Coping with rivals’ absorptive capacity in innovation activities

Abstract

Two factors jointly determine the likelihood of a firm's competitors obtaining information on its intangible assets and using it to damage the firm's innovation performance. Those factors are the absorptive capacity of the rival firm and the appropriability regime of the innovating firm.However, the precise roles of the two factors in affecting performance outcomes are not well documented. Furthermore, we lack knowledge of the interplay between an appropriability regime and absorptive capacity, although they clearly have the capacity to exert positive and negative effects both on each other and on innovativeness. This study presents findings derived from theoretical discussion and an empirical examination of 155 firms that suggest that while competitors' absorptive capacity does not play a direct negative or positive role on the innovation performance of a firm, an appropriability regime exerts a strong positive influence. Nevertheless, high rival absorptive capacity is not without importance, since the significant interaction effects suggest that a strong appropriability regime has positive effects on innovation performance especially in the context of a rival having high absorptive capacity.

The antecedents of new R&D collaborations with different partner types: On the dynamics of past R&D collaboration and innovative performance

“…There are strong reasons to believe that the risk of knowledge dissipation is greatest in R&D collaborations with competitors (Blomqvist et al, 2005;Hurmelinna-Laukkanen and Olander, 2014;Belderbos et al, 2004). In general, the probability of opportunistic behavior by partners in R&D collaboration is reduced through mutual dependence (Gulati & Sytch, 2007), and the expectation of durability provides the confidence that investments in the R&D collaborative projects can indeed be recouped (Gilsing and Nooteboom, 2006).…”

The dark side of knowledge transfer: Exploring knowledge leakage in joint R&D projects

“…If the appropriability regime is weak and (or) if key competitors are highly proficient in absorbing knowledge, then the focal firm runs a significant risk of losing critical knowledge through leakage (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen and Olander, 2014). The efficacy of the appropriability regime depends in part on the strength of institutional protection mechanisms such as formal protection for IP through patents and copyrights (Hurmelinna et al, 2007;Teece, 1986).…”

“…However, the appropriability regime is not purely exogenous but may also be a product of a firm's strategy (Pisano, 2006). Thus, mechanisms such as HRM policies and speed in development may complement formal protection (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen and Olander, 2014). Consequently, through formal and informal mechanisms, firms can influence the exposure to and risk of knowledge leakage.…”

“…When, for example, process firms chose to work with counterparts from fundamentally different industries, this allowed them to share knowledge freely, because the counterpart lacked the means and interest to undercut their competitive situation. They thus lacked absorptive capacity (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen and Olander, 2014).…”

Comparative analysis of Not-Invented-Here and NotShared-Here syndromes, innovation capabilities and innovative performance in service and trade firms

“…Futuras líneas de investigación deberían concentrarse en aplicar técnicas más robustas y de mayor poder explicativo. Además, debido a la prevalencia del síndrome NIH, motivada por razones que pueden estar relacionadas con la facilidad para imitar las innovaciones que desarrolla una determinada empresa, sería interesante llevar a cabo trabajos que analicen la capacidad de absorción de los competidores en el contexto de un país tecnológicamente seguidor, y compararlos con otros estudios (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2014).…”