The real lessons of Japanese research consortia

Hane, G.J.

doi:10.1007/bf02174801

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…'windowopening' activities, in areas of science still Joe Tidd and Martin J. Trewhella far away from commercial exploitation. This method was seen as being particularly attractive when collaborative efforts were also supported by government or EC funds, and in most cases was modelled on an understanding of Japanese consortia (Tidd and Brocklehurst, 1991;Hane, 1994). However, some companies felt that concerns with protecting underlying competitive positions led to difficulties in identifying realistic problems that could be shared in such consortia, and that this significantly reduced the value of these initiatives.…”

Section: Research Consortiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational and technological antecedents for knowledge acquisition and learning

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the factors affecting the decision to acquire external technology and the relative importance of different technology acquisition strategies pursued by British and Japanese firms. The paper draws on a study of 38 firms, consisting of 23 UK-based and 15 Japanese firms. This is not a comparative study of British and Japanese technology acquisition strategies. Rather, we aim to identify common factors affecting the decision to acquire external technology and the means by which firms attempt to do this. We identify two clusters of variable which appear to affect the decision to acquire technology. Firstly, an organization's inheritance, which includes corporate strategy, competencies, culture and what we refer to as management's 'comfort' with the technology. Secondly, the characteristics of the technology to be acquired, specifically, its competitive impact, complexity, codifiability and what we refer to as 'credibility' potential. Together, these factors will determine the degree and nature of technology acquisition strategy. We find that contrary to the present academic preoccupation with alliances and joint ventures, the firms examined ranked universities, research consortia and licensing as the most important sources of external technology. Rationale for technology acquisitionFirms choose to acquire technology from external sources rather than develop it in house for a number of reasons. Two theoretical models have dominated the issue of technology acquisition, namely transaction cost analysis and strategic behaviour (McGee and Dowling, 1994). Transaction cost analysis focuses on organizational efficiency, specifically where market transactions involve significant uncertainty. In such cases sellers of technology may engage in opportunistic behaviour (Eisenhardt, 1989). Generally, the fewer potential sources of technology, the lower the bargaining power of the purchaser, and the higher the transaction costs (Pisano, 1990). In addition, where the technology is complex it can be difficult to assess its performance. Therefore transaction costs are increased where a potential purchaser of technology has little knowledge of the technology (Teece, 1986(Teece, , 1988. In this respect the acquisition of technology differs from subcontracting more routine tasks such as production or maintenance work (Hauschildt, 1992). This suggests that acquisition of technology will require a closer relationship between buyers and sellers than traditional market transactions (Haour, 1992), resulting in a range of possible acquisition strategies and mechanisms (Granstrand et al., 1992). For example, Welch and Nayak (1992) argue that the optimal technology acquisition strategy will depend on the maturity of the technology, the firms technological position relative to competitors and the strategic significance of the technology.However, studies of technology licensing suggest that transaction cost considerations are not the most significant factors affecting

show abstract

Section: Research Consortiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational and technological antecedents for knowledge acquisition and learning

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Through the establishment of these publicprivate partnerships, the objective of policy makers was to "organize major industrial sectors concerned with solving technological problems common to the sector as a whole, or to a smaller group of major companies within the sector" (Ito, 1991). The authorities in charge of industrial policy, played a very influential role in forming and shaping the R&D consortia, not only ensuring the integration of the 'competitive partners' companies, but also sometimes actively recruiting the consortium's participants (Hane, 1993).…”

Section: Policy Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mission-oriented innovation policy in Japan

Larrue

2021

OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report assesses the potential for mission-oriented innovation policies (MOIPs) to contribute to the sustainable transition in Japan, and examines the challenges and opportunities that MOIPs would present. As part of a series of MOIP national case studies, the report finds that the ongoing ambitious and top-down MOIPs led by the centre-ofgovernment build upon a long history of proactive and goal-oriented policy intervention. MOIPs in Japan are the latest step of decades of efforts to reduce the fragmentation and lack of holistic coordination of Japan's science, technology and innovation policy in order to proactively address societal challenges. Available evaluations of these policies demonstrate very encouraging results in that regards. The study concludes with recommendations to pursue these efforts, including by mainstreaming these policy initiatives across the government structure and complementing them with more bottom-up challenge-based initiatives.

show abstract

“…Lacking a tradition of cooperation and collective learning on other levels, the members could not agree on what should count as proprietary technology. 48 Like their New Jersey counterparts, they were reluctant to devote their best talent to any joint enterprise. Nor could they find a place for the smaller companies and startups.…”

Section: Aerial View Of the Murray Hill Laboratories The Central Resmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selling Silicon Valley: Frederick Terman's Model for Regional Advantage

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the origins of the Silicon Valley model for regional economic development, and attempts to deploy this model elsewhere in the United States and abroad. Frederick Terman, Stanford's provost, first envisioned its unique partnership of academia and industry, and trained the first generation of students who effected it. He patiently cultivated an aggressively entrepreneurial culture in what he called “the newly emerging community of technical scholars.” Beginning in the 1960s, business groups elsewhere set out to build their own versions of Silicon Valley, some enlisting the assistance of Terman and his proteges. After discussing the emergence of the Stanford-Silicon Valley effort, the paper examines in detail the New Jersey Institute of Science and Technology, an effort led by Bell Laboratories; the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest and the SMU Foundaton for Science and Engineering in Dallas, Texas; and the Korea Advanced Insitute of Science and Technology, Terman's last and arguably most successful attempt. The paper discusses the reasons for the difficulties in creating new versions, and suggests explanations for the apparent success of the Korean experiment.

show abstract

The real lessons of Japanese research consortia

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Organizational and technological antecedents for knowledge acquisition and learning

Organizational and technological antecedents for knowledge acquisition and learning

Mission-oriented innovation policy in Japan

Selling Silicon Valley: Frederick Terman's Model for Regional Advantage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About