Elsevier

Research Policy

Volume 38, Issue 3, April 2009, Pages 518-526
Research Policy

External technology sourcing and innovation performance in LMT sectors: An analysis based on the Taiwanese Technological Innovation Survey

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.007Get rights and content

Abstract

This paper presents the strategies that low- and medium-technology (LMT) firms adopt to generate technological innovation and investigates the impact of these approaches on the firms’ innovation performances. These analyses are based on a sample from the Taiwanese Technological Innovation Survey totalling 753 LMT firms. The descriptive statistics show that about 95% of the firms acquired technology by technology licensing, while 32% of the firms engaged in R&D outsourcing. The firms in the sample acquiring external technological knowledge through collaboration with suppliers, clients, competitors, and research organizations are about 20%, 18%, 8%, and 23%, respectively. Using a moderated hierarchical regression analysis, this study reveals interesting results. First, inward technology licensing does not contribute significantly to innovation performance. Second, internal R&D investment negatively moderates the effect of R&D outsourcing on innovation performance. Third, internal R&D investment contingently impacts the different types of partners on innovation performance: by collaborating with different types of partners, firms with more internal R&D investment gain higher innovation returns than firms with fewer internal R&D activities. The results of this study contribute to a sharper understanding of technological innovation strategies and their effects on technological innovation performance in LMT sectors.

Introduction

With rapidly changing and complex technology, external technology acquisition has become an important component of a firm’s technology strategy and supports its competitive advantage and positioning (Zahra et al., 1994). By acquiring technologies from outside sources, firms can better cope with the increasing speed, cost, and complexity of technological developments (Vanhaverbeke et al., 2002). This practice can expand a firm’s technological capacity, thereby creating sustainable performance differentials with rivals (Henderson and Cockburn, 1996, Montoya et al., 2007). Many firms, even the largest companies, are relying more extensively on external sources in their innovation management practices. Given the increasing importance of innovation as a major organizational competitive weapon, numerous academic studies have examined the issues pertaining to technology acquisition and development.

Most existing literature on external technology sourcing concentrates on influential aspects of acquisition (e.g. Hemmert, 2004, Jones et al., 2001, Yoshikawa, 2003, Zahra et al., 2005) and on the choice between internal and external sourcing (e.g. Narula, 2001; Veugelers, 1997, Veugelers and Cassiman, 1999). Some research also investigates external technology sourcing–performance relationships (Ahuja and Katila, 2001, Jones et al., 2001, Tsai and Wang, 2007, Vanhaverbeke et al., 2002). The strategies of acquiring externally developed technology investigated in the literature include mergers and acquisitions (M&As), technology acquisition through licensing contracts (inward licensing) or technologies embodied in equipment, and some (formal or informal) cooperative modes of R&D. However, most studies consider these strategies to be isolated issues. In other words, external technology sourcing and external technology sourcing–performance relationships are often explored under a different acquisition strategy or a combination of acquisition strategies. Some research explores the effects of collaborative networks on technological activities (e.g. Belderbos et al., 2004a, Faems et al., 2005, Nieto and Santamaría, 2007), ignoring the role of internal R&D efforts. While these studies center on so-called high-tech industries (such as IC, biotechnology and electronics), little academic research to date in this field has focused on low- and medium-technology (LMT) sectors. Although these sectors are not characterized by rapidly changing technology, technology issues are still important within these industries because they comprise the bulk of economic activity in a country and innovation can also be a competitive advantage weapon in LMT sectors.

This study fills a gap in the literature by investigating how LMT firms manage their development activities to generate innovation and by examining the impacts of external technology acquisition approaches on firm innovation performance. For this second issue in particular, few studies simultaneously examine the relationships between various technology development strategies and innovation performance in a conceptual framework (Amara and Landry, 2005, Kessler et al., 2000), even though the influence of important external technological knowledge sources on innovation has been documented in earlier research (e.g. Grant, 1996, Zahra and Nielsen, 2002). Research tends to emphasize the role of internal research and development in the utilization of external technological knowledge (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990, Gambardella, 1992, Mowery et al., 1996); however, its moderating effect on the relationship between external technology sourcing and innovation performance is seldom examined. Investigating this topic is important because it is relevant to both established and start-up firms in which resource limitations constrain technology sourcing strategies.

To a firm, external technology acquisition means incorporating existing external technological knowledge. Organizational learning can also be viewed as the most important vehicle for knowledge accumulation and competence development (Drejer, 2000). Knowledge is the pivotal resource in the knowledge-based view of the firm (Foss, 1996, Grant, 1996). This study adopts the knowledge-based view to examine the external technology strategy–performance relationship for Taiwanese firms. Because the Taiwanese economy is predominantly comprised of SMEs, the Taiwanese Technological Innovation Survey (TTIS) database (which is described further in Section 3.2) is useful for this analysis. Furthermore, the results of this analysis can provide some insights on firms with limited resources, since extant research suggests that external technology issues are particularly relevant to these firms (e.g. Veugelers, 1997, Zahra, 1996).

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 addresses theoretical viewpoints and predictions. Section 3 introduces research methods, including the model, variable definitions and measurements, and the data adopted in this study. Section 4 reports results and offers some discussion, while Section 5 summarizes the results and discusses their implications for existing theoretical perspectives, managerial practice, and directions for future research.

