Managing Licensing in a Market for Technology

References

• Aghion P, Tirole J. Formal and local authority in organizations. J. Political Econom. (1997) 105(1):1–29Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Howitt P, Violante G. General purpose technology and wage inequality. J. Econom. Growth (2002) 7(4):315–345Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, Silverman BS. R&D, organization structure and the development of corporate technological knowledge. Strategic Management J. (2004) 25(8–9):929–958Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Ceccagnoli M. Patent protection, complementary assets, and firms' incentives for technology licensing. Management Sci. (2006) 52(2):293–308Link, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Fosfuri A. Licensing the market for technology. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (2003) 52(2):277–295Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Gambardella A. The changing technology of technical change: General and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Res. Policy (1994) 23(5):523–532Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Belenzon S, Rios LA. The organization of R&D in American corporations: The determinants and consequences of decentralization. (2011) . NBER Working Paper w17013, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Arora A, Fosfuri A, Gambardella A. Markets for Technology: Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Athreye S, Cantwell J. Creating competition? Globalisation and the emergence of new technology producers. Res. Policy (2007) 36(2):209–226Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burns T, Stalker GM. The Management of Innovation (1961) (Tavistock, London) Google Scholar
• Cassiman B, Valentini G. Strategic organization of R&D: Basicness and openness. Strategic Organ. (2009) 7(1):43–73Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler AD. Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise (1962) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Cockburn I, Henderson R. The IPO survey on strategic management of intellectual property, November. (2003) . Intellectual Property Owners Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Cohen W, Levinthal D. Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Econom. J. (1989) 99(397):569–596Google Scholar
• Davis JL, Harrison SS. Edison in the Boardroom: How Leading Companies Realize Value from Their Intellectual Assets (2001) (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ) Google Scholar
• Dessein W, Garicano L, Gertner R. Organizing for synergies. Amer. Econom. J.: Microeconomics (2010) 2(4):77–114Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dewatripont M, Tirole J. Advocates. J. Political Econom. (1999) 107(1):1–39Crossref, Google Scholar
• Economist, The A market for ideas. (2005) October 20):48–51Google Scholar
• Fama E. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. J. Political Econom. (1980) 88(2):288–307Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farrell J, Gibbons R. Cheap talk can matter in bargaining. J. Econom. Theory (1989) 48(1):221–237Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fosfuri A. The licensing dilemma: Understanding the determinants of the rate of technology licensing. Strategic Management J. (2006) 27(12):1141–58Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foss NJ, Laursen K, Pedersen T. Linking customer interaction and innovation: The mediating role of new organizational practices. Organ. Sci. (2011) 22(4):980–999Link, Google Scholar
• Gallini NT. Deterrence through market sharing: A strategic incentive for licensing. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1984) 74(5):931–941Google Scholar
• Gallini NT, Wright BD. Technology transfer under asymmetric information. RAND J. Econom. (1990) 21(1):147–160Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gambardella A, Giuri P, Luzzi PA. The market for patents in Europe. Res. Policy (2007) 36(8):1163–1183Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Stern S. The product market and the market for “ideas”: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res. Policy (2003) 32(2):333–350Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoskisson R, Hitt M, Hill C. Managerial incentive and investment in R&D in large multiproduct firms. Organ. Sci. (1993) 4(2):325–241Link, Google Scholar
• Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) Confidential benchmarking survey of Intellectual Property Owners Association, March 2006. (2006) . Last accessed December 10, 2012, http://www.ipo.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Business_Issues&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=27365Google Scholar
• Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) 2009 IPO corporate IP management benchmarking survey, September 2009. (2009) . Last accessed December 10, 2012, http://www.ipo.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Business_Issues&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=27348Google Scholar
• Jensen M, Meckling W. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. J. Financial Econom. (1976) 3(4):360–395Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung T, Walsh J. Organizational paths of commercializing patented inventions: The effects of transactions costs, firm capabilities, and collaborative ties. (2011) . ICER Working paper 4/2011, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1824343Google Scholar
• Kamien MI, Tauman Y. Patent licensing: The inside story. Manchester School (2002) 70(1):7–15Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz R, Allen TJ. 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 (1982) 12(1):7–20Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kline D. Sharing the corporate crown jewels. Sloan Management Rev. (2003) 44(3):89–93Google Scholar
• Leiponen A, Helfat CE. Location, decentralization, and knowledge sources for innovation. Organ. Sci. (2011) 22(3):641–658Link, Google Scholar
• Lichtenthaler U. Organizing for external technology exploitation in diversified firms. J. Bus. Res. (2010) 63(11):1245–1253Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lichtenthaler U. The evolution of technology licensing management: Identifying five strategic approaches. R&D Management (2011) 41(2):173–189Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mookherjee D. Decentralization, hierarchies, and incentives: A mechanism design perspective. J. Econom. Literature (2006) 44:367–390Crossref, Google Scholar
• Palomeras N. An analysis of pure-revenue technology licensing. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2007) 16(4):971–994Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phelps M, Kline D. Burning the Ships: Intellectual Property and the Transformation of Microsoft (2009) (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ) Google Scholar
• Pikethly R. Intellectual property strategy in Japanese and UK companies: Patent licensing decisions and learning opportunities. Res. Policy (2001) 30(3):425–442Crossref, Google Scholar
• Radner R, Marschak J. Economic Theory of Teams (1972) (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT) Google Scholar
• Razgaitis R. U.S./Canadian licensing in 2003: Survey results. Les Nouvelles (2004) (December)139–151Google Scholar
• Riordan MH, Sappington DM. Information, incentives, and organizational mode. Quart. J. Econom. (1987) 102(2):243–264Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robbins CA, Reinsdorf M, Slaughter MJ. Measuring payments for the supply and use of intellectual property. International Trade in Services and Intangibles in the Era of Globalization (2009) (University of Chicago Press, Chicago) 139–174Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rockett K. Choosing the competition and patent licensing. RAND J. Econom. (1990) 21(1):161–171Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slater SF, Narver JC. Does competitive environment moderate market orientation-performance relationship? J. Marketing (1994) 58(1):46–55Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stern S. Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Sci. (2004) 50(6):835–853Link, Google Scholar
• Sterling J, Murray CD. Reaping value from intellectual property: DuPont's strategic approach achieves global growth. Strategy Leadership (2007) 35(1):36–42Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece D. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing, and public policy. Res. Policy (1986) 15(6):285–305Crossref, Google Scholar