Reaching for the stars: When does basic research collaboration between firms and academic star scientists benefit firm invention performance?

Abstract

While their expertise and scientific excellence make academic star scientists attractive collaboration partners for firms, this study indicates that firms face difficulties in capturing value from collaborations with academic stars. Stars are time constrained, may be less committed to commercialization, and can be a source of undesired knowledge spillovers to other firms. The purpose of this study is to recognize the contingencies under which collaboration with star scientists is positively associated with a firm's ability to produce valuable patents (invention performance). We analyze a panel dataset on the collaborations in basic research(publication data) and invention performance (patent output) of 60 prominent pharmaceutical firms. We find that basic research collaboration with academic stars is on average not associated with a performance premium above the overall positive influence of collaborating with academia. We only observe this premium if the star scientist abstains from simultaneous collaboration with other firms ('dedication') and extend her collaboration with the firm to involvenot only basic but also applied research ('translation'). Extending prior work that has focused on corporate star scientists, we find that if the collaboration involves an internal firm star scientist, a translational contribution of the academic star is no longer a prerequisite, and may even be detrimental to inventive performance. Our findings inform the literatures on industry-science links and firms' (scientific) absorptive capacity by revealing the crucial contingencies for firms to benefit from partnering with the best and brightest among academic scientists. Practitioner Points:-Intuitively we may expect that collaborating with the very top among academics benefits firms, yet collaborating with these academic star scientists also entails important challenges.-Organizations seeking to benefit from the extraordinary expertise of academic star scientists should take into account two important conditions: o The top academic should be a dedicated collaboration partner, and avoid simultaneous collaboration with other firms. o The top academic should not only be involved in basic research but also in applied research collaboration with the firm, enhancing her ability to assist the firm in the translation of research into a marketable product. -When the firm also employs a star scientist who is engaged in the collaborative research with an academic star scientist, the translation of the joint research is better performed by the internally employed star scientists instead of the academic star scientist.

Your innovation or mine? The effects of partner diversity on product and process innovation

“…et al ( 2019), and Colen et al (2022) studies on the impact of R&D collaboration breadth and different single collaboration partners on product innovation. Second, we apply the KBV of inter-firm collaboration (Grant, 1996;Grant & Baden-Fuller, 1995;Kogut & Zander, 1992) to the open innovation literature (Chesbrough, 2006;Un et al, 2010;Un & Asakawa, 2015), and argue that the impact of R&D collaborations breadth on innovation outcomes depends on several boundary conditions related to type of partner, geography, and the firm's absorptive capacity.…”

“…Over the last decade, a few studies have started to look beyond single‐partner R&D collaboration (Colen et al, 2022; Laursen & Salter, 2006), researching R&D collaboration with two or more external partners simultaneously (Cheng & Huizingh, 2014; Gallié & Roux, 2010). The insights derived from these studies on the role that R&D collaboration breadth plays in product innovation (Belderbos et al, 2015) may not translate directly into innovation outcomes, because the type of knowledge transfer mechanism differs with geographical proximity to the source of knowledge (Crescenzi et al, 2016; Guenther et al, 2023) and between firms with different knowledge endowments.…”

“…This study contributes to the knowledge‐based view (KBV) and open innovation literature in two important ways. To begin with, this is the first study to focus on the complexity and heterogeneity in the relationship between R&D collaboration breadth and process and product innovation furthering Laursen and Salter (2006), Kobarg et al (2019), and Colen et al (2022) studies on the impact of R&D collaboration breadth and different single collaboration partners on product innovation. Second, we apply the KBV of inter‐firm collaboration (Grant, 1996; Grant & Baden‐Fuller, 1995; Kogut & Zander, 1992) to the open innovation literature (Chesbrough, 2006; Un et al, 2010; Un & Asakawa, 2015), and argue that the impact of R&D collaborations breadth on innovation outcomes depends on several boundary conditions related to type of partner, geography, and the firm's absorptive capacity.…”

Many are called, few are chosen: the role of science in drug development decisions

“…Moreover, advances in science after the patent application may also contribute to the take-up and development success of a drug candidate. Second, we could only examine patent, firm and firm-therapeutic area characteristics at the time of the patent application, and could not control for actions taken after patent application that may benefit the take-up decision and development success, such as engagement in collaboration (Crispeels et al, 2018;Belderbos et al, 2016;Colen et al, 2022).…”

Impacts of R&D investment on absorptive capacity and firm innovativeness: contingent roles of dysfunctional competition

“…Manufacturers could establish informal and formal mechanisms, such as seminars, to enhance the interactions and relationships among their employees to better perceive opportunities from customers. Manufacturers could also invest in science search, such as that involving star academic scientists, which could contribute not only to basic research but also to applied research (Colen et al, 2022). Knowledge from customers and U&RIs could help manufacturers realize the beneficial effects of R&D investment on firm innovativeness.…”