Skip to main content
Log in

Technological and Output Complementarities, and Inter-Firm Cooperation in Information Technology Ventures

  • Published:
Journal of Management and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Firms whose profiles of technologicalcompetence are complementary to one another are morelikely to enter into technology-based cooperativeagreements, and a broad level of technologicalcomplementarity is necessary for these agreements toextend as far as a mutual coordination of learningprocesses (combined research ventures). Using data onagreements between the world's largest firms in thearea of information technology (IT) and the patternsof technological specialization of these firms in theIT fields as revealed by their corporate patenting inthe US, we show that the technologicalco-specialization of firms helps to explain allianceformation, over and above the effects of anyco-specialization in IT products. While firms whosetechnological efforts are less complementary are lesslikely to cooperate for technology purposes, if theydo cooperate it is to exploit the differences in theirfields of expertise, and hence they are likely to usequasi-market organizational forms such as licensing,while the purpose of the alliance is restricted to anexchange of knowledge without any joint coordinationof learning (research). Instead, equity jointventures are likeliest when at a broad level ofaggregation the profiles of technologicalspecialization of partners are complementary, but ata more detailed level of disaggregation there is agreater distance between them, such that thecoordination of learning efforts is feasible, butrequires a stronger organizational commitment.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cainarca, G.C., M.G. Colombo and S. Mariotti: 1992, “Agreements between Firms and the Technological Life Cycle Model: Evidence from Information Technology”, Research Policy 21: 45–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A.: 1989, Technological Innovation and Multinational Corporations (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A.: 1991, “The Theory of Technological Competence and its Application to International Production”, in D.G. McFetridge (ed.), Foreign Investment, Technology and Economic Growth (Calgary: University of Calgary Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A.: 1993, “Corporate Technological Specialisation in International Industries”, in M.C. Casson and J. Creedy (eds.), Industrial Concentration and Economic Inequality: Essays in Honour of Peter Hart (Aldershot: Edward Elgar).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A.: 1994, “Introduction”, in J.A. Cantwell (ed.), Transnational Corporations and Innovatory Activities (London: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A. and M.P. Barrera: 1998, “The Localisation of Corporate Technological Trajectories in the Interwar Cartels: Cooperative Learning versus an Exchange of Knowledge”, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 6, Spring: 257–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A. and F.M. Fai: 1999, “Firms as the Source of Innovation and Growth: the Evolution of Technological Competence”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 9: 331–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J.A. and L. Piscitello: 2000, “Accumulating Technological Competence — Its Changing Impact on Corporate Diversification and Internationalisation”, Industrial and Corporate Change 9, forthcoming.

  • Chandler, A.D., P. Hagströ m and Ö . Sö lvell: (eds.): 1998, The Dynamic Firm: The Role of Technology, Strategy, Organization, and Regions (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W.M. and D.A. Levinthal: 1989, “Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D”, Economic Journal 99: 569–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W.M. and D.A. Levinthal: 1990, “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M.G.: 1995, “Firm Size and Cooperation: The Determinants of Cooperative Agreements in Information Technology Industries”, International Journal of the Economics of Business 2; 3–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M.G. (ed.): 1998, The Changing Boundaries of the Firm: Explaining Evolving Inter-Firm Relations (London and New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M.G. and P. Garrone: 1998, “A Simultaneous Equations Model of Technological Agreements and Inframural R&D”, in M.G. Colombo (ed.), The Changing Boundaries of the Firm (London and New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J.H.: 1995, “Reappraising the Eclectic Paradigm in an Age of Alliance Capitalism”, Journal of International Business Studies 26: 461–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J.H. and R.D. Pearce: 1985, The World's Largest Industrial Enterprises, 19621983 (Farnborough: Gower).

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N.J.: 1993, “The Theory of the Firm: Contractual and Competence Perspectives”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 3: 127–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C.: 1987, Technology Policy and Economic Performance (London: Frances Pinter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. and C. Perez: 1988, “Structural Crises of Adjustment, Business Cycles and Investment Behaviour”, in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R.R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L.L.G. Soete (eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory (London: Frances Pinter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Granstrand, O., P. Patel and K.L.R. Pavitt: 1997, “Multi-technology Corporations: Why They Have ‘Distributed’ Rather than ‘Distinctive Core’ Competencies”, California Management Review 39: 8–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granstrand, O. and S. Sjö lander: 1990, “Managing Innovation in Multi-technology Corporations”, Research Policy 19: 35–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R.M.: 1996, “Towards a Knowledge-based Theory of the Firm”, Strategic Management Journal 17 (Winter Special Issue): 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J.: 1993, “Understanding the Rationale of Strategic Technology Partnering: Interorganizational Modes of Cooperation and Sectoral Differences”, Strategic Management Journal 14: 371–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. and R. Narula: 1996, “Choosing Organizational Modes of Strategic Technology Partnering: International and Sectoral Differences”, Journal of International Business Studies 27: 265–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. and J. Schakenraad: 1990, “Inter-firm Partnerships and Cooperative Strategies in Core Technologies”, in C. Freeman and L.L.G. Soete (eds.), New Explorations in the Economics of Technological Change (London: Frances Pinter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. and J. Schakenraad: 1992, “Leading Companies and Networks of Strategic Alliances in Information Technologies”, Research Policy 21: 163–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G.: 1991, “Competition for Competence and Inter-partner Learning with International Strategic Alliances”, Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue, 12: 83–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G.M.: 1998, “Competence and Contract in the Theory of the Firm”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 35: 179–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loasby B.J.: 1991, Equilibrium and Evolution: An Exploration of Connecting Principles in Economics (Manchester University Press: Manchester).

    Google Scholar 

  • Loasby, B.J.: 1998, “The Organisation of Capabilities”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 35: 139–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D.C., J.E. Oxley and B.S. Silverman: 1996, “Strategic Alliances and Inter-firm Knowledge Transfer”, Strategic Management Journal 17: 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D.C., J.E. Oxley and B.S. Silverman: 1998, “Technological Overlap and Inter-firm Cooperation: Implications for the Resource-based View of the Firm”, Research Policy 27: 507–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D.C. and N. Rosenberg: 1989, Technology and the Pursuit of Economic Growth (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, M., J.M. Shaver and B. Yeung: 1996, “An Empirical Investigation of Joint Venture Dynamics: Evidence from US-Japan Joint Ventures”, International Journal of Industrial Organisation 14: 521–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R.R.: 1991, “Why Do Firms Differ, and How Does It Matter?”, Strategic Management Journal 12: 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, B.: 1999, “Innovation, Learning and Industrial Organization”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 23: 127–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, R.N. and C.C. Baughn: 1990, “Forms of Interorganizational Governance for Multinational Alliances”, Academy of Management Journal 33: 503–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, J.E.: 1997, “Appropriability Hazards and Governance in Strategic Alliances: A Transaction Cost Approach”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 13: 387–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P. and K.L.R. Pavitt: 1997, “The Technological Competences of the World's Largest Firms: Complex and Path-dependent, But not Much Variety”, Research Policy 26: 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K.L.R., M. Robson and J. Townsend: 1989, “Technological Accumulation, Diversification and Organisation in UK Companies, 1945–1983”, Management Science 35: 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G.P.: 1989, “Using Equity Participation to Support Exchange: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 5: 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, G.B.: 1972, “The Organization of Industry”, Economic Journal 82: 883–896.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachwald, F.: 1998, “Cooperative Agreements and the Theory of the Firm: Focusing on Barriers to Change”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 35: 203–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakakibara, M.: 1997a, “Evaluating Government-sponsored R&D Consortia in Japan: Who Benefits and How?”, Research Policy 26: 447–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakakikara, M.: 1997b, “Heterogeneity of Firm Capabilities and Cooperative Research and Development: An Empirical Examination of Motives”, Strategic Management Journal 18, special issue, summer: 143–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J., G. Pisano and A. Shuen: 1997, “Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management”, Strategic Management Journal 18: 537–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J., R. Rumelt, G. Dosi and S.G. Winter: 1994, “Understanding Corporate Coherence: Theory and Evidence”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 23: 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers, R.: 1997, “Internal R&D Expenditures and External Technology Sourcing”, Research Policy 26: 303–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O.E.: 1979, “Transaction Cost Economics: the Governance of Contractual Relations”, Journal of Law and Economics 22: 233–261.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cantwell, J., Colombo, M.G. Technological and Output Complementarities, and Inter-Firm Cooperation in Information Technology Ventures. Journal of Management & Governance 4, 117–147 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009909610368

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009909610368

Navigation