IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/entthe/v35y2011i4p653-681.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Determinants of Commercialization Strategy: Idiosyncrasies in British and German Biotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Carolin Haeussler

Abstract

The intention of this paper is to investigate whether market–related factors have a stronger influence on the strategic decision making of ventures in “liberal market economies†than on that of their counterparts in “coordinated economies.†Thereby, I focus on a particularly important strategic decision that firms face—the commercialization choice. Using a unique survey data set on the commercialization of British and German biotechnology firms, I analyze the determinants of commercialization strategy, paying particular attention to national idiosyncrasies. Together, the findings indicate that the commercialization strategy follows distinct patterns in the British “liberal market economy†and the German “coordinated economy.â€

Suggested Citation

  • Carolin Haeussler, 2011. "The Determinants of Commercialization Strategy: Idiosyncrasies in British and German Biotechnology," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 35(4), pages 653-681, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:entthe:v:35:y:2011:i:4:p:653-681
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00385.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00385.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00385.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005. "Probabilistic Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    2. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-1158, December.
    3. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Susan Bartholomew, 1997. "National Systems of Biotechnology Innovation: Complex Interdependence in the Global System," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 28(2), pages 241-266, June.
    5. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:2:p:125-56 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. David Ahlstrom & Garry D. Bruton, 2006. "Venture Capital in Emerging Economies: Networks and Institutional Change," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 30(2), pages 299-320, March.
    7. Bruce Kogut & Gordon Walker & Jaideep Anand, 2002. "Agency and Institutions: National Divergences in Diversification Behavior," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 162-178, April.
    8. Richard R. Nelson, 2002. "The problem of market bias in modern capitalist economies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(2), pages 207-244.
    9. Josh Lerner & Robert P. Merges, 1998. "The Control of Technology Alliances: An Empirical Analysis of the Biotechnology Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 125-156, June.
    10. Per Davidsson & Johan Wiklund, 2001. "Levels of Analysis in Entrepreneurship Research: Current Research Practice and Suggestions for the Future," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 25(4), pages 81-100, July.
    11. Bottazzi, Laura & Da Rin, Marco & Hellmann, Thomas, 2009. "What is the role of legal systems in financial intermediation? Theory and evidence," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 559-598, October.
    12. Régis Coeurderoy & Gordon Murray, 2008. "Regulatory environments and the location decision: evidence from the early foreign market entries of new-technology-based firms," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(4), pages 670-687, June.
    13. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    14. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2008. "The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 982-997, May.
    15. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    16. Bruton, Garry D. & Ahlstrom, David, 2003. "An institutional view of China's venture capital industry: Explaining the differences between China and the West," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 233-259, March.
    17. David T. Robinson & Toby E. Stuart, 2007. "Financial Contracting in Biotech Strategic Alliances," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(3), pages 559-596.
    18. Richard Whitley, 2002. "Developing innovative competences: the role of institutional frameworks," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 497-528, June.
    19. Mark Lehrer & Andrew Tylecote & Emmanuelle Conesa, 1999. "Corporate Governance, Innovation Systems and Industrial Performance," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 25-50.
    20. Gans, Joshua S. & Stern, Scott, 2003. "The product market and the market for "ideas": commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 333-350, February.
    21. Gordon Redding, 2005. "The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 36(2), pages 123-155, March.
    22. Krahnen, Jan P. & Schmidt, Reinhard H. (ed.), 2004. "The German Financial System," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199253166.
    23. Michael A. Hitt & David Ahlstrom & M. Tina Dacin & Edward Levitas & Lilia Svobodina, 2004. "The Institutional Effects on Strategic Alliance Partner Selection in Transition Economies: China vs. Russia," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 173-185, April.
    24. World Bank, 2007. "World Development Indicators 2007," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 8150.
    25. Gregory Jackson & Richard Deeg, 2008. "Comparing capitalisms: understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(4), pages 540-561, June.
    26. Kollmer, Holger & Dowling, Michael, 2004. "Licensing as a commercialisation strategy for new technology-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1141-1151, October.
    27. Andrew L Zacharakis & Jeffery S McMullen & Dean A Shepherd, 2007. "Venture capitalists' decision policies across three countries: an institutional theory perspective," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 38(5), pages 691-708, September.
    28. Levin, Richard C, 1988. "Appropriability, R&D Spending, and Technological Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 424-428, May.
    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. Haessler, Philipp & Giones, Ferran & Brem, Alexander, 2023. "The who and how of commercializing emerging technologies: A technology-focused review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).

    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. Kiss, Andreea N. & Danis, Wade M. & Cavusgil, S. Tamer, 2012. "International entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: A critical review and research agenda," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 266-290.
    2. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    3. Jeffrey J. Reuer & Ramakrishna Devarakonda, 2017. "Partner Selection in R&D Collaborations: Effects of Affiliations with Venture Capitalists," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 574-595, June.
    4. Devarakonda, Ramakrishna & Reuer, Jeffrey J. & Tadikonda, Harsha, 2022. "Founder social capital and value appropriation in R&D alliance agreements," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    5. Liu, Yu & Maula, Markku, 2021. "Contextual status effects: The performance effects of host-country network status and regulatory institutions in cross-border venture capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).
    6. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2010. "The Market for Technology," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 641-678, Elsevier.
    7. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    8. Carlos J. Serrano & Rosemarie Ziedonis, 2018. "How Redeployable are Patent Assets? Evidence from Failed Startups," NBER Working Papers 24526, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2016. "Complementarities in the search for innovation—Managing markets and relationships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2036-2053.
    10. Umit Ozmel & Deniz Yavuz & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Todd Zenger, 2017. "Network Prominence, Bargaining Power, and the Allocation of Value Capturing Rights in High-Tech Alliance Contracts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 947-964, October.
    11. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2012. "Complementary assets, patent thickets and hold-up threats: Do transaction costs undermine investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-015, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Haeussler, Carolin & Patzelt, Holger & Zahra, Shaker A., 2012. "Strategic alliances and product development in high technology new firms: The moderating effect of technological capabilities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 217-233.
    13. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Hermosilla, Manuel & Wu, Yufei, 2018. "Market size and innovation: The intermediary role of technology licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 980-991.
    15. Fiedler, Marina & Welpe, Isabell M., 2010. "Antecedents of cooperative commercialisation strategies of nanotechnology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 400-410, April.
    16. Simon Wakeman, 2012. "How does obtaining intellectual property rights impact technology commercialization strategy for start-up innovators? Reconciling the effects on licensing vs. financing," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-12-03 (R1), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 11 Jul 2012.
    17. Heikkilä, Jussi & Peltoniemi, Mirva, 2019. "Great expectations: Learning the boundaries of design rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    18. Kenny Ching & Joshua Gans & Scott Stern, 2019. "Control versus execution: endogenous appropriability and entrepreneurial strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(2), pages 389-408.
    19. Zhujun Ding & Sunny Sun & Kevin Au, 2014. "Angel investors’ selection criteria: A comparative institutional perspective," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 705-731, September.
    20. Kasch, Silja & Dowling, Michael, 2008. "Commercialization strategies of young biotechnology firms: An empirical analysis of the U.S. industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1765-1777, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:entthe:v:35:y:2011:i:4:p:653-681. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.