IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v40y2011i9p1217-1225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To explore or to exploit? An empirical investigation of acquisitions by large incumbents

Author

Listed:
  • Wagner, Marcus

Abstract

Innovation in high technology industries poses considerable challenges, frequently forcing firms to consider using acquisitions as a means of sourcing technology. This paper investigates such behaviour in a major high technology sector, namely the semiconductor industry. The paper focuses on differential effects of technology-related versus nontechnological acquisitions on exploratory and exploitative research and innovation. Most importantly, it confirms the important role of technology-related acquisitions for exploratory innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Wagner, Marcus, 2011. "To explore or to exploit? An empirical investigation of acquisitions by large incumbents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1217-1225.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:40:y:2011:i:9:p:1217-1225
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733311001338
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2011.07.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
    2. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    3. Bronwyn H. Hall, 1990. "The Impact of Corporate Restructuring on Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 85-135.
    4. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    5. Puranam, Phanish & Singh, Harbir & Zollo, Maurizio, 2003. "A Bird in the Hand or Two in the Bush?: Integration Trade-offs in Technology-grafting Acquisitions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 179-184, April.
    6. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2006. "The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms," KITeS Working Papers 186, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2006.
    7. Annette L. Ranft & Michael D. Lord, 2002. "Acquiring New Technologies and Capabilities: A Grounded Model of Acquisition Implementation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 420-441, August.
    8. Cassiman, Bruno & Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The impact of M&A on the R&D process: An empirical analysis of the role of technological- and market-relatedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 195-220, March.
    9. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    10. Ashish Arora & Marco Ceccagnoli, 2006. "Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 293-308, February.
    11. Xinlei Zhao, 2009. "Technological Innovation and Acquisitions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1170-1183, July.
    12. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    13. Schmoch, Ulrich, 2007. "Double-boom cycles and the comeback of science-push and market-pull," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1000-1015, September.
    14. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & van den Oord, Ad, 2008. "Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1717-1731, December.
    15. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1997. "The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 141-156, May.
    17. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
    18. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    19. Desyllas, Panos & Hughes, Alan, 2010. "Do high technology acquirers become more innovative?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1105-1121, October.
    20. Panos Desyllas & Alan Hughes, 2009. "The revealed preferences of high technology acquirers: An analysis of the innovation characteristics of their targets," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 33(6), pages 1089-1111, November.
    21. Mario Calderini & Paola Garrone & Maurizio Sobrero (ed.), 2003. "Corporate Governance, Market Structure and Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2588.
    22. Bruce A. Blonigen & Christopher T. Taylor, 2000. "R&D Intensity and Acquisitions in High‐Technology Industries: Evidence from the US Electronic and Electrical Equipment Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 47-70, March.
    23. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    24. Jacques Michel & Bernd Bettels, 2001. "Patent citation analysis.A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 185-201, April.
    25. Himmelberg, Charles P & Petersen, Bruce C, 1994. "R&D and Internal Finance: A Panel Study of Small Firms in High-Tech Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(1), pages 38-51, February.
    26. Dahlstrand, Asa Lindholm, 1997. "Growth and inventiveness in technology-based spin-off firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 331-344, October.
    27. Gautam Ahuja & Riitta Katila, 2001. "Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 197-220, March.
    28. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    29. Gary Dushnitsky & Michael J. Lenox, 2005. "When do firms undertake R&D by investing in new ventures?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(10), pages 947-965, October.
    30. Phanish Puranam & Kannan Srikanth, 2007. "What they know vs. what they do: how acquirers leverage technology acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 805-825, August.
    31. Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "How Much You Know versus How Well I Know You: Selecting a Supplier for a Technically Innovative Component," Working Papers 02-0106, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    32. Pavitt, Keith, 1982. "R&D, patenting and innovative activities : A statistical exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 33-51, February.
    33. Granstrand, Ove & Sjölander, Sören, 1990. "The Acquisition of Technology and Small Firms by Large Firms," Working Paper Series 213, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    34. Scherer, F. M. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2000. "Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 559-566, April.
    35. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
    36. Friedrich Trautwein, 1990. "Merger motives and merger prescriptions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 283-295, May.
    37. Glenn Hoetker, 2005. "How much you know versus how well I know you: selecting a supplier for a technically innovative component," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 75-96, January.
    38. Basberg, Bjorn L., 1983. "Foreign patenting in the U.S. as a technology indicator : The case of Norway," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 227-237, August.
    39. Gustavo Crespi & Aldo Geuna & Lionel Nesta, 2007. "The mobility of university inventors in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 195-215, June.
    40. Capron, Laurence & Mitchell, Will, 1998. "Bilateral Resource Redeployment and Capabilities Improvement Following Horizontal Acquisitions," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(3), pages 453-484, September.
    41. Granstrand, Ove & Sjolander, Soren, 1990. "The acquisition of technology and small firms by large firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 367-386, June.
    42. Melissa E. Graebner, 2004. "Momentum and serendipity: how acquired leaders create value in the integration of technology firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 751-777, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephanie Lange & Marcus Wagner, 2021. "The influence of exploratory versus exploitative acquisitions on innovation output in the biotechnology industry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 659-680, February.
    2. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Seungho Choi & Gerry McNamara, 2018. "Repeating a familiar pattern in a new way: The effect of exploitation and exploration on knowledge leverage behaviors in technology acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 356-378, February.
    4. Basant, Rakesh & Jaiswal, Neha, 2022. "Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Innovation: Evidence from a Panel of Indian Pharmaceutical Firms," IIMA Working Papers WP 2022-01-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    5. Ouyang, Huimin & Park, Chansoo & Oh, Chang Hoon, 2024. "The impact of reverse knowledge transfers on exploitative and exploratory innovations in MNCs: The role of knowledge distance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    6. M. Grajek & K. Gugler & T. Kretschmer & I. Mişcişin, 2019. "Static or Dynamic Efficiency: Horizontal Merger Effects in the Wireless Telecommunications Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 55(3), pages 375-402, November.
    7. Zhang, Zhu & Lyles, Marjorie A. & Wu, Changqi, 2020. "The stock market performance of exploration-oriented and exploitation-oriented cross-border mergers and acquisitions: Evidence from emerging market enterprises," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4).
    8. Szücs, Florian, 2014. "M&A and R&D: Asymmetric Effects on acquirers and targets?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1264-1273.
    9. Varshney, Mayank & Jain, Amit, 2023. "Technology acquisition following inventor exit in the biopharmaceutical industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    10. Erlinghagen, Sabine & Markard, Jochen, 2012. "Smart grids and the transformation of the electricity sector: ICT firms as potential catalysts for sectoral change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 895-906.
    11. Kavusan, K., 2015. "Essays on capability development through alliances," Other publications TiSEM 8eb736a5-b217-4718-ac13-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Armin Anzenbacher & Marcus Wagner, 2020. "The role of exploration and exploitation for innovation success: effects of business models on organizational ambidexterity in the semiconductor industry," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 571-594, June.
    13. Jiang, Zihao & Shi, Jiarong, 2023. "Government intervention and technological innovation in the wind power industry in China: The role of industrial environmental turbulence," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 344(C).
    14. Guktae Kim & Moon-Goo Huh, 2015. "Exploration and organizational longevity: The moderating role of strategy and environment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 389-414, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wagner, Marcus, 2008. "Technology sourcing by large incumbents through acquisition of small firms," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2008-055, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    2. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2008-055 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Elona Marku, 2019. "M&A and diversification strategies: what effect on quality of inventive activity?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(3), pages 669-692, September.
    4. Seungho Choi & Gerry McNamara, 2018. "Repeating a familiar pattern in a new way: The effect of exploitation and exploration on knowledge leverage behaviors in technology acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 356-378, February.
    5. Shafique, Muhammad & Hagedoorn, John, 2022. "Look at U: Technological scope of the acquirer, technological complementarity with the target, and post-acquisition R&D output," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    6. Schön, Benjamin & Pyka, Andreas, 2013. "The success factors of technology-sourcing through mergers & acquisitions: An intuitive meta-analysis," FZID Discussion Papers 78-2013, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    7. Desyllas, Panos & Hughes, Alan, 2010. "Do high technology acquirers become more innovative?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1105-1121, October.
    8. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    9. Marcela Miozzo & Lori DiVito & Panos Desyllas, 2011. "Cross-border acquisitions of science-based firms: Their effect on innovation in the acquired firm and the local science," DRUID Working Papers 11-17, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    10. Erik E. Lehmann & Manuel T. Schwerdtfeger, 2016. "Evaluation of IPO-firm takeovers: an event study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 921-938, December.
    11. Cloodt, Myriam & Hagedoorn, John & Van Kranenburg, Hans, 2006. "Mergers and acquisitions: Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 642-654, June.
    12. Erik Lehmann & Thorsten Braun & Sebastian Krispin, 2012. "Entrepreneurial human capital, complementary assets, and takeover probability," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 589-608, October.
    13. Torsten Gerpott, 2009. "Forschung & Entwicklung und technologieorientierte Unternehmensakquisitionen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 9-41, May.
    14. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    15. Colombo, Massimo G. & Rabbiosi, Larissa, 2014. "Technological similarity, post-acquisition R&D reorganization, and innovation performance in horizontal acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1039-1054.
    16. Braun, Thorsten V. & Lehmann, Erik E. & Schwerdtfeger, Manuel T., 2011. "The stock market evaluation of IPO-firm takeovers," UO Working Papers 01-11, University of Augsburg, Chair of Management and Organization.
    17. Armin Anzenbacher & Marcus Wagner, 2020. "The role of exploration and exploitation for innovation success: effects of business models on organizational ambidexterity in the semiconductor industry," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 571-594, June.
    18. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Phanish Puranam & Harbir Singh & Saikat Chaudhuri, 2009. "Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration Is (Un)necessary," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 313-328, April.
    20. Namgyoo K. Park & Monica Youngshin Chun & Jeonghwan Lee, 2019. "How Do Mobility Direction and Human Assets of Mobile Engineers Affect Joint Knowledge Creation after M&As?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-21, August.
    21. Arroyabe, M. F. & Hussinger, Katrin & Hagedoorn, John, 2020. "Hiring new key inventors to improve firms' post-M&A inventive output," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-029, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:40:y:2011:i:9:p:1217-1225. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.