Does Information Technology Improve Open Innovation Performance? An Examination of Manufacturers in Spain

References

• Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quart. 25(1):107–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allen TJ (1986) Organizational structure, information technology, and R&D productivity. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 33(4): 212–217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Artz KW, Norma PM, Hatfield DE, Cardinal LB (2010) A longitudinal study of the impact of R&D patents and product innovation on performance. J. Product Innovation Management 27(5):725–740.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banbury CM, Mitchell W (1995) The effect of introducing important incremental innovations on market share and business survival. Strategic Management J. 16(S1):161–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bardhan I, Krishnan V, Lin S (2013) Business value of information technology: Testing the interaction effect of IT and R&D on Tobin’s Q. Inform. System Res. 24(4):1147–1161.Link, Google Scholar
• Barge-Gil A, López A (2015) R versus D: Estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results. Indust. Corporate Change 24(1):93–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barge-Gil A, Nieto MJ, Santamaría L (2011) Hidden innovators: The role of non-R&D activities. Technol. Anal. Strategic Management 23(4):415–432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beneito P (2003) Choosing among alternative technological strategies: An empirical analysis of formal sources of innovation. Res. Policy 32(4):693–713.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beneito P (2006) The innovative performance of in-house and contracted R&D in terms of patents and utility models. Res. Policy 35(4):502–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berchicci L (2013) Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance. Res. Policy 42(1):117–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Van Reenen J (2002) Patents, real options and firm performance. Econom. J. 112(478):C97–C116.Google Scholar
• Blundell R, Griffith R, Van Reenen J (1995) Dynamic count data models of technological innovation. Econom. J. 105(429):333–344.Google Scholar
• Bönte W (2003) R&D and productivity: Internal vs. external R&D-evidence from West German manufacturing industries. Econom. Innovation New Technol. 12(4):343–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bound J, Cummins C, Griliches Z, Hall BH, Jaffe A (1984) Who does R&D and who patents? Griliches Z, ed. R&D, Patents, and Productivity (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 21–54.Google Scholar
• Branscomb L, Auerswald PE (2002) Between invention and innovation an analysis of funding for early-stage technology development. NIST GCR 02–841 Report, Economic Assessment Office, Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Hitt L (1993) Is information systems spending productive?: New evidence and new results. Proc. 14th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems, Orlando, FL, 47–64. http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis1993/43.Google Scholar
• Campa JM, Guillén M (1999) The internalization of exports: Ownership and location-specific factors in a middle-income country. Management Sci. 45(11):1463–1478.Link, Google Scholar
• Cassiman B, Veugelers R (2006) In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Sci. 52(1):68–82.Link, Google Scholar
• Cassiman B, Golovko E, Martínez-Ros E (2010) Innovation, exports and productivity. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 28(4):372–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cassiman B, Veugelers R, Zuniga P (2008) In search of performance effects of (in) direct industry science links. Indust. Corporate Change 17(4):611–646.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cesaroni F (2004) Technological outsourcing and product diversification: Do markets for technology affect firms’ strategies? Res. Policy 33(10):1547–1564.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chesbrough HW (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Clemons EK, Kimbrough S (1986) Information systems, telecommunications, and their effect on industrial organization. Proc. 7th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems, San Diego, CA, 99–108. http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis1986/27.Google Scholar
• Clemons EK, Row MC (1991) Sustaining IT advantage. The role of structural differences. MIS Quart. 15(3):275–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. firms patent (or not). Working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coxe S, West SG, Aiken LS (2013) Generalized linear models. The Oxford Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology: Statistical Analysis, Vol. 2 (Oxford University Press, New York), 26–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dahlander L, Gann DM (2010) How open is innovation? Res. Policy 39(6):699–709.Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Aveni RA, Battista G, Smith KG (2010) The age of temporary advantage. Strategic Management J. 31(13):1371–1385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dedrick J, Kraemer KL (2010) Impacts of internal and interorganizational information systems on the outsourcing of manufacturing. J. Strategic Inform. Systems 19(2):78–95.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Devinney TM (1993) How well do patents measure new product activity? Econom. Lett. 41(4):447–450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dewan S, Kraemer K (2000) Information technology and productivity: Evidence from country-level data. Management Sci. 46(4):548–562.Link, Google Scholar
• Dewan S, Min C-K (1997) The substitution of information technology for other factors of production: A firm level analysis. Management Sci. 43(12):1660–1675.Link, Google Scholar
• Dewan S, Michael SC, Min CH-K (1998) Firm characteristics and investments in information technology: Scale and scope effects. Inform. Systems Res. 9(3):219–232.Link, Google Scholar
• Di Minin A, Frattini F, Piccaluga A (2010) Fiat: Open innovation in a downturn (1993–2003). California Management Rev. 52(3): 131–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dodgson M, Gann D, Salter A (2006) The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: The case of Procter & Gamble. R&D Management 36(3):333–346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dos Santos BL, Zheng Z, Mookerjee VS, Chen H (2012) Are new IT-enabled investment opportunities diminishing for firms? Inform. Systems Res. 23(2):287–305.Link, Google Scholar
• Eurostat (2015) Annual enterprise statistics by size class. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database.Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Sorenson O (2003) Navigating the technology landscape of innovation. Sloan Management Rev. 44(2):15–23.Google Scholar
• Freeman C, Soete L (1997) The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd ed. (Routledge, London).Google Scholar
• Fuentelsaz L, Gómez J, Palomas S (2012) Production technologies and financial performance: The effect of uneven diffusion among competitors. Res. Policy 41(2):401–413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gómez J, Vargas P (2012) Intangible resources and technology adoption in manufacturing firms. Res. Policy 41(9):1607–1617.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene W (2008) Econometric Analysis, 6th ed. (Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Griliches Z (1981) Market value, R&D and patents. Econom. Lett. 7(2):183–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griliches Z, Hall BH, Pakes A (1981) R&D, patents and market value revisited: Is there a second technological opportunity factor? Econom. Innovation New Technol. 1(3):183–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grimpe C, Kaiser U (2010) Balancing internal and external knowledge acquisition: The gains and pains from R&D outsourcing. J. Management Stud. 47(8):1483–1509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta AK, Smith KG, Shalley CE (2006) The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Management J. 49(4):693–706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haans RF, Pieters C, He ZL (2016) Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research. Strategic Management J. 37(7):1177–1195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagedoorn J, Cloodt M (2003) Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Res. Policy 32(8):1365–1379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B, Griliches Z, Hausman JA (1986) Patents and R&D: Is there a lag? Internat. Econom. Rev. 27(2):265–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamm S (2007) Radical collaboration: Lessons from IBM’s innovation factory. BusinessWeek, 17–22. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2007-08-30/radical-collaborationbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice.Google Scholar
• Hausman JA, Hall B, Griliches Z (1984) Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship. Econometrica 52(4):909–938.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hemp P (2009) Death by information overload. Harvard Bus. Rev. 87(9):83–89.Google Scholar
• Henderson R, Cockburn I (1994) Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management J. 15(S1):63–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang C, Liu C (2005) Exploration for the relationship between innovation, IT and performance. J. Intellectual Capital 6(2):237–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joshi KD, Chi L, Datta A, Han S (2010) Changing the competitive landscape: Continuous innovation through IT-enabled knowledge capabilities. Inform. System Res. 21(3):472–495.Link, Google Scholar
• Katila R, Ahuja G (2002) Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1183–1194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz ML (1986) An analysis of cooperative research and development. RAND J. Econom. 17(4):527–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz R, Allen TJ (1982) Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups. R&D Management 12(1):7–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinknecht A, van Montfort K, Brouwer E (2002) The non-trivial choice between innovation indicators. Econom. Innovation New Technol. 11(2):109–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleis L, Chwelos P, Ramirez R, Cockburn I (2012) Information technology and intangible output: The impact of IT investment on innovation productivity. Inform. Systems Res. 23(1):42–59.Link, Google Scholar
• Laursen K, Salter A (2006) Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management J. 27(2):131–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Q, Maggitti PG, Smith KG, Tesluk PE, Katila R (2013) Top management attention to innovation: The role of search selection and intensity in new product introductions. Acad. Management J. 56(3):893–916.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lichtenberg F (1995) The output contributions of computer equipment and personnel: A firm-level analysis. J. Econom. Innovation New Technol. 3(3–4):201–217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lokshin B, Belderbos R, Carree M (2008) The productivity effects of internal and external R&D: Evidence from a dynamic panel data model. Oxford Bull. Econom. Statist. 70(3):399–413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maritan C, Peteraf M (2011) Building a bridge between resource acquisition and resource accumulation. J. Management 37(5): 1374–1389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Rust RT (2016) How information technology strategy and investments influence firm performance: Conjectures and empirical evidence. MIS Quart. 40(1):223–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Krishnan MS, Fornell C (2016) Information technology, customer satisfaction, and profit: Theory and evidence. Inform. Systems Res. 27(1):166–181.Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR (1959) The simple economics of basic scientific research. J. Political Econom. 67(3):297–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• OECD (2002) Frascati Manual: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development (OECD Publishing, Paris).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pakes A, Griliches Z (1984) Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first look. Griliches Z, ed. R&D, Patents, and Productivity (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 55–72.Google Scholar
• Palepu K (1985) Diversification strategy, profit performance and the entropy measure. Strategic Management J. 6(3):239–255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paruchuri S (2010) Intraorganizational networks, interorganizational networks, and the impact of central inventors: A longitudinal study of pharmaceutical firms. Organ. Sci. 21(1):63–80.Link, Google Scholar
• Powell TC, Dent-Micallef A (1997) Information technology as competitive advantage: The role of human, business, and technology resources. Strategic Management J. 18(5):375–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ragatz GL, Handfield RB, Scannell TV (1997) Success factors for integrating suppliers into new product development. J. Product Innovation Management 14(3):190–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ravichandran T, Han S, Mithas S (2017) Mitigating diminishing returns to R&D: The role of information technology in innovation. Inform. Systems Res. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
• Reinganum JF (1981) Market structure and the diffusion of new technology. Bell J. Econom. 12(2):618–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT, Alexandre MT (2009) Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Organ. Sci. 20(4):759–780.Link, Google Scholar
• Ruggles R (1998) The state of the notion: Knowledge management in practice. California Management Rev. 40(3):80–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salge TO, Farchi T, Barret MI, Dopson S (2013) When does search openness really matter? A contingency study of health-care innovation projects. J. Product Innovation Management 30(4): 659–676.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaver J (2011) The benefits of geographic sales diversification: How exporting facilitates capital investment. Strategic Management J. 32(10):1046–1060.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sieg JH, Wallin MW, Von Krogh G (2010) Managerial challenges in open innovation: A study of innovation intermediation in the chemical industry. R&D Management 40(3):281–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Solomon RM, Shaver JM (2005) Learning by exporting: New insights from examining firm innovation. J. Econom. Management Strategy 14(2):431–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece DJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15(6):285–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau Data (2015) County business patterns and economic census. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/susb.html.Google Scholar
• Wiggins RR, Ruefli TW (2005) Schumpeter’s ghost: Is hypercompetition making the best of times shorter? Strategic Management J. 26(10):887–911.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xue L, Ray G, Sambamurthy V (2012) Efficiency or innovation: How do industry environments moderate the effects of firms’ IT portfolios? MIS Quart. 36(2):509–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zahra SA, George G (2002) Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Acad. Management Rev. 27(2):185–203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou KZ, Li CB (2012) How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strategic Management J. 33(9):1090–1102.Crossref, Google Scholar