The Circulation of Ideas in Firms and Markets

References

• Agarwal A., Cockburn I. The anchor tenant hypothesis: Exploring the role of large, local, R&D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2003) 21(9):1227–1253Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R., Echambadi R., Franco A., Sarkar M. B. Knowledge transfer through inheritance: Spin-out generation, growth, and survival. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(4):501–522Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P., Dewatripont M., Stein J. C. Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND J. Econom. (2008) 39(3):617–635Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almeida P. Knowledge sourcing by foreign multinationals: Patent citation analysis in the U.S. semiconductor industry. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(Winter Special Issue):155–165Google Scholar
• Anton J., Yao D. Expropriation and inventions. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1994) 84(1):190–209Google Scholar
• Anton J., Yao D. The sale of ideas: Strategic disclosure, property rights and contracting. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2002) 69(3):513–531Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K., Nelson R. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for inventions. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (1962) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 609–625Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P. Capturing knowledge across and within firm boundaries: Evidence from clinical development. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2004) 94(5):1591–1612Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baccara M., Razin R. Bargaining over new ideas: Rent distribution and stability of innovative firms. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. (2007) 5(6):1095–1129Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagley C., Dauchy C.The Entrepreneur's Guide to Business Law (2008) 3rd ed.(West/Thomson Learning, Albany, NY) Google Scholar
• Bartlett C. A., Mohammed A. 3M: Profile of an innovating company. (1995) . HBS Case Study 9-395-016, Harvard Business School, BostonGoogle Scholar
• Biais B., Perotti E. Entrepreneurs and new ideas. RAND J. Econom. (2008) 39(4):1105–1125Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boldrin M., Levine D. K.Against Intellectual Monopoly (2008) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Branstetter L. Is foreign direct investment a channel of knowledge spillovers? Evidence from Japan's FDI in the United States. J. Internat. Econom. (2006) 68(2):325–344Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bresnahan T., Gambardella A., Saxenian A. Old economy inputs for new economy outputs: Cluster formation in the new silicon valleys. Indust. Corporate Change (2001) 10(4):835–860Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cassiman B., Ueda M. Optimal project rejection and new firm start-ups. Management Sci. (2006) 52(2):262–275Link, Google Scholar
• Chou E. The boundaries of firms as information barriers. RAND J. Econom. (2007) 38(2):733–746Google Scholar
• Coase R. The nature of the firm. Economica (1937) 4(16):386–405Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cyert R. M., March J. G.A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (1963) (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Economist, The Google's corporate culture: Creative tension. (2009) September 17):74–75Google Scholar
• Gallini N., Scotchmer S., Jaffee A., Lerner J., Stern S. Intellectual property: When is it the best incentive system? Innovation Policy and the Economy (2002) 2(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) 51–77Chap. 2Google Scholar
• Gans J., Stern S. The product market and the market for “ideas”: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res. Policy (2003) 32(2):333–350Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L. Hierarchies and the organization of knowledge in production. J. Political Econom. (2000) 108(5):874–904Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilson R. The legal infrastructure of high technology industrial districts: Silicon valley, route 128, and covenants not to compete. New York Univ. Law Rev. (1999) 74(3):575–629Google Scholar
• Gompers P., Lerner J., Scharfstein D. Entrepreneurial spawning: Public corporations and the genesis of new ventures: 1986–1999. J. Finance (2005) 60(2):577–614Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grant R. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(Winter Special Issue):109–122Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hellmann T. When do employees become entrepreneurs? Management Sci. (2007) 53(6):919–933Link, Google Scholar
• Hellmann T., Perotti E. The circulation of ideas in firms and markets. (2011) . NBER Working Paper 16943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Hsu D. Venture capitalists and cooperative start-up commercialization strategy. Management Sci. (2006) 52(2):204–219Link, Google Scholar
• Hyde A. Silicon valley's high-velocity labor market. J. Appl. Corporate Finance (1998) 11(2):28–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaffe A., Lerner J.Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System Is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do About It (2004) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Sleeper S. Entry by spin-offs. Management Sci. (2005) 51(8):1291–1306Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Thompson P. Disagreements and intra-industry spinoffs. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2010) 28(5):526–538Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B., Zander U. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. (1992) 3(3):383–397Link, Google Scholar
• Kreps D., Alt J., Shepsle K. Corporate culture and economic theory. Rational Perspectives on Political Science (1986) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Google Scholar
• Lawrence P. R., Lorsch J. W.Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (1967) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) Google Scholar
• Lewis T., Yao D. Innovation, knowledge flow, and worker mobility. (2003) . Mimeo, Harvard Business School, BostonGoogle Scholar
• Liebeskind J. Knowledge, strategy and the theory of the firm strategic. Management J. (1996) 17(Winter Special Issue):93–107Google Scholar
• Liebeskind J. Keeping organizational secrets: Protective mechanisms and their costs. Indust. Corporate Change (1997) 6(3):623–663Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marx M., Strumsky D., Fleming L. Mobility, skills, and the Michigan non-compete experiment. Management Sci. (2009) 55(6):875–889Link, Google Scholar
• Porter M. E. Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1998) 76(6):77–90Google Scholar
• Rajan R., Zingales L. The firm as a dedicated hierarchy. Quart. J. Econom. (2001) 116(3):805–851Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N.Exploring the Black Box: Technology, Economics, and History (1994) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saxenian A. L.Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (1994) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Schumpeter J.Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (1926) (Duncker and Humbolt, Berlin) Google Scholar
• Schumpeter J.Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942) (George Allen and Unwin, London) Google Scholar
• Singh J. Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Sci. (2005) 51(5):756–770Link, Google Scholar
• Stephan P. E., Hall B. H., Rosenberg N. The economics of science. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation (2010) (North-Holland, Amsterdam) 217–273Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart T., Sorenson O. Liquidity events and the geographic distribution of entrepreneurial activity. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2003) 48(2):175–201Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart T., Hoang H., Hybels R. Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1999) 44(2):315–349Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece D. J. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing, and public policy. Res. Policy (1986) 15(6):285–305Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weitzman M. Recombinant growth. Quart. J. Econom. (1998) 113(2):331–360Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson O. E.Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (1975) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar