Storm Clouds on the Horizon? New Entry Threats and R&D Investments in the U.S. IT Industry

References

• Abernathy WJ, Utterback JM (1978) Patterns of industrial innovation. Tech. Rev. 80(7):40–47.Google Scholar
• Abrahamson E (1991) Managerial fads and fashions: The diffusion and rejection of innovations. Acad. Management Rev. 16(3):586–612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P (2003) Empirical Estimates of the Relationship Between Product Market Competition and Innovation. Institutions, Innovation and Growth: Selected Economic Papers (Edward Elgar Publishing, Paris), 142–169.Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Howitt P (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60(2):323–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2005) Competition and innovation: An inverted-u relationship. Quart. J. Econom. 120(2):701–728.Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P, Prantl S (2009) The effects of entry on incumbent innovation and productivity. Rev. Econom. Statist. 91(1):20–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aizawa A (2003) An information-theoretic perspective of tf–idf measures. Inform. Processing Management 39(1):45–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aral S, Van Alstyne M (2011) The diversity-bandwidth trade-off. Amer. J. Sociol. 117(1):90–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev. Econom. Stud. 58(2):277–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Fosfuri A, Gambardella A (2001) Markets for technology and their implications for corporate strategy. Indust. Corporate Change 10(2):419–451.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, Committee on Economic Growth of the Social Science Research Council, eds. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 609–626.Google Scholar
• Atanassov J (2013) Do hostile takeovers stifle innovation? Evidence from antitakeover legislation and corporate patenting. J. Finance 68(3):1097–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Audretsch DB, Mata J (1995) The post-entry performance of firms: Introduction. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 13(4):413–419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bardhan I, Krishnan V, Lin S (2013) Research note—business value of information technology: Testing the interaction effect of it and R&D on Tobin’s q. Inform. Systems Res. 24(4):1147–1161.Link, Google Scholar
• Becker-Blease JR (2011) Governance and innovation. J. Corporate Finance 17(4):947–958.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bikhchandani S, Hirshleifer D, Welch I (1998) Learning from the behavior of others: Conformity, fads, and informational cascades. J. Econom. Perspect. 2(3):151–170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bird S, Klein E, Loper E (2009) Natural Language Processing with Python (O'Reilly Media, Inc., Sebastopol, CA).Google Scholar
• Blonigen BA, Taylor CT (2000) R&D intensity and acquisitions in high-technology industries: Evidence from the U.S. electronic and electrical equipment industries. J. Indust. Econom. 48(1):47–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Bond S, Van Reenen J (2007) Uncertainty and investment dynamics. Rev. Econom. Stud. 74(2):391–415.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blundell R, Bond S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J. Econometrics 87(1):115–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blundell R, Griffith R, Van Reenen J (1999) Market share, market value and innovation in a panel of British manufacturing firms. Rev. Econom. Stud. 66(3):529–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brav A, Graham JR, Harvey CR, Michaely R (2005) Payout policy in the 21st century. J. Financial Econom. 77(3):483–527.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breschi S, Malerba F (1997) Sectoral Innovation Systems: Technological Regimes, Schumpeterian Dynamics, and Spatial Boundaries (Frances Pinter, London).Google Scholar
• Brown LD, Caylor ML (2006) Corporate governance and firm valuation. J. Accounting Public Policy 25(4):409–434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, McAfee A (2011) Race Against the Machine: How the Digital Revolution Is Accelerating Innovation, Driving Productivity, and Irreversibly Transforming Employment and the Economy (Digital Frontier Press, Lexington, MA).Google Scholar
• Bulan LT (2005) Real options, irreversible investment and firm uncertainty: New evidence from us firms. Rev. Financial Econom. 14(3):255–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caves RE, Porter ME (1977) From entry barriers to mobility barriers: Conjectural decisions and contrived deterrence to new competition. Quart. J. Econom. 91(2):241–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandy RK, Tellis GJ (2000) The incumbent’s curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. J. Marketing 64(3):1–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chemmanur TJ, Tian X (2018) Do antitakeover provisions spur corporate innovation? A regression discontinuity analysis. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 53(3):1163–1194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen M-J, Smith KG, Grimm CM (1992) Action characteristics as predictors of competitive responses. Management Sci. 38(3):439–455.Link, Google Scholar
• Cockburn IM, MacGarvie MJ (2011) Entry and patenting in the software industry. Management Sci. 57(5):915–933.Link, Google Scholar
• Cohen S, Hochberg Y (2014) Accelerating startups: The seed accelerator phenomenon. Working paper, University of Georgia, Athens.Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Colombo MG, Delmastro M (2002) How effective are technology incubators?: Evidence from Italy. Res. Policy 31(7):1103–1122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cornaggia J, Mao Y, Tian X, Wolfe B (2015) Does banking competition affect innovation? J. Financial Econom. 115(1):189–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Czarnitzki D, Toole AA (2011) Patent protection, market uncertainty, and R&D investment. Rev. Econom. Statist. 93(1):147–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Czarnitzki D, Toole AA (2013) The R&D investment–uncertainty relationship: Do strategic rivalry and firm size matter? Managerial Decision Econom. 34(1):15–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dasgupta P, Stiglitz J (1980) Industrial structure and the nature of innovative activity. Econom. J. 90(358):266–293.Google Scholar
• Dixit AK, Stiglitz JE (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. Amer. Econom. Rev. 67(3):297–308.Google Scholar
• Evans DS (2003) Some empirical aspects of multi-sided platform industries. Rev. Network Econom. 2(3):1–19.Google Scholar
• Fine CH (1998) Clockspeed: Winning Industry Control in the Age of Temporary Advantage (Perseus Books, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Fudenberg D, Tirole J (1984) The fat-cat effect, the puppy-dog ploy, and the lean and hungry look. Amer. Econom. Rev. 74(2):361–366.Google Scholar
• Gatignon H, Anderson E, Helsen K (1989) Competitive reactions to market entry: Explaining interfirm differences. J. Marketing Res. 26(1):44–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Geroski PA (1989) Entry, innovation and productivity growth. Rev. Econom. Statist. 71(4):572–578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghosal V, Loungani P (2000) The differential impact of uncertainty on investment in small and large businesses. Rev. Econom. Statist. 82(2):338–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Giarratana MS (2004) The birth of a new industry: Entry by start-ups and the drivers of firm growth: The case of encryption software. Res. Policy 33(5):787–806.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert RJ, Newbery DM (1982) Preemptive patenting and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 72(3):514–526.Google Scholar
• Gimeno J (2004) Competition within and between networks: The contingent effect of competitive embeddedness on alliance formation. Acad. Management J. 47(6):820–842.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gompers P, Lerner J (2001) The venture capital revolution. J. Econom. Perspect. 15(2):145–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goolsbee A, Syverson C (2008) How do incumbents respond to the threat of entry? Evidence from the major airlines. Quart. J. Econom. 123(4):1611–1633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Green JR, Scotchmer S (1995) On the division of profit in sequential innovation. RAND J. Econom. 26(1):20–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene WH (2003) Econometric Analysis (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Grossman GM, Helpman E (1991) Quality ladders in the theory of growth. Rev. Econom. Stud. 58(1):43–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gunther McGrath R, Nerkar A (2004) Real options reasoning and a new look at the R&D investment strategies of pharmaceutical firms. Strategic Management J. 25(1):1–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH (1988) The effect of takeover activity on corporate research and development. Auerbach AJ, ed. Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 69–100.Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Ham Ziedonis R, Hall BH (2001) The effects of strengthening patent rights on firms engaged in cumulative innovation: Insights from the semiconductor industry. Libecap GD, ed. Entrepreneurial Inputs and Outcomes: New Studies of Entrepreneurship in the United States, Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation & Economic Growth, vol. 13 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK), 133–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haupt R, Kloyer M, Lange M (2007) Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development. Res. Policy 36(3):387–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hecker DE (2005) High-technology employment: A NAICS-based update. Monthly Labor Rev. 128(7):57–72.Google Scholar
• Hiemstra D (2000) A probabilistic justification for using tf×idf term weighting in information retrieval. Internat. J. Digital Libraries 3(2):131–139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill CW, Rothaermel FT (2003) The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Acad. Management Rev. 28(2):257–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoberg G, Phillips G (2010) Product market synergies and competition in mergers and acquisitions: A text-based analysis. Rev. Financial Stud. 23(10):3773–3811.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoberg G, Phillips GM (2016) Text-based network industries and endogenous product differentiation. J. Political Econom. 124(5):1423–1465.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoberg G, Phillips G, Prabhala N (2014) Product market threats, payouts, and financial flexibility. J. Finance 69(1):293–324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu DH (2008) Technology-based entrepreneurship. Shane S, ed. Handbook of Technology and Innovation Management (Wiley, West Sussex, UK), 367–388.Google Scholar
• Huchzermeier A, Loch CH (2001) Project management under risk: Using the real options approach to evaluate flexibility in R&D. Management Sci. 47(1):85–101.Link, Google Scholar
• Jacquemin AP, Berry CH (1979) Entropy measure of diversification and corporate growth. J. Indust. Econom. 27(4):359–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jorgenson DW, Stiroh KJ (1999) Information technology and growth. Amer. Econom. Rev. 89(2):109–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jorgenson DW, Stiroh KJ, Gordon RJ, Sichel DE (2000) Raising the speed limit: U. S. economic growth in the information age. Brookings Papers Econom. Activity 31(1):125–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jovanovic B, MacDonald G (1994) The life-cycle of a competitive industry. J. Political Econom. 102(2):322–347.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan SN, Zingales L (1997) Do investment-cash flow sensitivities provide useful measures of financing constraints? Quart. J. Econom. 112(1):169–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz ML, Shapiro C (1985) Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. 75(3):424–440.Google Scholar
• Khessina OM, Carroll GR (2008) Product demography of de novo and de alio firms in the optical disk drive industry, 1983-1999. Organ. Sci. 19(1):25–38.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim K, Gopal A, Hoberg G (2016) Does product market competition drive cvc investment? Evidence from the U.S. IT industry. Inform. Systems Res. 27(2):259–281.Link, Google Scholar
• King JL, Gurbaxani V, Kraemer KL, McFarlan FW, Raman K, Yap C-S (1994) Institutional factors in information technology innovation. Inform. Systems Res. 5(2):139–169.Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S (1996) Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86(3):562–583.Google Scholar
• Klepper S, Simons KL (1997) Technological extinctions of industrial firms: An inquiry into their nature and causes. Indust. Corporate Change 6(2):379–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristiansen EG (1998) R&D in the presence of network externalities: Timing and compatibility. RAND J. Econom. 29(3):531–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuester S, Homburg C, Robertson TS (1999) Retaliatory behavior to new product entry. J. Marketing 63(4):90–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuratko DF, Menter M (2017) The role of public policy in fostering technology-based nascent entrepreneurship. Cunningham J, O'Kane C, eds. Technology-Based Nascent Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Advances in the Economics of Innovation and Technology (Palgrave Macmillan, New York), 19–52.Google Scholar
• Lanjouw JO, Schankerman M (2001) Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition. RAND J. Econom. 32(1):129–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lukach R, Kort PM, Plasmans J (2007) Optimal R&D investment strategies under the threat of new technology entry. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 25(1):103–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Markides C (2006) Disruptive innovation: In need of better theory. J. Product Innovation Management 23(1):19–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAfee A, Brynjolfsson E (2008) Investing in the it that makes a competitive difference. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(7/8):98–107.Google Scholar
• McGrath RG (1997) A real options logic for initiating technology positioning investments. Acad. Management Rev. 22(4):974–996.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mendelson H, Pillai RR (1998) Clockspeed and informational response: Evidence from the information technology industry. Inform. Systems Res. 9(4):415–433.Link, Google Scholar
• Mendelson H, Pillai RR (1999) Industry clockspeed: Measurement and operational implications. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 1(1):1–20.Link, Google Scholar
• Merges RP, Nelson RR (1990) On the complex economics of patent scope. Columbia Law Rev. 90(4):839–916.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell W, Singh K (1992) Incumbents’ use of pre-entry alliances before expansion into new technical subfields of an industry. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 18(3):347–372.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickell SJ (1996) Competition and corporate performance. J. Political Econom. 104(4):724–746.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Connor M, Rafferty M (2012) Corporate governance and innovation. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 47(2):397–413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oriani R, Sobrero M (2008) Uncertainty and the market valuation of R&D within a real options logic. Strategic Management J. 29(4):343–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pauwels C, Clarysse B, Wright M, Van Hove J (2016) Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation 50:13–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter ME (2008) The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(1):25–40.Google Scholar
• Reinganum JF (1983) Uncertain innovation and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 73(4):741–748.Google Scholar
• Rigby DK, Christensen CM, Johnson M (2002) Foundations for growth: How to identify and build disruptive new businesses. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 43(3):22–32.Google Scholar
• Roodman D (2009) How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system gmm in stata. Stata J. 9(1):86–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sambamurthy V, Bharadwaj A, Grover V (2003) Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Quart. 27(2):237–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sarasvathy SD (2001) Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad. Management Rev. 26(2):243–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Schwartz ES, Moon MA (2000) Evaluating Research and Development Investments (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Seamans RC (2013) Threat of entry, asymmetric information, and pricing. Strategic Management J. 34(4):426–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sebastiani F (2002) Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Comput. Surveys 34(1):1–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shapiro C, Varian HR (1999) The art of standards wars. Calif. Management Rev. 41(2):8–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spence AM (1977) Entry, capacity, investment and oligopolistic pricing. Bell J. Econom. 8(2):534–544.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srinivasan R, Lilien GL, Rangaswamy A (2004) First in, first out? The effects of network externalities on pioneer survival. J. Marketing 68(1):41–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tang J (2006) Competition and innovation behaviour. Res. Policy 35(1):68–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tata S, Patel JM (2007) Estimating the selectivity of tf-idf based cosine similarity predicates. ACM SIGMOD Record 36(2):7–12.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
• Tetlock PC (2011) All the news that’s fit to reprint: Do investors react to stale information? Rev. Financial Stud. 24(5):1481–1512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tetlock PC, Saar-Tsechansky M, Macskassy S (2008) More than words: Quantifying language to measure firms’ fundamentals. J. Finance 63(3):1437–1467.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Utterback J (1994) Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Wang Q, Chen Y, Xie J (2010) Survival in markets with network effects: Product compatibility and order-of-entry effects. J. Marketing 74(4):1–14.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weeds H (2002) Strategic delay in a real options model of R&D competition. Rev. Econom. Stud. 69(3):729–747.Crossref, 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
• Wooldridge JM (2010) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Zhu K, Kraemer KL, Gurbaxani V, Xu SX (2006) Migration to open-standard interorganizational systems: Network effects, switching costs, and path dependency. MIS Quart. 30(Special Issue):515–539.Crossref, Google Scholar