nep-knm New Economics Papers
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy
Issue of 2010‒11‒06
seven papers chosen by
Laura Stefanescu
European Research Centre of Managerial Studies in Business Administration

  1. Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations By Ufuk Akcigit; William R. Kerr
  2. Strategic Niche Management of Social Innovations: the Case of Social Entrepreneurship By Marten J. Witkamp; Rob P. J. M. Raven; Lambèr M. M. Royakkers
  3. Co-innovation by KIBS in Environmental Services: A Resource-based View By Carolina Castaldi; Jan Faber; Maikel Kishna
  4. Communicating Technical Knowledge By James E. Bessen
  5. Competition and Innovation: ICT- and non-ICT-enabled Product and Process Innovations By Nepelski, Daniel
  6. The interplay between standardization and technological change: A study on wireless technologies, technological trajectories, and essential patent claims By Rudi Bekkers; Arianna Martinelli
  7. Managing Knowledge Workers in Global Value Chains By Brown, Clair; Linden, Greg

  1. By: Ufuk Akcigit (Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania); William R. Kerr (Department of Economics, Harvard University)
    Abstract: We study how exploration versus exploitation innovations impact economic growth through a tractable endogenous growth framework that contains multiple innovation sizes, multi-product firms, and entry/exit. Firms invest in exploration R&D to acquire new product lines and exploitation R&D to improve their existing product lines. We model and show empirically that exploration R&D does not scale as strongly with firm size as exploitation R&D. The resulting framework conforms to many regularities regarding innovation and growth differences across the firm size distribution. We also incorporate patent citations into our theoretical framework. The framework generates a simple test using patent citations that indicates that entrants and small firms have relatively higher growth spillover effects.
    Keywords: : Endogenous Growth, Innovation, Exploration, Exploitation, Research and Development, Patents, Citations, Scientists, Entrepreneurs.
    JEL: O31 O33 O41 L16
    Date: 2010–10–27
  2. By: Marten J. Witkamp; Rob P. J. M. Raven; Lambèr M. M. Royakkers
    Abstract: Strategic niche management (SNM), a tool to understand and manage radical socio-technical innovations and facilitate their diffusion, has always departed from a technical artefact. Many radical innovations, however, do not revolve around such an artefact. Social entrepreneurship is a new business model that combines a social goal with a business mentality and is heralded as an important new way to create social value such as sustainability. This study examines if and how SNM can be applied to such a social innovation. It identifies theoretical and practical limitations and proposes solutions. The main conclusion is that SNM can be used to analyse radical social innovation, although it requires rethinking the initial entry point for research and management. Exemplifying quotes are proposed as an alternative. Second, this paper suggests using values to describe niche-regime interaction as a better way to anticipate future niche-regime interactions.
    Keywords: Multi-Level Perspective, Social Entrepreneurship, Social Innovation, Socio-technical Regime, Strategic Niche Management, Value
    Date: 2010–07
  3. By: Carolina Castaldi; Jan Faber; Maikel Kishna
    Abstract: This paper investigates the ability of knowledge intensive business firms (KIBS) to engage in co-innovation with client firms. Co-innovation relates to KIBS competitive advantage as knowledge creators and sources of innovation. We propose a resource-based model where knowledge-related resources and capabilities explain why certain KIBS firms are able to co-innovate. We explore the model on a sample of Dutch environmental investigation firms. Our exploratory results confirm the expected dominant role played by the learning capabilities of KIBS firms in explaining their ability to co-innovate.
    Keywords: KIBS, co-innovation, resource-based, knowledge
    Date: 2010–03
  4. By: James E. Bessen
    Date: 2010–10–29
  5. By: Nepelski, Daniel
    Abstract: The reason for contradictory predictions of the models studying the impact of competi¬tion on innovation is the varying assumptions with respect to competition or innovation type. Thus, we study how the impact of competition changes with different types of innova¬tive Output. In particular, we distinguish between non-ICT - and ICT-enabled product and process innovations. To allow for such flexibility, we apply Bayesian inference techniques and use direct measures of innovative that control for the heterogeneity of innovation Output. Our analysis provides evidence that supports the hypothesis that the effect of market com¬petition on innovation is not alike for all types of innovation. We observe an inverse U-shape relationship between competition and non-ICT-enabled and a clear U-shape dependency for ICT-enabled innovations. However, the results become considerably weaker, once industry effects are taken into account. Thus, although the impact of competition on innovation varies with the type of innovation, other factors seem to have a stronger impact on the incentives to innovate.
    Keywords: Competition, innovation, Information and communication technologies
    JEL: L20 L22 O31
    Date: 2010–06–01
  6. By: Rudi Bekkers; Arianna Martinelli
    Abstract: In many technology fields, standardization is the primary method of achieving alignment between actors. Especially if strong network effects and increasing returns are present, the market often ends up with a single standard that dominates the technical direction, activities and search heuristics, for at least one full technology generation. Although literature has addressed such decision processes quite extensively, relatively little attention has been paid to the way in which standards affect - and are affected by - technological change. Building upon the concepts of technological regimes and trajectories (Dosi, 1982), and on the methodology proposed by (Hummon & Doreian, 1989) to empirically investigate such trajectories, this papers aims to study the interplay between standardisation and technological change. We conclude that the empirically derived technological trajectories very well match the standardisation activities and the main technological challenges derived from the engineering literature. Moreover, we also observe that the Hummon & Doreian methodology can indeed reveal technological discontinuities. To the best of our knowledge, this has not been the case in earlier studies using this technology, and refutes concerns that this methodology has a (too) strong bias towards incremental, continuous technological paths. Finally, we compare the set of patents in the most important technological trajectories to the set of so-called essential patent claims at standards bodies, and conclude that there is no significant relationship. This confirms earlier arguments that essential patents are not necessarily ‘important’ patents in a technical sense.
    Keywords: technological trajectories, standardization, innovation
    Date: 2010–09
  7. By: Brown, Clair; Linden, Greg
    Abstract: Global value chains span national and organizational boundaries in a growing number of industries. Knowledge creation and exchange within these diffuse networks is more complex than in the centralized R&D process of the past. This research, based on extensive fieldwork with engineers and managers in multinational headquarters and subsidiaries in a number of high-tech industries, analyzes alternative modes of managing knowledge workers in this global setting. Strategic human resource management (SHRM), of which formal HR policies are but a small part, is necessary to structure formal and informal network activities, both within and beyond the firm. We compare two archetypal high-performance SHRM systems and describe how they have evolved in practice. We analyze SHRM for global knowledge flows with offshore subsidiaries, value chain partners, allies, acquisitions, and corporate ventures. We also look at knowledge flows in informal personal networks and via the global circulation of knowledge workers. Finally we review lessons learned about SHRM practices to create and manage knowledge workers in global value chains.
    Date: 2010–10–20

This nep-knm issue is ©2010 by Laura Stefanescu. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.