Section snippets

Literature review and theoretical background

According to the knowledge-based view, a firm gains a competitive advantage by exploring, exploiting, and integrating different specialized knowledge areas through internal R&D activities and external technology sourcing (Grant, 1996). Focusing on in-house R&D activities allows a firm to develop its core technological capabilities and experience higher economic returns while allowing for better control and tacit knowledge understanding embedded in the development process (Chesbrough and Teece,

The model

Based on theoretical expectations regarding innovation performance and external technology sourcing, the following model is used in this paper to explain a firm’s technological innovation performance:INN=β0+j=1βjINDj+β8FS+β9HQ+β10CM+β11INR+β12OUR+β13ITL+β14CPS+β15CPc+β16CPm+β17CPR+β18INR×OUR+β19INR×ITL+β20INR×CPS+β21INR×CPc+β22INR×CPm+β23INR×CPR

The dependent variable INN is technological innovation performance. This study defines INN as a firms’ turnover attributable to technologically

Results

The models in this study are estimated by OLS-based hierarchical regression. Model 1 contains control variables including industry dummies (IND1–IND7), firm size, human quality, and a multinationality dummy (CM), followed by internal R&D investment (INR), R&D outsourcing (OUR), inward technology licensing, and the collaboration variables (CPS, CPC, CPM, and CPR) in Model 2. Model 3 adds interaction terms between external technology sourcing variables and an internal R&D investment variable.

Summary and implications

This study presents interesting findings based on a sample of LMT firms. First, although inward technology licensing has been widely adopted by LMT firms to acquire external technology, this strategy does not significantly enhance a firm’s innovation performance. Second, matching greater internal R&D investment with a lower level of R&D outsourcing contributes to a firm’s technological innovation performance. Third, the impact of different types of partners on technological innovation

References (84)

  • H. Lööf et al.

    Knowledge capital and performance heterogeneity: a firm level

    International Journal of Production Economics

    (2002)
  • F. Martin

    The economic impact of Canadian university R&D

    Research Policy

    (1998)
  • G.S. McMillan et al.

    An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology

    Research Policy

    (2000)
  • D.C. Mowery

    The relationship between intrafirm and contractual forms of industrial research in American manufacturing, 1900–1940

    Explorations in Economic History

    (1983)
  • M.J. Nieto et al.

    The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation

    Technovation

    (2007)
  • B. Tether

    Who co-operates for innovation, and why: an empirical analysis

    Research Policy

    (2002)
  • S. Ulset

    R&D outsourcing and contractual governance: an empirical study of commercial R&D projects

    Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

    (1996)
  • R. Veugelers

    Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing

    Research Policy

    (1997)
  • R. Veugelers et al.

    Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms

    Research Policy

    (1999)
  • O. Vuola et al.

    Mutually benefiting joint innovation process between industry and big-science

    Technovation

    (2006)
  • S.A. Zahra

    Technology strategy and financial performance: examining the moderating role of a firm’s competitive environment

    Journal of Business Venturing

    (1996)
  • G. Ahuja et al.

    Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study

    Strategic Management Journal

    (2001)
  • L.S. Aiken et al.

    Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions

    (1991)
  • P. Bierly et al.

    Determinants of technology cycle time in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry

    R&D Management

    (1996)
  • K. Brockhoff

    Customers’ perspectives of involvement in new product development

    International Journal of Technology Management

    (2003)
  • B. Cassiman et al.

    In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition

    Management Science

    (2006)
  • H.W. Chesbrough et al.

    When is virtual virtuous?: Organizing for innovation

    Harvard Business Review

    (1996)
  • W.M. Cohen et al.

    Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1990)
  • M. Dakhli et al.

    Human capital, social capital, and innovation: a multi-country study

    Entrepreneurship & Regional Development

    (2004)
  • A. Drejer

    Organizational learning and competence development

    The Learning Organization

    (2000)
  • K. Eisenhardt et al.

    Accelerating adaptive process: product innovation in the global computer industry

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1995)
  • D. Faems et al.

    Interorganizational collaboration and innovation: toward a portfolio approach

    Journal of Product Innovation Management

    (2005)
  • N.J. Foss

    Knowledge-based approaches to the theory of the firm: some critical comments

    Organization Science

    (1996)
  • S. Girma

    Technology transfer from acquisition FDI and the absorptive capacity of domestic firms: an empirical investigation

    Open Economies Review

    (2005)
  • R.M. Grant

    Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm

    Strategic Management Journal

    (1996)
  • R.M. Grant et al.

    A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances

    Journal of Management Studies

    (2004)
  • R. Griffith et al.

    Mapping the two faces of R&D: productivity growths in a panel of OECD countries

    Review of Economics and Statistics

    (2004)
  • Z. Griliches

    Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth

    Bell Journal of Economics

    (1979)
  • Z. Griliches

    Productivity, R&D, and the data constraint

    American Economic Review

    (1994)
  • L.A. Grünfeld

    Meet me halfway but don’t rush: absorptive capacity and strategic R&D investment revisited

    International Journal of Industrial Organization

    (2003)
  • A.K. Gupta et al.

    Excelling in R&D

    Research Technology Management

    (2000)
  • G. Hamel et al.

    Competing for the Future

    (1994)
  • Cited by (197)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Tel.: +886 2 27356006x605; fax: +886 2 27390615.

    View full text