|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2012‒11‒03
six papers chosen by Laura Stefanescu European Research Centre of Managerial Studies in Business Administration |
| By: | Richard Woodward; Elzbieta Wojnicka; Wojciech Pander |
| Abstract: | This study surveys the current state of affairs in Poland with regard to the development of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE), or new firm creation in industries considered to be science-based or to use research and development (R&D) intensively. We place KIE in Poland in the larger institutional context, outlining the key features of the country’s National Innovation System, and then focus on KIE itself. Our findings are perhaps more optimistic than many previous studies of knowledge-based economy development in Poland. We observe significant progress due to Polish access to the European Union. The frequency with which universities are playing a significant role as partners for firms in the innovation process has increased significantly; moreover, we observe a significant degree of internationalization of innovation-related cooperation. Another optimistic development is that the level of activity of venture capitalists seems to be fairly high in Poland considering the relatively low degree of development of capital markets offering VC investors exit opportunities. Moreover, after almost two decades of decline in the share of R&D spending in GDP, there are signs that this is beginning to rise, and that businesses are beginning to spend more on R&D. While demand-side problems continue to be significant barriers for the development of KIE, due to the relatively low level of education and GDP per capita in the country, the trends here are optimistic, with high rates of economic growth and improvements in the level of education of younger generations. Significant improvement is still needed in the area of intellectual property protection. |
| Keywords: | Knowledge-Based Economy, Entrepreneurship, Transition, Post-Communist, SMEs, Poland |
| JEL: | L26 O31 O52 P27 |
| Date: | 2012–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sec:cnstan:0446&r=knm |
| By: | Mikko Packalen; Jay Bhattacharya |
| Abstract: | Intelligently allocating research effort and funds requires deciding whether to build on recent advances or on more established knowledge. When recent advances create superior opportunities for invention, their adoption as research inputs in the invention process promotes technological progress. The gains from pursuing such innovative research paths may, however, be very limited, due to the undeveloped nature of new knowledge, quick obsolescence of fast-improving knowledge, and the vast scope of the existing knowledge base. In this paper, we first develop a new approach to identifying research inputs in invention. Next, we estimate the value of pursuing innovative research paths that are created by the arrival of new research inputs. We identify research inputs based on a natural language analysis of 10 billion word and word sequence patent pairs in 6 million patents granted during 1920-2010. This novel textual analysis empirically reveals which single and general purpose technologies and scientific discoveries have been popular as research inputs in invention. We estimate the value of innovative research by comparing patents that mention these research inputs early against the value of other patents. For this comparison, we develop also a new measure of patent value. The measure distinguishes between citations that reflect the cumulative nature of invention and citations that may merely reflect similarity. |
| JEL: | I1 O31 O32 O33 |
| Date: | 2012–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:18494&r=knm |
| By: | Alessandro Nuvolari; James Sumner |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the relationship between patents, appropriability strategies and market for technologies in the English brewing industry before 1850. Previous research has pointed to the apparent oddity that large-scale brewing in this period was characterized both by a self-aware culture of rapid technological innovation, and by a remarkably low propensity to patent. Our study records how brewery innovators pursued a wide variety of highly distinct appropriability strategies, including secrecy, selective revealing, patenting, and open innovation and knowledge-sharing for reputational reasons. All these strategies could co-exist, although some brewery insiders maintained a suspicion of the promoters of patent technologies which faded only in the nineteenth century. Furthermore, we find evidence that sophisticated strategies of selective revealing could support trade in inventions even without the use of the patent system. |
| Date: | 2012–10–23 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2012/18&r=knm |
| By: | Enrico Guzzini (Università degli Studi e-Campus, Italy); Donato Iacobucci (Dept. of Information Engineering Università Politecnica delle Marche, Italy) |
| Abstract: | Several empirical papers have shown that firms belonging to business groups have a higher propensity to engage in R&D. The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate that this higher propensity depends on the ownership share of controlled companies, besides the presence of co-ordination mechanisms. We develop an analytical model and we empirically test the predictions of the model using a dataset of Italian manufacturing firms. From the development of this model we derive three main implications: a) that there is no difference in R&D propensity between stand-alone firms and firms at the bottom of business groups; b) that head and intermediate firms have a higher R&D propensity compared to stand-alone and firms at the bottom of the group; c) that the intensity of R&D depends on the ownership shares in controlled companies. Overall the results of the empirical analysis are in accordance with the implications of the model. |
| Keywords: | business groups; R&D investment; knowledge spillovers. |
| JEL: | L2 O32 |
| Date: | 2012–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cme:wpaper:1205&r=knm |
| By: | S. MOSEY; M. WRIGHT; B. CLARYSSE |
| Abstract: | Within the UK, considerable policy support has been provided to create multi-disciplinary institutes to encourage academics to develop new knowledge to address industry and societal problems. We consider four large traditional UK universities that have gained significant funding for such activities. We examine the changes in institutional structures necessary to enable universities to transform from single discipline based schools to multi-disciplinary institutes. New incentives for working across schools, the cross subsidy transfer of industry funded research and teaching income and senior role models are observed to enable the development of a multi-disciplinary research capability. Yet, this capability is not easily sustained. It appears that for institutes to survive beyond the initial funding round they regress towards traditional school activities of peer reviewed research and teaching. We conclude that to transform academic behaviour a fundamental shift in promotion procedures, that remain heavily weighted towards peer reviewed journal publication within single disciplines, is required. |
| Keywords: | universities; research; knowledge; institutional theory; evolutionary theory. |
| Date: | 2012–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rug:rugwps:12/794&r=knm |
| By: | Koskinen, Yrjö; Mæland, Jøril |
| Abstract: | In our model multiple innovators compete against each other by submitting investment proposals to an investor. The investor chooses the least expensive proposal and when to invest in it. Innovators have to provide costly effort and they learn privately the cost of investing. Multiple efforts have to be compensated for, but competition helps to erode innovators' informational rents, since innovators are more likely to lose the competition if they inflate investment costs. Consequently, competition leads to faster innovation, because the investor has less of a need to delay expensive investments. The investor's payoff sensitivity also increases with competition, thus enabling the investor to capture more of the upside of innovative activity. |
| Keywords: | Agency costs; Auctions; Innovation; Investment timing; Real options |
| JEL: | D44 D82 G24 G31 O31 O32 |
| Date: | 2012–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9187&r=knm |