235–270

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gallini NT (2002) The economics of patents: lessons from recent US patent reform. J Econ Perspect 16:131–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gallouj F (2002) Interactional innovation: a neoschumpeterian model. In: Sundbo J, Fuglang L (eds) Innovation as strategic reflexivity. Routledge, London, pp 29–56

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gooroochurn N, Hanley A (2007) A tale of two literatures: transaction costs and property rights in innovation outsourcing. Res Policy 36:1483–1495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hagedoorn J (2002) Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Res Policy 31:477–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hagedoorn J, Wang N (2010) Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external strategies? Unu-Merit, Working Papers Series 005. Available at: <http://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/wppdf/2010/wp2010-005.pdf>. Accessed 15 March 2010

  33. Hanel P (2006) Intellectual property rights business management practices: a survey of literature. Technovation 26:895–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hart O, Moore J (1988) ‘Property rights and the nature of the firm. J Political Econ 98(6):1119–1158

    Google Scholar 

  35. Jaffe B (2000) The US patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process. Res Policy 29:531–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour agency costs and ownership structure. J Fin Econ 3:305–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Joly PB, Hervieu B (2003) La marchandisation du vivant. Pour une mutualisation des recherches en génomique. Futuribles 292:5–29

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kapàs J (2008) Industrial revolutions and the evolution of the firm’s organization: an historical perspective. J Innov Econ 2:15–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kline SJ, Rosenberg N (1986) An overview of innovation. In: Landau R, Rosenberg N (eds) The positive sum strategy. National Academic Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  40. Langlois RN (2002) Modularity in technology and organization. J Econ Behav Org 49:19–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Laperche B (2006) Large corporations and technostructures in competition. In: Laperche B, Galbraith J, Uzunidis D (eds) Innovation, evolution and economic change: new ideas in the tradition of Galbraith. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 142–161

    Google Scholar 

  42. Laperche B (2007) Knowledge-capital and innovation in multinational corporations. Int J Technol Glob 3(1):24–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Laperche B, Uzunidis D, Von Tunzelmann N (2008) The genesis of innovation. Systemic linkages between knowledge and the market. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  44. Laperche B, Lefebvre G, Langlet D (2011) Innovation strategies of industrial groups in the global crisis: rationalization and new paths. Technol Forecast Soc (in press)

  45. Lévêque F, Menière Y (2004) The economics of patents and copyright. A primer for free. Berkeley Electronic Press. Available at: <http://www.cerna.ensmp.fr/PrimerForFree.htm>. Accessed 15 June 2005

  46. Levin R, Klevorick R, Nelson R, Winter S (1987) Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development: a review of evidence. Brook Papers Econ Activity 18:783–932

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Malerba F (2006) Innovation and the evolution of industry. J Evol Econ 16:3–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Malone TW, Crowston K (1994) The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Comput Surv 26(1):87–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Michalet CA (2007) Dynamique des formes de délocalisation et gouvernance des firmes et des Etats. Rev Fr Gest 177(8):141–148

    Google Scholar 

  50. Milgrom P, Roberts J (1988) Communication and inventory as substitutes in organizing production. Scand J Econ 90(3):275–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mowery DC, Nelson R, Sampat BN, Ziedonis A (2001) The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh Dole Act of 1980. Res Policy 30:99–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Nelson R, Winter SG (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Belknap Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  53. O’Donoghue T, Scotchmer S, Thisse JF (1998) Patent breadth, patent life and the pace of technological progress. J Econ Manag Strateg 2(1):1–32

    Google Scholar 

  54. OECD (2003) Science, technology and industry Scoreboard 2003. OECD, Paris

  55. OECD (2008a) Open innovation in global networks. OECD, Paris

  56. OECD (2008b) Working paper on biotechnology. Task force on biotechnology for sustainable industrial development globalisation of industrial biotechnology R&D, DSTI/STP.BIO 13. OECD, Paris

  57. Penin J (2005) Patents versus ex post rewards: a new look. Res Policy 34:641–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Penrose ET (1959) The theory of the growth of the firm. Blackwell, Oxford, reprinted in 1968

    Google Scholar 

  59. Porter ME (1990) The competitive advantage of nations. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  60. Richardson GB (1972) The organisation of industry. Econ J 82:883–896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Rosenberg N (1990) Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)? Res Policy 19:165–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Schumpeter JA (1911) The theory of economic development. edn 1983 Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick

  63. Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, socialism and democracy. edn 1950 Harper & Row, New York

  64. Scotchmer S (2004) Innovation and incentives. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  65. Sell SK (2003) Private power, public law. The globalization of intellectual property rights. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  66. Serfati C (2008) Financial dimensions of transnational corporations, global value chain and technological innovation. J Innov Econ 2:35–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Shapiro C (2001) Navigating the patent thicket: cross licensing patent pools and standard setting. In: Jaffe E et al (eds) Innovation policy and the economy, vol I. Cambridge, MIT Press, pp 119–150

    Google Scholar 

  68. Shapiro C (2003) Antitrust limits to patent settlements. RAND J Econ 34(2):391–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Shapiro C, Varian H (1998) Information rules: a strategic guide to the network economy. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  70. Sheehan, J Martinez, C & Guellec D (2004) Understanding business patenting and licensing: results of a survey in patents, innovation and economics performance. In: Proceedings of an OECD conference, OECD, Paris

  71. Stigler GJ (1966) The theory of the Price. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  72. Sturgeon T (2002) Modular production networks: a new American model of industrial organization. Ind Corp Chang 11(3):451–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 18(7):509–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Tidd J, Bessant J, Pavitt K (2005) Managing innovation. Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  75. UNCTAD (2005) World investment report Transnational corporations and the internationalization of R&D, United Nations, New York and Geneva

  76. Uzunidis D (2004) L’innovation et l’économie contemporaine. De Boeck, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  77. Uzunidis D, Boutillier S, Laperche B (1997) Le travail bradé. Economie et Innovation, L’Harmattan, Paris

  78. West J (2006) ‘Does appropriability enable or retard open innovation’. In: Chesbrough H, Vanhaverbeke W, West J (eds) Open innovation researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 109–133

    Google Scholar 

  79. Williamson OE (1975) Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  80. Williamson OE (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Unit on Industry and Innovation, ULCO, France/CLERSE UMR 8019, Université Lille Nord de France, France

    Blandine Laperche

  2. Research Network on Innovation, MRSH-Lab.RII, 21 quai de la Citadelle, 21 quai de la Citadelle, BP 35528, 59383, Dunkerque Cedex 1, France

    Blandine Laperche

Authors
  1. Blandine Laperche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Blandine Laperche.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Laperche, B. How to Coordinate the Networked Enterprise in a Context of Open Innovation? A New Function for Intellectual Property Rights. J Knowl Econ 3, 354–371 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-011-0052-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-011-0052-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation