Mind the Gaps: How Organization Design Shapes the Sourcing of Inventions

References

• Adner R, Levinthal DA (2004) What is not a real option: Considering boundaries for the application of real options to business strategy. Acad. Management Rev. 29(1):74–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal P, Sanseau P, Cardon LR (2013) Novelty in the target landscape of the pharmaceutical industry. Nature Rev. Drug Discovery 12(8):575.Google Scholar
• Albert D (2018) Organizational module design and architectural inertia: Evidence from structural recombination in universal banking. Organ. Sci. 29(5):890–911.Link, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, Silverman BS (2004) R&D, organization structure, and the development of corporate technological knowledge. Strategic Management J. 25(89):929–958.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, Zenger TR (2012) Capabilities, transaction costs, and firm boundaries. Organ. Sci. 23(6):1643–1657.Link, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, Felin T, Foss N, Zenger T (2012) Organizational economics of capability and heterogeneity. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1213–1226.Link, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Gambardella A (1994) Evaluating technological information and utilizing it: Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 24(1):91–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Belenzon S, Rios LA (2014) Make, buy, organize: The interplay between research, external knowledge, and firm structure. Strategic Management J. 35(3):317–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Cohen WM, Walsh JP (2016) The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact. Res. Policy 45(6):1113–1128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Fosuri A, Gambarella A (2001) Markets for technology and their implications for corporate strategy. Indust. Corporate Change 10(2):419–451.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barczak G, Griffin A, Kahn KB (2009) Perspective: Trends and drivers of success in NPD practices: Results of the 2003 PDMA best practices study. J. Product Innovation Management 26(1):3–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baysinger B, Hoskisson RE (1989) Diversification strategy and R&D intensity in multiproduct firms. Acad. Management J. 32(2):310–332.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bidwell M (2010) Problems deciding: How the structure of make-or-buy decisions leads to transaction misalignment. Organ. Sci. 21(2):362–379.Link, Google Scholar
• Capron L, Mitchell W (2012) Build, Borrow, or Buy: Solving the Growth Dilemma (Harvard Business Press, Boston).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
• Chan T, Nickerson JA, Owan H (2007) Strategic management of R&D pipelines with cospecialized investments and technology markets. Management Sci. 53(4):667–682.Link, Google Scholar
• Chandy R, Hopstaken B, Narasimhan O, Prabhu J (2006) From invention to innovation: Conversion ability in product development. J. Marketing Res. 43(3):494–508.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and capacity. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conti R, Gambardella A, Mariani M (2013) Learning to be Edison: Inventors, organizations, and breakthrough inventions. Organ. Sci. 25(3):833–849.Link, Google Scholar
• Criscuolo P, Dahlander L, Grohsjean T, Salter A (2016) Evaluating novelty: The role of panels in the selection of R&D projects. Acad. Management J. 60(2):433–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deloitte (2017) External Innovation: How Biopharma Companies Are Bolstering R&D Pipelines Through Deal-Making (Deloitte Center for Health Solutions).Google Scholar
• DeSanctis G, Glass JT, Ensing IM (2002) Organizational designs for R&D. Acad. Management Executive 16(3):55–66.Google Scholar
• Eklund JC (2019) Great Idea, Now What? Three Essays Examining the Relationship Between Organization Design and Commercialization of Knowledge (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia).Google Scholar
• Fleming L (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Sci. 47(1):117–132.Link, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Sorenson O (2004) Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management J. 25(8–9):909–928.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galunic DC, Rodan S (1998) Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management J. 19(12):1193–1201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Stern S (2003) The product market and the market for “ideas”: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res. Policy 32(2):333–350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girod SJ, Whittington R (2015) Change escalation processes and complex adaptive systems: From incremental reconfigurations to discontinuous restructuring. Organ. Sci. 26(5):1520–1535.Link, Google Scholar
• Granger CW (1969) Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica 37(3):424–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge based theory of the firm. Strategic Management J. 17(S2):109–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR (2003) Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griffin A (1997) PDMA research on new product development practices: Updating trends and benchmarking best practices. J. Product Innovation Management 14(6):429–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grigoriou K, Rothaermel FT (2017) Organizing for knowledge generation: Internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing. Strategic Management J. 38(2):395–414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grönlund J, Sjödin DR, Frishammar J (2010) Open innovation and the stage-gate process: A revised model for new product development. California Management Rev. 52(3):106–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guadalupe M, Li HY, Wulf J (2014) Who lives in the C-suite? Organizational structure and the division of labor in top management. Management Sci. 60(4):824–844.Link, Google Scholar
• Haas MR, Hansen MT (2007) Different knowledge, different benefits: Toward a productivity perspective on knowledge sharing in organizations. Strategic Management J. 28(11):1133–1153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER patent citations data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.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
• Henderson R, Cockburn I (1996) Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J. Econom. 27(1):32–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoang H, Rothaermel FT (2010) Leveraging internal and external experience: Exploration, exploitation, and R&D project performance. Strategic Management J. 31(7):734–758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Homburg C, Bucerius M (2006) Is speed of integration really a success factor of mergers and acquisitions? An analysis of the role of internal and external relatedness. Strategic Management J. 27(4):347–367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iacus SM, King G, Porro G (2011) Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Anal. 20(1):1–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaruzelski B, Staack V, Shinozaki A (2016) 2016 global innovation 1000 study: Software-as-a-catalyst Strategy & Business (October 25, 2016/Winter 2016/Issue 85).Google Scholar
• Kale P, Dyer JH, Singh H (2002) Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management J. 23(8):747–767.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kapoor R, Klueter T (2015) Decoding the adaptability-rigidity puzzle: Evidence from pharmaceutical incumbents’ pursuit of gene therapy and monoclonal antibodies. Acad. Management J. 58(4):1180–1207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kapoor R, Lim K (2007) The impact of acquisitions on the productivity of inventors at semiconductor firms: A synthesis of knowledge-based and incentive-based perspectives. Acad. Management J. 50(5):1133–1155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S (2006) Modularity in organizational structure: The reconfiguration of internally developed and acquired business units. Strategic Management J. 27(9):799–823.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S, Kaul A (2015) Structural recombination and innovation: Unlocking intraorganizational knowledge synergy through structural change. Organ. Sci. 26(2):439–455.Link, Google Scholar
• Kay N (1988) The R&D function: Corporate strategy and structure. Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Siverberg G, Soete C, eds. Technical Change and Economic Theory (Pinter, London), 283–294.Google Scholar
• Kim S, Anand J (2018) Knowledge complexity and the performance of inter‐unit knowledge replication structures. Strategic Management J. 39(7):1959–1989.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klingebiel R, Rammer C (2014) Resource allocation strategy for innovation portfolio management. Strategic Management J. 35(2):246–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klueter T (2013) Searching for Needles in a Haystack: Three Essays on the Role of R&D Partnerships in the Bio-Pharmaceutical Industry (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia).Google Scholar
• Klueter T, Monteiro LF, Dunlap DR (2017) Standard vs. partnership-embedded licensing: Attention and the relationship between licensing and product innovations. Res. Policy 46(9):1629–1643.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larsson R, Bengtsson L, Henriksson K, Sparks J (1998) The interorganizational learning dilemma: Collective knowledge development in strategic alliances. Organ. Sci. 9(3):285–305.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
• Lee J, Berente N (2012) Digital innovation and the division of innovative labor: Digital controls in the automotive industry. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1428–1447.Link, Google Scholar
• Leiponen A, Helfat CE (2010) Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth. Strategic Management J. 31(2):224–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Macher JT (2006) Technological development and the boundaries of the firm: A knowledge-based examination in semiconductor manufacturing. Management Sci. 52(6):826–843.Link, Google Scholar
• Macher JT, Boerner C (2012) Technological development at the boundaries of the firm: A knowledge‐based examination in drug development. Strategic Management J. 33(9):1016–1036.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mairesse J, Mohnen P (2004) The importance of R&D for innovation: a reassessment using French survey data. J. Tech. Transfer 30(1–2):183–197.Google Scholar
• Mayer KJ, Argyres NS (2004) Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal computer industry. Organ. Sci. 15(4):394–410.Link, Google Scholar
• Mikkola JH (2001) Portfolio management of R&D projects: Implications for innovation management. Technovation 21(7):423–435.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Monteiro F, Birkinshaw J (2017) The external knowledge sourcing process in multinational corporations. Strategic Management J. 38(2):342–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moreira S, Klueter TM, Tasselli S (2020) Competition, technology licensing-in, and innovation. Organ. Sci. 31(4):1012–1036.Link, Google Scholar
