Advertisement

Small Business Economics

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 153–165 | Cite as

Leveraging Research and Development: Assessing the Impact of the U.S. Advanced Technology Program

  • Maryann P. Feldman
  • Maryellen R. Kelley
Article

Abstract

This paper examines the factors that affect a firm's chances of winning an award from the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and the subsequent impact of the award on a firm's success in raising additional funds for its research and development (R&D) activities. Analysis of data from a survey of 1998 ATP applicants shows that proposals with higher ratings by technical and business/economic experts have a greater chance of winning an award. Further, the projects and firms selected by ATP are more willing to share their research findings with other firms, and tend to be those that open up new pathways for innovation through combining technical areas or by forming new R&D partnerships. Most of the non-winners have not proceeded with any aspect of the R&D project proposed to ATP and, of those that have, most did so at a smaller scale. Furthermore, the ATP award has prestige value for the winning firms; the halo effect from the award increases the success of these firms in attracting additional funding from other sources. Our conclusion is that the ATP is leveraging activities that have a strong potential for broad-based economic benefit.

Keywords

Research Finding Advance Technology Economic Benefit Industrial Organization Great Chance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Advanced Technology Program Proposal Preparation Kit, 1999, U.S. Department of Commerce Advanced Technology Program National Institute of Standards and Technology.Google Scholar
  2. Cohen, Linda R. and Roger G. Noll, 1991, The Technology Pork Barrel, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, Wesley M. and Daniel A. Levinthal, 1990, 'Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation', Administrative Science Quarterly 35, 128-152.Google Scholar
  4. David Paul A., Bronwyn H. Hall and Andrew A. Toole, 2000, 'Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence', Research Policy 29(4-5), 497-529.Google Scholar
  5. Doz, Y., 1996, 'The Evolution of Cooperation in Strategic Alliances: Initial Conditions or Learning Processes?' Strategic Management Journal 17, 55-83.Google Scholar
  6. Feldman, Maryann P. and Maryellen R. Kelley, 2001, 'The Case for Government R&D Additionality: An Investigation of the Advanced Technology Program Selection Process'.Prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology. NISTIR 6577. January.Google Scholar
  7. Feldman, Maryann P., Maryellen R. Kelley, Joshua Schaff and Gabriel Farkas, 2000, 'Reinforcing Interactions between the Advanced Technology Program and State Technology Programs. Volume II: How The States Assist High-Tech Start-up Companies', Prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology. NISTIR 6523. June.Google Scholar
  8. Flamm, Kenneth, 1988, Creating the Computer: Government, Industry, and High Technology, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  9. Gittelman, Michelle and Bruce Kogut, 2000, 'Why Do Firms Publish Their Research (By Their Own Scientists?): Publication and Patenting by U.S. Biotechnology Firms'. Paper presented at the Western Economic Association meeting in Vancouver, BC, July 1.Google Scholar
  10. Griliches, Z., 1992, 'The Search for R&D Spillovers', Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94 (Supplement), 29-47.Google Scholar
  11. Guellec, D. and B. von Pottelsbughe, 2000, 'The Impact of Public R&D Expenditures in Business R&D'. Paper presented to NBER Summer Institute, July 25.Google Scholar
  12. Hagedoorn, John, Albert N. Link and Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2000, 'Research Partnerships', Research Policy 29(4-5), 567-586Google Scholar
  13. Hall, Bronwyn H., Albert N. Link and John T. Scott, forthcoming, Universities as Research Partners in ATP-Funded Projects. U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, National Institute for Standards and Technology.Google Scholar
  14. Hamel, G., 1991, 'Competition for Competence and Inter-Partner Learning Within International Strategic Alliances', Strategic Management Journal 12, 83-103.Google Scholar
  15. Harrigan, Kathryn R., 1988, 'Joint Ventures and Competitive Strategy', Strategic Management Journal 9, 141-158.Google Scholar
