nach oben

Small Business Economics

Erschienen in:

21.07.2016

What do firms know? What do they produce? A new look at the relationship between patenting profiles and patterns of product diversification

verfasst von: Giovanni Dosi, Marco Grazzi, Daniele Moschella

Erschienen in: Small Business Economics | Ausgabe 2/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In this work, we analyze the relationship between the patterns of firm diversification, if any, across product lines and across bodies of innovative knowledge, proxied by the patent classes where the firm is present. Putting it more emphatically, we investigate the relationship between “what a firm does” and “what a firm knows.” Using a newly developed dataset matching information on patents and products at the firm level, we provide evidence concerning firms’ technological and product scope, their relationships, the size-scaling and coherence properties of diversification itself. Our analysis shows that typically firms are much more diversified in terms of products than in terms of technologies, with their main products more related to the exploitation of their innovative knowledge. The scaling properties show that the number of products and technologies increases log-linearly with firm size. And the directions of diversification themselves display coherence between neighboring activities also at relatively high degrees of diversification. These findings are well in tune with a capability-based theory of the firm.

Vorheriger Artikel Do micro start-ups fuel job creation? Cross-country evidence from the DynEmp Express database

Nächster Artikel ICT as facilitator of internationalisation in small- and medium-sized firms

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

On the limitations, but also the relevance of the use of patents as a proxy for innovation, see the critical review by Griliches (1990).

See, in particular, the evidence presented in Dernis et al. (2015) about the patenting strategies of world corporate top R&D investors across the five top intellectual property offices (IP5) which include, in addition to the USPTO and the EPO, the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) and the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of China (SIPO).

Notice that a single patent may be owned by more than one firm. In case of co-patenting, our analysis credits the patent to each co-patentee, as it is usually done in the literature (see, for example, Breschi et al. 2003).

Information on total turnover is available only in 2000 and 2003.

More on the dataset in Grazzi et al. (2013).

Notice that figures relative to more recent years are less reliable due to the time lag between a patent application and its grant.

See in particular the Schmoch et al. (2003) concordance table.

In what follows, we will assume that “products” and “technological fields” map one-to-one into each other (a 4-digit ISIC Rev.3 sector).

For a detailed description of the transaction level trade data and the product classification employed refer to Bernard et al. (2015).

We focus on exports to Extra-EU destinations for several reasons. Most importantly, firm-level exports to the EU are not recorded for all exporters and these criteria have changed over time.

See Hirsch and Lev (1971) and Kim et al. (1993) for empirical evidence on the negative relationship between firm diversification and sales volatility.

The matrix is calculated taking into account only firms which are active in at least two products (technological fields), and only products (technological fields) in which at least two firms are active. The resulting matrix is 136 × 136 in the case of products (taking into account 2571 firms) and 102 × 102 in the case of technological fields (taking into account 940 firms).

When making inference about skewed distributions, as for example distributions of firms across products or technological fields, P value is to be preferred to statistics-based inference, like the t-statistics used in Teece et al. (1994). The point is discussed at greater length in Bottazzi and Pirino (2010).

Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1987). Innovation, market structure and firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 69, 567–575.CrossRef

Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1990). Innovation and small firms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1994). R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336–340.CrossRef

Audretsch, D. B., & Vivarelli, M. (1996). Firms size and R&D spillovers: Evidence from Italy. Small Business Economics, 8(3), 249–258.CrossRef

Bernard, A. B., Grazzi, M., & Tomasi, C. (2015). Intermediaries in international trade: Products and destinations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(4), 916–920.CrossRef

Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., Redding, S. J., & Schott, P. K. (2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 105–130.CrossRef

Bottazzi, G., Dosi, G., Lippi, M., Pammolli, F., & Riccaboni, M. (2001). Innovation and corporate growth in the evolution of the drug industry. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19(7), 1161–1187.CrossRef

Bottazzi, G., & Pirino, D. (2010). Measuring industry relatedness and corporate coherence. In LEM papers series 2010/10, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.

Bottazzi, G., & Secchi, A. (2006). Gibrat’s law and diversification. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(5), 847–875.CrossRef

Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32(1), 69–87.CrossRef

Brouwer, E., & Kleinknecht, A. (1999). Innovative output, and a firm’s propensity to patent: An exploration of CIS micro data. Research Policy, 28(6), 615–624.CrossRef

Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Knowledge specialisation, organizational coupling and the boundaries of the firm: Why firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 597–621.CrossRef

Corradini, C., Demirel, P., & Battisti, G. (2016). Technological diversification within UK’s small serial innovators. Small Business Economics, 47(1), 163–177.CrossRef

Dernis, H., Dosso, M., Hervas, F., Millot, V., Squicciarini, M., & Vezzani, A. (2015). World Corporate Top R&D investors: Innovation and IP bundles. In JRC-IPTS working papers JRC94932, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Joint Research Centre.

Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3), 1120–1171.

Dosi, G., Faillo, M., & Marengo, L. (2008). Organizational capabilities, patterns of knowledge accumulation and governance structures in business firms: An introduction. Organization Studies, 29(8–9), 1165–1185.CrossRef

Dosi, G., Grazzi, M., & Moschella, D. (2015). Technology and costs in international competitiveness: From countries and sectors to firms. Research Policy, 44(10), 1795–1814.CrossRef

Dosi, G., Marengo, L., & Pasquali, C. (2010). How much should society fuel the greed of innovators? On the relations between appropriability, opportunities and rates of innovation. In R. Viale & H. Etzkowitz (Eds.), The capitalization of knowledge. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. (2000). Introduction. In G. Dosi, R. R. Nelson, & S. Winter (Eds.), The nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goldschlag, N., Lybbert, T. J., & Zolas, N. J. (2016). An algorithmic links with probabilities crosswalk for uspc and cpc patent classifications with an application towards industrial technology composition. In US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies paper no. CES-WP-16-15.

Grazzi, M., Sanzo, R., Secchi, A., & Zeli, A. (2013). The building process of a new integrated system of business micro-data 1989–2004. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 38(4), 291–324.

Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661–1707.

Hall, B. H., & Mairesse, J. (1995). Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms. Journal of Econometrics, 65(1), 263–293.CrossRef

Hirsch, S., & Lev, B. (1971). Sales stabilization through export diversification. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 53(3), 270–277.CrossRef

Kim, W. C., Hwang, P., & Burgers, W. P. (1993). Multinationals’ diversification and the risk-return trade-off. Strategic Management Journal, 14(4), 275–286.CrossRef

Lybbert, T. J., & Zolas, N. J. (2014). Getting patents and economic data to speak to each other: An algorithmic links with probabilities approach for joint analyses of patenting and economic activity. Research Policy, 43(3), 530–542.CrossRef

Miller, D. J. (2006). Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7), 601–619.CrossRef

Montgomery, C. A. (1994). Corporate diversification. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(3), 163–178.CrossRef

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

Nesta, L., & Saviotti, P. P. (2006). Firm knowledge and market value in biotechnology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(4), 625–652.CrossRef

Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1997). The technological competencies of the world’s largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy, 26(2), 141–156.CrossRef

Pavitt, K. (1998). Technologies, products and organization in the innovating firm: What Adam Smith tells us and Joseph Schumpeter doesn’t. Industrial and Corporate Change, 7(3), 433–452.CrossRef

Piscitello, L. (2000). Relatedness and coherence in technological and product diversification of the world’s largest firms. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 11(3), 295–315.CrossRef

Piscitello, L. (2004). Corporate diversification, coherence and economic performance. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(5), 757–787.CrossRef

Schmoch, U., Laville, F., Patel, P., & Frietsch, R. (2003). Linking technology areas to industrial sectors. DG research: Final report to the European commission.

Teece, D. J., Rumelt, R., Dosi, G., & Winter, S. (1994). Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 23(1), 1–30.CrossRef

Valvano, S., & Vannoni, D. (2003). Diversification strategies and corporate coherence evidence from Italian leading firms. Review of Industrial Organization, 23(1), 25–41.CrossRef

Wakelin, K. (1998). Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level. Research Policy, 26(7), 829–841.CrossRef

Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991–995.CrossRef

Titel: What do firms know? What do they produce? A new look at the relationship between patenting profiles and patterns of product diversification
verfasst von: Giovanni Dosi
Marco Grazzi
Daniele Moschella
Publikationsdatum: 21.07.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Small Business Economics / Ausgabe 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0921-898X
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0913
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9783-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2017

Risk, balanced skills and entrepreneurship

The private financial gains to entrepreneurship: Is it a good use of public money to encourage individuals to become entrepreneurs?

The impact of habitual entrepreneurial experience on new firm closure outcomes

Institutional determinants of university spin-off quantity and quality: a longitudinal, multilevel, cross-country study

R&D profitability: the role of risk and Knightian uncertainty

ICT as facilitator of internationalisation in small- and medium-sized firms

Premium Partner