IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crt/wpaper/1611.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Factor Market Rivalry and Inter Industry Competitive Dynamics

Author

Listed:
  • Gideon Markman
  • Peter Gianiodis
  • Andreas Panagopoulos

    (Department of Economics, University of Crete, Greece)

Abstract

We study competitive dynamics by using 10 years of data from the biotech industry on patent infringement lawsuits because they capture offensive actions and defensive responses. Results suggest that larger patent portfolios, long‐term partnerships, and short‐term agreements lead to factor market rivalry. Specifically, long‐term research partnerships are associated with lower proclivity and vulnerability to attack, while short‐term licensing and marketing agreements with increased proclivity and vulnerability to attack. Lastly, although nonbiotech companies attack biotech firms, the proclivity of the latter to launch cross‐industry attacks is not significant. We discuss how the results contribute to competitive dynamics research and theory.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Gideon Markman & Peter Gianiodis & Andreas Panagopoulos, 2016. "Factor Market Rivalry and Inter Industry Competitive Dynamics," Working Papers 1611, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:crt:wpaper:1611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economics.soc.uoc.gr/wpa/docs/1611.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: No
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2010. "Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 472-503, September.
    3. Dixit, Avinash K, 1977. "The Accumulation of Capital Theory," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-29, March.
    4. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, 1996. "Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 136-150, April.
    5. Sascha G. Walter & Simon Heinrichs & Achim Walter, 2014. "Parent hostility and spin-out performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 2031-2042, December.
    6. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 207-220, December.
    7. Deepak Somaya, 2003. "Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 17-38, January.
    8. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technological Opportunities and New Firm Creation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 205-220, February.
    9. Lerner, Josh, 1995. "Patenting in the Shadow of Competitors," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 463-495, October.
    10. Olivier Chatain, 2014. "How do strategic factor markets respond to rivalry in the product market?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 1952-1971, December.
    11. Andrei Hagiu & David B. Yoffie, 2013. "The New Patent Intermediaries: Platforms, Defensive Aggregators, and Super-Aggregators," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 45-66, Winter.
    12. Ming-Jer Chen & Danny Miller, 2015. "Reconceptualizing competitive dynamics: A multidimensional framework," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 758-775, May.
    13. G. Tyge Payne, 2006. "Examining Configurations and Firm Performance in a Suboptimal Equifinality Context," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 756-770, December.
    14. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2004. "Protecting Intellectual Property Rights: Are Small Firms Handicapped?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(1), pages 45-74, April.
    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. Chih-Yi, Su & Bou-Wen, Lin, 2021. "Attack and defense in patent-based competition: A new paradigm of strategic decision-making in the era of the fourth industrial revolution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    2. Christian Hofer & Jordan M. Barker & Laura D'Oria & Jonathan L. Johnson, 2022. "Broadening our understanding of interfirm rivalry: A call for research on how supply networks shape competitive behavior and performance," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(2), pages 8-25, April.

    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. Dietmar Harhoff & Georg von Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner, 2016. "Conflict Resolution, Public Goods, and Patent Thickets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 704-721, March.
    2. Lee, Jong-Seon & Kim, Nami & Bae, Zong-Tae, 2019. "The effects of patent litigation involving NPEs on firms’ patent strategies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    3. Alberto Galasso, 2012. "Broad Cross‐License Negotiations," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 873-911, December.
    4. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2013. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation:Causal Evidence from the Courts," IIR Working Paper 13-16, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    5. Karin Beukel & Minyuan Zhao, 2018. "IP litigation is local, but those who litigate are global," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 53-70, June.
    6. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman & Carlos J. Serrano, 2013. "Trading and enforcing patent rights," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 275-312, June.
    7. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2013. "Patents and cumulative innovation: causal evidence from the courts," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51539, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Sorg & Georg von Graevenitz, 2024. "Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation: Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 494, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    9. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation: Causal Evidence from the Courts," CEP Discussion Papers dp1205, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. Kimberlee Weatherall & Elizabeth Webster, 2014. "Patent Enforcement: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 312-343, April.
    11. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kristof Van Criekingen, 2018. "New evidence on determinants of IP litigation: A market-based approach," Working Papers of Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven 621964, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven.
    12. Sahaym, Arvin & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Boeker, Warren, 2016. "The parent's legacy: Firm founders and technological choice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2624-2633.
    13. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Patent Thickets and the Market for Innovation: Evidence from Settlement of Patent Disputes," CEP Discussion Papers dp0889, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    14. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 481-520, September.
    15. 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.
    16. Anne Duchêne, 2017. "Patent Litigation Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 84(2), pages 631-660, June.
    17. Ralph Siebert, 2013. "Are Ex Ante and Ex Post Licensing Agreements Useful Instruments to Lessen Uncertainty in R&D?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4535, CESifo.
    18. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," 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 315-380, Elsevier.
    19. Yun Hou & I.P.L. Png & Xi Xiong, 2023. "When stronger patent law reduces patenting: Empirical evidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 977-1012, April.
    20. Kwon, Seokbeom & Drev, Matej, 2020. "Defensive Patent Aggregators as Shields against Patent Assertion Entities? Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Competitive dynamics; factor market rivalry; patent litigation; value chain;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M20 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - General
    • L23 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Organization of Production

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:crt:wpaper:1611. 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: Kostis Pigounakis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuchgr.html .

    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.