Milking partners or symbiotic know-how enhancement? International versus national alliances in Japan's biotech industry

Abstract

It is frequently contended that as for research and development (R&D), the scientific basis of innovation, Japan has been a freerider with respect to the international community. It is generally accepted, both within and outside the country, that, be that as it may, Japan as an important "frontier economy" can no longer rest on this position (e.g., cf. Ueda, 1996, p. 22).This paper is about one possible way out of this unsatisfactory situation, i.e. (research) alliances among companies, in order to complement their weak basis of scientific knowledge in one of the most advanced fields of scientific research and most promising fields of business interest: new biotechnology. With respect to such alliances, there is always the fear that "the game is not strictly played by the rules", i.e. that one "partner" will cheat -or at least will try to cheat -the other. Does this apply to Japan, particularly if foreign companies are involved: are partners "milked", or is there a symbiotic know-how enhancement, fruitful for all participants?Alliances can be established with scientific institutions or other companies, among them potential competitors, at a national and/or an international level. As for national alliances, government-sponsored R&D consortia can play a major role. How do these relationships work and what are their results? Surveying the relevant literature, several hypotheses can be put forward. With respect to international alliances, it is frequently suggested that an uncontrolled dissemination of technological know-how from the foreign to the Japanese partner may take place, which could be a major reason for failures of co-operative ventures. On the other hand, Japanese research consortia are often seen in Western literature as an effective tool of technology creation, because of the extensive potential information exchange (cf. Audretsch,

Strategic alliances influence on small and medium firm performance

“…Gassel and Pascha (2000) find that cooperation in the biotech field primarily aims at gaining access to scientific resources and commercial success; it is an interactive "give and take" in order to combine both partners' strengths. Hence, Hypothesis 6.…”

Future directions of R&D internationalization in international business

“…A systematic investigation is required to determine whether the same antecedents apply to EMNEs. Much is known about how AMNEs internationalize their R&D activities through various entry modes: strategic alliances (Gassel and Pascha, 2000), international joint ventures (Richards and De Carolis, 2003), international subsidiaries (Allred and Swan, 2004), greenfield FDI (Liu and Zou, 2008), mergers and acquisitions (Haasis et al , 2018), offshoring (Nieto and Rodriguez, 2011) and outsourcing (Martínez-Noya and García-Canal, 2011). However, the preferred entry modes for firms from emerging economies and the circumstances under which EMNEs prefer one entry mode over others remain unknown.…”

Firms' use of organizational, personal, and intermediary networks to gain access to resources for internationalization

“…Managers that create and combine resources contribute to a firms' competitive advantage and strategic direction (Andersson, ; Alvarez & Busentitz, 2001). Resources can be classified in different ways (Chetty & Wilson, ; Gassel & Pascha, ; Tolstoy & Agndal, ; Wei & Clegg, ), this study employs the same classification Tolstoy and Agndal () developed: market, human, reputational, financial, physical, and technical resources. Their classifications were derived from other studies in the biotech industry (e.g., Ahn & Meeks, ; Gassel & Pascha, ; Powell, Koput, & Smith‐Doerr, ).…”