Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Innovation, Recombination and Technological Proximity

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

Abstract

This article investigates the relation between recombinative capabilities, innovation and alliance strategies for 71 firms in the Information Communication Technologies (ICT) sector, through a panel data analysis. In particular, it explores the impact of two factors on innovation. The first is the recombinative capabilities of firms, which are measured by the breadth of their patents. The second is their alliance strategies, which are measured in terms of technological proximity with partners. The results reveal that recombinative capabilities increase innovative output. However, there is a limit to this positive effect. Beyond this limit, recombinative capabilities reduce innovation intensity. In other words, after a threshold, the wider is the breadth of the firm’s patents, the less is the number of them. This relationship also depends on the technological proximity with alliance partners. High recombinative capabilities are best complemented by technologically proximate alliance partners, who permit refinements in existing domains, without augmenting costs of variety management.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We collect also the technological fields of the firms (that are not necessarily included in our sample) involved in a strategic alliance with the firm in our sample.

  2. The mapping between IPC codes and 30 technology fields is based on the study by Fraunhofer Gessellschaft-ISI (Karlsrube), Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle (INPI-Paris) and Observatoire des Sciences et des Techniques (OST, Paris).

  3. As there are some missing variables in the measure of R&D expenditure, the sample is reduced to 245 observations.

  4. According to Estimation (2), \( \frac{\partial P}{\partial TechProx}=1.67-2.9\; TechProx+3.98\; recomb \)

References

  • Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. (2001). Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 197–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonelli, C. (2006). The business governance of localized knowledge: an information economics approach for the economics of knowledge. Industry and Innovation, 13(3), 227–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonelli, C., Krafft, J., & Quatrato, F. (2010). Recombinant knowledge and growth: the case of ICTs. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 21, 50–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora, A., & Gambardella, A. (1994). Evaluating technological information and utilizing it. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 24(1), 91–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, B. (2009). The nature of technology. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banbury, G., & Mitchell, W. (1995). The effect of introducing important incremental innovations on market share and business survival. Strategic Management Journal, 16(special issue), 161–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassala, G. (1988). The evolution of technology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1977). Heterogeneity and inequality. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32, 69–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresnahan, T. F., & Malerba, F. (1999). Industrial dynamics and the evolution of Firms’ and Nations’ competitive capabilities in the world computer industry. In: D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Sources of industrial leadership (pp. 79-132).

  • Cameron, C., & Trivedi, P. (2009). Microeconometrics using Stata. College Station, Texas: Stata.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnabuci, G., & Bruggeman, J. (2009). Knowledge specialization, knowledge brokerage and the uneven growth of technology domains. Social Forces, 88(2), 607–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2006). In search of complementarity in the innovation strategy: internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science, 52, 68–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cecere, G. (2009). VoIP diffusion among new entrants: a path dependent process. Industry and Innovation, 16(2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrocher, N., Malerba, F., & Montobbio, F. (2007). Schumpeterian patterns of innovative activity in the ICT field. Research Policy, 36, 418–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, R., & Jonard, N. (2009). Knowledge portfolios and the organization of innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 34, 320–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duysters, G., & Lokshin, B. (2011). Determinants of alliance portfolio complexity and its effect on innovative performance of companies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(4), 570–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. H., & Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: the toyota case. Strategic Management 21(3), p345, 23.

  • Fleming, L. (2002). Finding the organizational sources of technological breakthroughs: the story of Hewlett-Packard’s thermal ink-jet. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(5), 1059–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L., & Marx, M. (2006). Managing creativity in a small world. California Management Review, 48, 6–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galunic, D. C., & Rodan, S. (1998). Resource recombinations in the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 19(12), 1193–1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Vega, M. (2006). Does technological diversification promote innovation?: an empirical analysis for European firms. Research Policy, 35(2), 230–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilfillan, S. (1935). Inventing the ship. Chicago: Follett Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilsing, V., Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., & van de Oord, A. (2008). Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: technological distance, between centrality and density. Research Policy, 37, 1717–1731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gronbach, L. (1987). Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 414–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J., Hall, B., & Griliches, Z. (1984). Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents—R&D relationship. Econometrica, 52, 909–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E. (1994). Evolutionary trajectories in petroleum firm R&D. Management Science, 40(12), 1720–1747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, R., Tao, Q., & Santoro, M. (2010). Alliance portfolio diversity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 31(10), 1136–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and replication of new technology. Organization Science, 33, 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, D., & Miller, S. R. (2008). Alliance portfolio internationalization and firm performance organization. Science, 19(4), 623–646.

