Reconciling the Firm Size and Innovation Puzzle

References

• Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB (1987) Innovation, market structure, and firm size. Rev. Econom. Statist. 69(4):567–574.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB (1988) Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. Amer. Econom. Rev. 78(4):678–690.Google Scholar
• Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB (1990) Innovation and Small Firms (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allen TJ (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization, 2nd ed. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Almeida P (1999) Semiconductor startups and the exploration of new technological territory. Acs ZJ, ed. Are Small Firms Important? Their Role and Impact (Springer, Boston, MA), 39–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almeida P, Kogut B (1997) The exploration of technological diversity and the geographic localization of innovation. Small Bus. Econom. 9(1):21–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin WL, Scott JT (1987) Market Structure and Technological Change (Harwood Academic Publishers, Chur, Switzerland).Google Scholar
• Baumol WJ (2002) The Free-Market Innovation Machine, STU-Student edition (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Baumol WJ (2004) Entrepreneurial enterprises, large established firms and other components of the free-market growth machine. Small Bus. Econom. 23(1):9–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boroush M (2010) NSF Releases New Statistics on Business Innovation. InfoBrief NSF 11-300 (National Science Foundation, Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, Alexandria, VA).Google Scholar
• Braunerhjelm P, Ding D, Thulin P (2018) The knowledge spillover theory of intrapreneurship. Small Bus. Econom. 51(1):1–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coad A, Segarra A, Teruel M (2016) Innovation and firm growth: Does firm age play a role? Res. Policy 45(2):387–400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM (2010) Fifty years of empirical studies of innovative activity and performance. Hall B, Rosenberg N, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 129–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Klepper S (1996a) A reprise of size and R & D. Econom. J. (London) 106(437):925–951.Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Klepper S (1996b) Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. Rev. Econom. Statist. 78(2):232–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levin RC (1989) Empirical studies of innovation and market structure. Schmalensee R, Willig R, ed. Handbook of Industrial Organization (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 1059–1107.Google Scholar
• Cummings T, Knott AM (2018) Outside CEOs and innovation. Strategic Management J. 39(8):2095–2119.Google Scholar
• Duran P, Kammerlander N, Van Essen M, Zellweger T (2016) Doing more with less: Innovation input and output in family firms. Acad. Management J. 59(4):1224–1264.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eshima Y, Anderson BS (2017) Firm growth, adaptive capability, and entrepreneurial orientation. Strategic Management J. 38(3):770–779.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert R (2006) Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where are we in the competition–innovation debate? Innovation Policy Econom. 6:159–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griliches Z (1990) Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. J. Econom. Literature 28(4):1661–1707.Google Scholar
• Hall BH (1993) The stock market’s valuation of R&D investment during the 1980’s. Amer. Econom. Rev. 83(2):259–264.Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Mairesse J, Mohnen P (2010) Measuring the returns to R&D. Hall BH, Rosenberg N, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, vol. 2 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 1033–1082.Google Scholar
• Henderson R (1993) Underinvestment and incompetence as responses to radical innovation: Evidence from the photolithographic alignment equipment industry. RAND J. Econom. 24(2):248–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kamien MI, Schwartz NL (1982) Market Structure and Innovation (Cambridge University Press, London).Google Scholar
• Knott AM (2008) R&D/returns causality: Absorptive capacity or organizational IQ. Management Sci. 54(12):2054–2067.Link, Google Scholar
• Knott AM (2018) There's no good alternative to investing in R&D. Harvard Bus. Rev. (April 17), https://hbr.org/2018/04/theres-no-good-alternative-to-investing-in-rd.Google Scholar
• Knott AM, Vieregger C (2018) A Theory of R&D When Firms Differ (Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY).Google Scholar
• Levin RC, Klevorick AK, Nelson RR, Winter SG, Gilbert R, Griliches Z (1987) Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers Econom. Activity 1987(3):783–831.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Link AN (1982) An analysis of the composition of R&D spending. Southern Econom. J. 49(2):342–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu CC (2016) Brokerage by design: Formal structure, geography, and crosscutting ties. Working paper, Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto.Google Scholar
• Mansfield E (1981) Composition of R and D expenditures: Relationship to size of firm, concentration, and innovative output. Rev. Econom. Statist. 63(4):610–615.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR (1959) The simple economics of basic scientific research. J. Political Econom. 67(3):297–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Norbäck PJ, Persson L, Svensson R (2016) Creative destruction and productive preemptive acquisitions. J. Bus. Venturing 31(3):326–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pavitt K, Robson M, Townsend J (1987) The size distribution of innovating firms in the UK: 1945-1983. J. Indust. Econom. 35(3):297–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prusa TJ, Schmitz JA Jr (1991) Are new firms an important source of innovation? Econom. Lett. 35(3):339–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosen RJ (1991) Research and development with asymmetric firm sizes. RAND J. Econom. 22(3):411–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothwell R, Zegveld W (1982) Innovation and the Small and Medium Sized Firm (Pinter, London).Google Scholar
• Scherer FM (1991) Changing perspectives on the firm size problem. Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB, eds. Innovation and Technological Change: An International Comparison (Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York), 24–38.Google Scholar
• Scherer FM, Harhoff D (2000) Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes. Res. Policy 29(4):559–566.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scherer FM, Ross D (1990) Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 3rd ed. (Houghton Mifflin, Boston).Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Harper, New York).Google Scholar
• Shapiro G (2011) Comeback: How Innovation Will Restore the American Dream (Beaufort Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Stevens GA, Burley J (1997) 3,000 raw ideas = 1 commercial success! Res. Tech. Management 40(3):16–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (1968) Economies as an antitrust defense: The welfare tradeoffs. Amer. Econom. Rev. 58(1):18–36.Google Scholar
• Zenger TR (1994) Explaining organizational diseconomies of scale in R&D: Agency problems and the allocation of engineering talent, ideas, and effort by firm size. Management Sci. 40(6):708–729.Link, Google Scholar