  16. Hill, Christopher T., 1998, 'The Advanced Technology Program: Opportunities for Advancement', in Lewis Branscomb and James Keller (eds.), Investing in Innovation: Creating a Research and Innovation Policy that Works, Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Inkpen, A. C., 1995, The Management of International Joint Ventures: An Organizational Learning Perspective, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Jaffe, Adam B., 1996, Economic Analysis of Research Spillovers: Implications for the Advanced Technology Program, U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, National Institute for Standards and Technology, GCR 97-708.Google Scholar
  19. Jovanovic, Boyan, 2000, 'Growth Theory', NBER Working Paper 7468.Google Scholar
  20. Kelley, Maryellen R., 1997, 'From Mission to Commercial Orientation: Perils and Possibilities for Federal Industrial Technology Policy', Economic Development Quarterly 11(4), 313-328.Google Scholar
  21. Khanna, T., R. Gulati and N. Nohria, 1998, 'The Dynamics of Learning Alliances: Competition, Cooperation, and Relative Scope', Strategic Management Journal 19(3), 193-210.Google Scholar
  22. Klette, Tor Jakob, Jarle Moen and Zvi Griliches, 2000, 'Do Subsidies to Commercial R&D Reduce Market Failures? Microeconomic Evaluation Studies', Research Policy 29(4-5), 471-495.Google Scholar
  23. Lerner, Josh, 1999, 'The Government as Venture Capitalist: The Long Run Impact of the SBIR Program', Journal of Business 72(3), 285-318.Google Scholar
  24. Liebeskind, Julia P., 1996, 'Knowledge, Strategy and the Theory of the Firm', Strategic Management Journal 17, 93-107.Google Scholar
  25. Liebeskind, Julia P., 1997, 'Keeping Organizational Secrets: Protective Institutional Mechanisms and their Costs', Industrial and Corporate Change 6(3), 623-663.Google Scholar
  26. Link, Albert N., David B. Audretsch, Maryann P. Feldman, John E. Jankowski, Donald Siegel, Paula Stephan, Gregory Tassey and Charles Wessner, forthcoming, 'The Economics of Science and Technology', The Journal of Technology Transfer.Google Scholar
  27. Morgenthaler, David, forthcoming, 'The Venture Capital Perspective', in Charles W. Wessner (ed.), The Advanced Technology Program: Assessing Outcomes, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  28. Mowery, David and Nathan Rosenberg, 1989, Technology and the Pursuit of Economic Growth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Narayanan, V. K., G. E. Pinches, J. M. Kelm and D. M.Lander, 2000, 'The Influence of Voluntarily Disclosed Qualitative Information', Strategic Management Journal 21, 707-722.Google Scholar
  30. National Research Council, 1996, Conflict and Cooperation in National Competition for High-Technology Industry, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  31. National Science Board, 1998, Science & Engineering Indicators-1998, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  32. Nelson, Richard R., 1990, 'Capitalism as an Engine of Progress', Research Policy 19(3), 193-214.Google Scholar
  33. Nelson, Richard R., 1992, 'What Is "Commercial" and What Is 'Public' about Technology, and What Should Be?', in Nathan Rosenberg, Ralph Landau and David Mowery (eds.), Technology and the Wealth of Nations, Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 57-71.Google Scholar
  34. Powell, Walter W., Kenneth W. Koput, and Laurel Smith-Doerr, 1996, 'Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology', Administrative Science Quarterly 41, 116-145.Google Scholar
  35. Sako, Mari, 1992, Prices, Quality and Trust: Inter-firm Relations in Britain & Japan, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Sako, Mari, 1994, 'Supplier Relationships and Innovation', in Mark Dodgson and Roy Rothwell (eds.), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation, Cheltenham, UK and Brookfield, MA: Elgar.Google Scholar
  37. Teece, David J., 1992, 'Competition, Cooperation and Innovation: Organizational Arrangements for Regimes of Rapid Technological Progress', Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 18, 1-25.Google Scholar
  38. Trajtenberg, Manuel, forthcoming, 'R&D Policy in Israel: An Overview and Reassessment', in M. P. Feldman and A. N. Link (eds.), Technology Policy for the Knowledge-Based Economy, Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 409-454.Google Scholar
  39. von Hippel, Eric, 1988, The Sources of Innovation, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Wallsten, Scott J., 1998, 'Rethinking the Small Business Innovation Research Program', in Lewis Branscomb and James Keller (eds.), Investing in Innovation: Creating a Research and Innovation Policy that Works, Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maryann P. Feldman
    • 1
  • Maryellen R. Kelley
    • 2
  1. 1.Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreU.S.A
  2. 2.Pamet Hill AssociatesWashingtonU.S.A

Personalised recommendations