  • Lavie, D., & Rosenkopf, L. (2006). Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 797–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 4, 109–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, D., Kang, J., & Rosenkopf, L. (2011). Balance within and across domains: the performance implications of exploration and exploitation in alliances. Organization Science, 22(6), 1517–1538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Z., Yang, H., & Arya, B. (2010). Alliance partners and firm performance: resource complementarity and status association. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 921–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning, organization. Science, 2, 71–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. J., Fern, M. J., & Cardinal, L. B. (2007). The use of knowledge for technological innovation within diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 308–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Rosenberg, N. (1989). Technology and the pursuit of economic growth. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1998). Technological overlap and interfirm coordination: implications for the resource-based view of the firm. Research Policy, 27, 507–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1997). Social capital, intellectual capital and the creation of value in firms. Academy of Management Proceedings, 97, 35–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G. M., Gilsing, V. A., & van den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 367, 1016–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational learning and the locus of innovation networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, P. M., Vemuri, V. K., & Galvin, P. (2004) The changing technological profile of the leading ICT firms: evidence from US patent data, 1981-2000. Industry & Innovation, 11(4), 353–372.

  • Schilling, M. A. (2008). Understanding the alliance data. Strategic Management Journal, 30(3), 233–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmoch, U. (2008). Concept of a technology classification for country comparisons, Final Report.

  • Schoenmakers, W., & Duysters, G. (2006). Learning in strategic technology alliances. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 18, 245–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenmakers, W., & Duysters, G. (2010). The technological origins of radical inventions. Research Policy, 39(8), 1051–1059.

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. English translation published in 1934 as The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Srivastava, M. K., & Gnyawali, D. R. (2011). When do relational resources matter? Leveraging portfolio technological resources for breakthrough innovation. The Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 797–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinmuller, E. (2007). The economics of ICTs Building blocks and implications. In R. Mansell, C. Avgerou, & D. Quah (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of information and communication technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., & Podolny, M. (1996). Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 17(special issue), 21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2008). Optimal diversity increasing returns versus recombinant innovation. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 68(3–4), 565–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Ende, J., & Dolfsma, W. (2005). Technology-push, demand-pull and the shaping of the technological paradigms: patterns in the development of computing technology. Journal of Evolutionary Economic, 15, 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhaverbeke, W., Gilsing, V., Beerkens, B., & Duysters, G. (2009). The role of alliance network redundancy in the creation of core and non-core technologies. Journal of Management Studies, 46(2), 215–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincenti, W. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, M. L. (1998). Recombinant growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 331–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamakawa, Y., Yang, H., & Lin, Z. (2011). Exploration versus exploitation in alliance portfolio: performance implications of organizational, strategic, and environmental fit. Research Policy, 40(2), 287–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Telecom Ecole de Management, Institut Mines-TELECOM, 9, Rue Charles Fourier, 91000, Evry, France

    Grazia Cecere & Muge Ozman

  2. ADIS, Universite Paris-Sud, 54 Bouleard Desgranges, 92330, Sceaux, France

    Grazia Cecere

Authors
  1. Grazia Cecere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muge Ozman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muge Ozman.

Appendixes

Appendixes

Appendix 1

Table 4 Correlation matrix
Full size table

Appendix 2

Table 5 Poisson estimations and negative binomial estimations: dependent variable innovation capabilities
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cecere, G., Ozman, M. Innovation, Recombination and Technological Proximity. J Knowl Econ 5, 646–667 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0209-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0209-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation