Energizing Change: How Policies and Experience Drive Research and Development

References

• Agarwal R, Helfat CE (2009) Strategic renewal of organizations. Organ. Sci. 20(2):281–293.Link, Google Scholar
• Aggarwal VA, Posen HE, Workiewicz M (2017) Adaptive capacity to technological change: A microfoundational approach. Strategic Management J. 38(6):1212–1231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Katila R (2001) Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management J. 22(3):197–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ancona DG, Caldwell D (1990) Beyond boundary spanning: Managing external dependence in product development teams. J. High Tech. Management Res. 1(2):119–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson P, Tushman ML (1990) Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(4):604–633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aragòn-Correa JA, Marcus A, Vogel D (2020) The effects of mandatory and voluntary regulatory pressures on firms’ environmental strategies: A review and recommendations for future research. Acad. Management Ann. 14(1):339–365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Gambardella A (2010) The market for technology. Hall BH, Rosenberg N, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, vol. 1 (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 641–678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Belenzon S, Patacconi A (2018) The decline of science in corporate R&D. Strategic Management J. 39(1):3–32.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, Cunningham C, Cohen W (2025) Inventive capabilities in the division of innovative labor. Econom. Innovation New Technol. Forthcoming.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.Google Scholar
• Arora A, Cohen W, Lee H, Sebastian D (2023) Invention value, inventive capability and the large firm advantage. Res. Policy 52(1):104650.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashford NA, Heaton GR (1983) Regulation and technological innovation in the chemical industry. Law Contemporary Problems 46(3):109–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balasubramanian N (2011) New plant venture performance differences among incumbent, diversifying, and entrepreneurial firms: The impact of industry learning intensity. Management Sci. 57(3):549–565.Link, Google Scholar
• Barbose G (2021) U.S. Renewables Portfolio Standards 2021 Status Update: Early Release (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bayus BL, Agarwal R (2007) The role of pre-entry experience, entry timing, and product technology strategies in explaining firm survival. Management Sci. 53(12):1887–1902.Link, Google Scholar
• Becker RA (2005) Air pollution abatement costs under the Clean Air Act: Evidence from the PACE survey. J. Environ. Econom. Management 50(1):144–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bennear LS (2007) Are management-based regulations effective? Evidence from state pollution prevention programs. J. Policy Anal. Management 26(2):327–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ, Ranganathan R (2012) Offsetting illegitimacy? How pressures from securities analysts influence incumbents in the face of new technologies. Acad. Management J. 55(1):213–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berchicci L (2013) Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance. Res. Policy 42(1):117–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berchicci L, Dutt N, Mitchell W (2019) Knowledge sources and operational problems: Less now, more later. Organ. Sci. 30(5):1030–1053.Link, Google Scholar
• Berry H, Kaul A, Lee N (2021) Follow the smoke: The pollution haven effect on global sourcing. Strategic Management J. 42(13):2420–2450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bird L, Bolinger M, Gagliano T, Wiser R, Brown M, Parsons B (2005) Policies and market factors driving wind power development in the United States. Energy Policy 33(11):1397–1407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blind K (2016) The impact of regulation on innovation. Edler J, Cunningham P, Gk A, Shapira P, eds. Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK), 450–482.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borenstein S, Bushnell J (2015) The US electricity industry after 20 years of restructuring. Annual Rev. Econom. 7(1):437–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bound J, Jaeger DA, Baker RM (1995) Problems with instrumental variables estimation when the correlation between the instruments and the endogenous explanatory variable is weak. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 90(430):443–450.Google Scholar
• Capron L, Mitchell W (2004) Where firms change: Internal development versus external capability sourcing in the global telecommunications industry. Eur. Management Rev. 1(2):157–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capron L, Mitchell W (2009) Selection capability: How capability gaps and internal social frictions affect internal and external strategic renewal. Organ. Sci. 20(2):294–312.Link, Google Scholar
• Carley S (2009) Distributed generation: An empirical analysis of primary motivators. Energy Policy 37(5):1648–1659.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carley S, Miller CJ (2012) Regulatory stringency and policy drivers: A reassessment of renewable portfolio standards. Policy Stud. J. 40(4):730–756.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carley S, Davies LL, Spence DB, Zirogiannis N (2018) Empirical evaluation of the stringency and design of renewable portfolio standards. Nature Energy 3(9):754–763.Crossref, 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
• Cecere G, Corrocher N (2016) Stringency of regulation and innovation in waste management: An empirical analysis on EU countries. Indust. Innovation 23(7):625–646.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cette G, Lopez J, Mairesse J (2018) Labour market regulations and capital intensity. Campos NF, De Grauwe P, Ji Y, eds. The Political Economy of Structural Reforms in Europe (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 181–188.Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK, Fabrizio KR (2016) Does the market for ideas influence the rate and direction of innovative activity? Evidence from the medical device industry. Strategic Management J. 37(3):447–465.Google Scholar
• Chen PL, Williams C, Agarwal R (2012) Growing pains: Pre-entry experience and the challenge of transition to incumbency. Strategic Management J. 33(3):252–276.Crossref, 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 No. 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Coley JS, Hess DJ (2012) Green energy laws and Republican legislators in the United States. Energy Policy 48:576–583.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Costello K (2016) A Primer on R&D in the Energy Utility Sector (National Regulatory Research Institute, Silver Spring, MD).Google Scholar
• Criscuolo P, Laursen K, Reichstein T, Salter A (2018) Winning combinations: Search strategies and innovativeness in the UK. Indust. Innovation 25(2):115–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dahlander L, O’Mahony S, Gann DM (2016) One foot in, one foot out: How does individuals’ external search breadth affect innovation outcomes? Strategic Management J. 37(2):280–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Damodaran A (2025) Useful data sets. Accessed June 10, 2025, https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/.Google Scholar
• Delmas MA, Montes-Sancho MJ (2011) U.S. state policies for renewable energy: Context and effectiveness. Energy Policy 39(5):2273–2288.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doshi AR, Dowell GWS, Toffel MW (2013) How firms respond to mandatory information disclosure. Strategic Management J. 34(10):1209–1231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dosi G (1982) Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Res. Policy 11(3):147–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutt N (2013) Identifying search space. Accessed July 23, 2025, https://www.proquest.com/docview/1353110653?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true.Google Scholar
• Dutt N (2022) Knowledge search and learning in sustainability practices. Italian J. Management 40(1):35–50.Google Scholar
• Dutt N, Joseph J (2019) Regulatory uncertainty, corporate structure, and strategic agendas: Evidence from the U.S. renewable electricity industry. Acad. Management J. 62(3):800–827.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutt N, Lawrence M (2022) Learning to manage breadth: Experience as repetition and adaptation. Organ. Sci. 33(4):1300–1318.Link, Google Scholar
• Dutt N, Mitchell W (2020) Searching for knowledge in response to proximate and remote problem sources: Evidence from the U.S. renewable electricity industry. Strategic Management J. 41(8):1412–1449.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eggers JP, Park KF (2018) Incumbent adaptation to technological change: The past, present, and future of research on heterogeneous incumbent response. Acad. Management Ann. 12(1):357–389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• EIA (2013) Electric Power Annual 2012 (U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• EIA (2017) Investor-Owned Utilities Served 72% of U.S. Electricity Customers in 2017—Today in Energy (U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Eklund J, Kapoor R (2019) Pursuing the new while sustaining the current: Incumbent strategies and firm value during the nascent period of industry change. Organ. Sci. 30(2):383–404.Link, Google Scholar
• Eklund J, Kapoor R (2022) Mind the gaps: How organization design shapes the sourcing of inventions. Organ. Sci. 33(4):1319–1339.Link, Google Scholar
• Escribano A, Fosfuri A, Tribó JA (2009) Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Res. Policy 38(1):96–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fabrizio KR (2009) Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation. Res. Policy 38(2):255–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fabrizio KR (2013) The effect of regulatory uncertainty on investment: Evidence from renewable energy generation. J. Law Econom. Organ. 29(4):765–798.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fey CF, Birkinshaw J (2005) External sources of knowledge, governance mode, and R&D performance. J. Management 31(4):597–621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischer C (2010) Renewable portfolio standards: When do they lower energy prices? Energy J. 31(1):101–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fremeth AR, Marcus AA (2011) Institutional void and stakeholder leadership: Implementing renewable energy standards in Minnesota. Burger J, ed. Stakeholders and Scientists (Springer, New York), 367–392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furr NR (2019) Product adaptation during new industry emergence: The role of start-up team preentry experience. Organ. Sci. 30(5):1076–1096.Link, Google Scholar
• Grimpe C, Kaiser U (2010) Balancing internal and external knowledge acquisition: The gains and pains from R&D outsourcing. J. Management Stud. 47(8):1483–1509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagedoorn J, Wang N (2012) Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies? Res. Policy 41(6):1072–1083.Google Scholar
• Helfat CE, Lieberman MB (2002) The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Indust. Corporate Change 11(4):725–760.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson RM, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):9–30.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
• Hoffmann VH, Trautmann T, Hamprecht J (2009) Regulatory uncertainty: A reason to postpone investments? Not necessarily. J. Management Stud. 46(7):1227–1253.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iacus SM, King G, Porro G (2012) Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Anal. 20:1–24.Google Scholar
• Jamasb T, Pollitt M (2008) Liberalisation and R&D in network industries: The case of the electricity industry. Res. Policy 37(6):995–1008.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S, Mitchell W (2000) Path-dependent and path-breaking change: Reconfiguring business resources following acquisitions in the U.S. medical sector, 1978–1995. Strategic Management J. 21(10–11):1061–1081.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R (2002) New product search over time: Past ideas in their prime? Acad. Management J. 45(5):995–1010.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaul A, Wu B (2016) A capabilities-based perspective on target selection in acquisitions. Strategic Management J. 37(7):1220–1239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim J, Kim Y, Flacher D (2012) R&D investment of electricity-generating firms following industry restructuring. Energy Policy 48:103–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King AA, Lenox MJ (2001) Who adopts management standards early? An examination of ISO 14001 certifications. Acad. Management Proc. 1:1–6.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King AA, Tucci CL (2002) Incumbent entry into new market niches: The role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Management Sci. 48(2):171–186.Link, Google Scholar
• Klueter T, Ghosh A, Rosenkopf L (2025) Not in-sourced here! When does external technology sourcing yield familiar versus novel solutions? Strategic Management J. 46(2):275–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laursen K, Salter A (2006) Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management J. 27(2):131–150.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
• Lopes-Bento C, Simeth M (2024) Research versus development, external knowledge, and firm innovation. J. Product Innovation Management 41(4):768–792.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lyon TP, Yin H (2010) Why do states adopt renewable portfolio standards? An empirical investigation. Energy J. 31(3):133–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Majumdar SK, Marcus AA (2001) Rules versus discretion: The productivity consequences of flexible regulation. Acad. Management J. 44(1):170–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Margolis RM, Kammen DM (1999) Evidence of under-investment in energy R&D in the United States and the impact of federal policy. Energy Policy 27(10):575–584.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCright AM, Xiao C, Dunlap RE (2014) Political polarization on support for government spending on environmental protection in the USA, 1974–2012. Soc. Sci. Res. 48:251–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGrew JH (2009) FERC: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (American Bar Association, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Menz FC (2005) Green electricity policies in the United States: Case study. Energy Policy 33(18):2398–2410.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
• Moeen M (2017) Entry into nascent industries: Disentangling a firm’s capability portfolio at the time of investment versus market entry. Strategic Management J. 38(10):1986–2004.Crossref, 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
• Nerkar A, Roberts PW (2004) Technological and product-market experience and the success of new product introductions in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management J. 25(8–9):779–799.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nigam A, Huising R, Golden B (2016) Explaining the selection of routines for change during organizational search. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(4):551–583.Crossref, Google Scholar
• NSF (2022) Research and development: U.S. trends and international comparisons. Accessed June 10, 2025, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20225/u-s-business-r-d.Google Scholar
• Parmigiani A (2007) Why do firms both make and buy? An investigation of concurrent sourcing. Strategic Management J. 28:285–311.Google Scholar
• Parmigiani A, Howard-Grenville J (2011) Routines revisited: Exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Acad. Management Ann. 5(1):413–453.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pavitt K (2003) Innovating routines in the business firm: What matters, what’s staying the same, and what’s changing? Metcalfe JS, Cantner U, eds. Change, Transformation and Development (Physica-Verlag HD, Heidelberg, Germany), 183–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pechman C (2022) Regulation and electric utility industry monopoly status focus of NRRI paper. Report, NARUC, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Polidoro F Jr, Lampert CM, Kim M (2022) External knowledge sourcing, knowledge spillovers, and internal collaboration: The effects of intrafirm linkages on firm-university co-authorship linkages. Strategic Management J. 43(13):2742–2776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rockart SF, Dutt N (2015) The rate and potential of capability development trajectories. Strategic Management J. 36(1):53–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sampson RC (2005) Experience effects and collaborative returns in R&D alliances. Strategic Management J. 26(11):1009–1031.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanyal P, Cohen LR (2009) Powering progress: Restructuring, competition, and R&D in the U.S. electric utility industry. Energy J. 30(2):41–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmalensee R, Stavins RN (2019) Policy evolution under the Clean Air Act. J. Econom. Perspect. 33(4):27–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Semadeni M, Withers MC, Trevis Certo S (2014) The perils of endogeneity and instrumental variables in strategy research: Understanding through simulations. Strategic Management J. 35(7):1070–1079.Google Scholar
• Sharma HC (2001) Role of pollution prevention in waste management/environmental restoration. Ghassemi A, ed. Handbook of Pollution Control and Waste Minimization (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sine WD, Haveman HA, Tolbert PS (2005) Risky business? Entrepreneurship in the new independent-power sector. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(2):200–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sohn E, Seamans R, Sands DB (2024) Technology adoption and innovation: The establishment of airmail and aviation innovation in the United States, 1918–1935. Strategic Management J. 45(1):3–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB, Stuart TE (2000) Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):81–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sosa L (2009) Application-specific R&D capabilities and the advantage of incumbents: Evidence from the anticancer drug market. Management Sci. 55(8):1409–1422.Link, Google Scholar
• Sterlacchini A (2012) Energy R&D in private and state-owned utilities: An analysis of the major world electric companies. Energy Policy 41:494–506.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ter Wal ALJ, Criscuolo P, Salter A (2017) Making a marriage of materials: The role of gatekeepers and shepherds in the absorption of external knowledge and innovation performance. Res. Policy 46(5):1039–1054.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tether BS, Tajar A (2008) Beyond industry–university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organisations and the public science-base. Res. Policy 37(6):1079–1095.Google Scholar
• Tripsas M, Gavetti G (2000) Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management J. 21:1147–1161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Utterback JM, Abernathy WJ (1975) A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega 3(6):639–656.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Veugelers R, Cassiman B (1999) Make and buy in innovation strategies: Evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Res. Policy 28(1):63–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wadhwa A, Bodas Freitas IM, Sarkar MB (2017) The paradox of openness and value protection strategies: Effect of extramural R&D on innovative performance. Organ. Sci. 28(5):873–893.Link, Google Scholar
• Wiser R, Namovicz C, Gielecki M, Smith R (2007) The experience with renewable portfolio standards in the United States. Electricity J. 20(4):8–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wolfolds SE, Siegel J (2019) Misaccounting for endogeneity: The peril of relying on the Heckman two-step method without a valid instrument. Strategic Management J. 40(3):432–462.Google Scholar
• Xu D, Zhou KZ, Du F (2019) Deviant versus aspirational risk taking: The effects of performance feedback on bribery expenditure and R&D intensity. Acad. Management J. 62(4):1226–1251.Google Scholar
• Yin H, Powers N (2010) Do state renewable portfolio standards promote in-state renewable generation? Energy Policy 38(2):1140–1149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yu W, Minniti M, Nason R (2019) Underperformance duration and innovative search: Evidence from the high-tech manufacturing industry. Strategic Management J. 40(5):836–861.Google Scholar
• Yuan B, Zhang Y (2020) Flexible environmental policy, technological innovation and sustainable development of China’s industry: The moderating effect of environment regulatory enforcement. J. Cleaner Production 243:118543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Gimeno J (2010) Earnings pressure and competitive behavior: Evidence from the U.S. electricity industry. Acad. Management J. 53(4):743–768.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao M (2006) Conducting R&D in countries with weak intellectual property rights protection. Management Sci. 52(8):1185–1199.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhao B, Ziedonis R (2020) State governments as financiers of technology startups: Evidence from Michigan’s R&D loan program. Res. Policy 49(4):103926.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zott C (2003) Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intraindustry differential firm performance: Insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management J. 24(2):97–125.Crossref, Google Scholar