• Mowery DC, Oxley JE, Silverman BS (1996) Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management J. 17(S2):77–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nicholls‐Nixon CL, Woo CY (2003) Technology sourcing and output of established firms in a regime of encompassing technological change. Strategic Management J. 24(7):651–666.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nishimura J, Okada Y (2014) R&D portfolios and pharmaceutical licensing. Res. Policy 43(7):1250–1263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen MA (2009) Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(1):435–480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petrova E (2014) Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The process of drug discovery and development. Ding M, Eliashberg J, Stremersch S, eds. Pharmaceutical Industry Emerging Practices, Research, and Policies (Springer-Verlag, New York), 19–81.Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J, Sutton RI (1999) The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action (Harvard Business Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Pfrang P, Dealhoy K, Heller T, Shah S (2017) External Innovation: How Biopharma Companies Are Bolstering R&D Pipelines Through Deal-Making (Deloitte). https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/health-care/biopharma-companies-deals-research-development.html.Google Scholar
• Pisano GP (1990) The R&D boundaries of the firm: An empirical analysis. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):153–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pisano GP (1991) The governance of innovation: Vertical integration and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry. Res. Policy 20(3):237–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell WW, Koput KW, Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(1):116–145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prahalad CK, Hamel G (1990) The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Bus. Rev. (May–June):79–91.Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Alexy O, Reitzig M (2014) What’s “new” about new forms of organizing? Acad. Management Rev. 39(2):162–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reed WR (2015) On the practice of lagging variables to avoid simultaneity. Oxford Bull. Econom. Statist. 77(6):897–905.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Richard PJ, Devinney TM, Yip GS, Johnson G (2009) Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. J. Management 35(3):718–804.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
• Schuhmacher A, Gatto A, Hinder M, Kuss M, Gassmann O (2020) The upside of being a digital pharma player. Drug Discovery Today 25(9):1569–1574.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schweizer L (2005) Organizational integration of acquired biotechnology companies into pharmaceutical companies: The need for a hybrid approach. Acad. Management J. 48(6):1051–1074.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sengul M, Gimeno J (2013) Constrained delegation: Limiting subsidiaries’ decision rights and resources in firms that compete across multiple industries. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(3):420–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steensma HK, Corley KG (2000) On the performance of technology-sourcing partnerships: The interaction between partner interdependence and technology attributes. Acad. Management J. 43(6):1045–1067.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swinney DC, Anthony J (2011) How were new medicines discovered? Nature Rev. Drug Discovery 10(7):507–519.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Szulanski G (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management J. 17(S2):27–43.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
• Trichterborn A, Zu Knyphausen‐Aufseß D, Schweizer L (2016) How to improve acquisition performance: The role of a dedicated M&A function, M&A learning process, and M&A capability. Strategic Management J. 37(4):763–773.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van de Vrande V (2013) Balancing your technology‐sourcing portfolio: How sourcing mode diversity enhances innovative performance. Strategic Management J. 34(5):610–621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van de Vrande V, Lemmens C, Vanhaverbeke W (2006) Choosing governance modes for external technology sourcing. R&D Management 36(3):347–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vanhaverbeke W, Duysters G, Noorderhaven N (2002) External technology sourcing through alliances or acquisitions: An analysis of the application-specific integrated circuits industry. Organ. Sci. 13(6):714–733.Link, Google Scholar
• Vassolo RS, Anand J, Folta TB (2004) Non‐additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: A real options‐based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology. Strategic Management J. 25(11):1045–1061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weigelt C, Miller DJ (2013) Implications of internal organization structure for firm boundaries. Strategic Management J. 34(12):1411–1434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• West J, Bogers M (2014) Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. J. Product Innovation Management 31(4):814–831.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson O (1979) Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. J. Law Econom. 22(2):233–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson O (1985a) Contractual man. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism (Free Press, New York), 43–63.Google Scholar
• Williamson O (1985b) The governance of contractual relations. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism (Free Press, New York), 68–84.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
• Zenger TR, Hesterly WS (1997) The disaggregation of corporations: Selective intervention, high-powered incentives, and molecular units. Organ. Sci. 8(3):209–222.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Baden-Fuller C, Mangematin V (2007) Technological knowledge base, R&D organization structure and alliance formation: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical industry. Res. Policy 36(4):515–528.Crossref, Google Scholar