IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iae/iaewps/wp2009n13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Governs Firm-Level R&D: Internal or External Factors?

Author

Listed:
  • William Griffiths

    (Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia, The University of Melbourne and Department of Economics, The University of Melbourne)

  • Elizabeth Webster

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

Two parallel streams of research investigating the determinants of corporate R&D exist: one from economics and the other from management. The economists' variables tend to reflect the firm's external environment while the explanatory variables used by management scientists are commonly internal to the firm. This paper combines both approaches to test for the relative importance of each type of factor using firm-level data on large Australian companies from 1990 to 2005. Our evidence suggests that most of a firm's R&D activity can be explained by time-invariant factors which we believe relate to internal and specific characteristics such as the firm's managerial style, competitive strategy and how it communicates with employees. Of the remaining time-varying portion, we find that past profits, the rate of growth of the industry and the level of R&D activity over the firm's industry is pertinent. These results are suggestive since we cannot clearly identify the extent to which the firm's internal behaviour is conditioned by its external environment.

Suggested Citation

  • William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2009. "What Governs Firm-Level R&D: Internal or External Factors?," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2009n13, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    • Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2009n13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2009n13.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    2. Ariel Pakes & Mark Schankerman, 1984. "An Exploration into the Determinants of Research Intensity," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 209-232, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Henry G. Grabowski, 1968. "The Determinants of Industrial Research and Development: A Study of the Chemical, Drug, and Petroleum Industries," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(2), pages 292-292.
    4. Matthew Rafferty & Mark Funk, 2008. "Asymmetric Effects Of The Business Cycle On Firm-Financed R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 497-510.
    5. Douglas Cumming & Jeffrey MacIntosh, 2000. "The Determinants of R & D Expenditures: A Study of the Canadian Biotechnology Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 17(4), pages 357-370, December.
    6. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 1, pages 3-15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Richard Levin & Peter C. Reiss, 1984. "Tests of a Schumpeterian Model of R&D and Market Structure," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 175-208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Edwin Mansfield, 1984. "R&D and Innovation: Some Empirical Findings," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 127-154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Derek Bosworth & Mark Rogers, 2001. "Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firms," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(239), pages 323-337, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Spyros Arvanitis, 2008. "Explaining Innovative Activity In Service Industries: Micro Data Evidence For Switzerland," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 209-225.
    12. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    13. Branch, Ben, 1974. "Research and Development Activity and Profitability: A Distributed Lag Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(5), pages 999-1011, Sept./Oct.
    14. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horlsey, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1974. "SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 258-291, November.
    15. Chang-Yang Lee, 2002. "Industry R&D intensity distributions: regularities and underlying determinants," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 307-341.
    16. Paul Geroski & John Reenen & Chris Walters, 2002. "Innovations, Patents and Cash Flow," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 2, pages 31-55, Palgrave Macmillan.
    17. Bronwyn Hall, 2004. "The financing of research and development," Chapters, in: Anthony Bartzokas & Sunil Mani (ed.), Financial Systems, Corporate Investment in Innovation, and Venture Capital, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Judson, Ruth A. & Owen, Ann L., 1999. "Estimating dynamic panel data models: a guide for macroeconomists," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-15, October.
    19. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    20. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    21. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 2, pages 16-23, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Emmanuel Duguet & Stéphanie Monjon, 2004. "Is innovation persistent at the firm Level. An econometric examination comparing the propensity score and regression methods," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques v04075, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    23. 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.
    24. Ester Martinez-Ros & José M. Labeaga, 2002. "Modelling Innovation Activities Using Discrete Choice Panel Data Models," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 7, pages 150-171, Palgrave Macmillan.
    25. Heinz Hollenstein, 2002. "Determinants of the Adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)," WIFO Working Papers 183, WIFO.
    26. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    27. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1978. "Self-Financing of an R&D Project," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(3), pages 252-261, June.
    28. Levin, Richard C & Cohen, Wesley M & Mowery, David C, 1985. "R&D Appropriability, Opportunity, and Market Structure: New Evidence on Some Schumpeterian Hypotheses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 20-24, May.
    29. repec:bla:ecorec:v:77:y:2001:i:239:p:323-37 is not listed on IDEAS
    30. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Slevin, Dennis P. & Heeley, Michael B., 2001. "Strategic decision making in an intuitive vs. technocratic mode: structural and environmental considerations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 51-67, April.
    31. John Scott, 1984. "Firm versus Industry Variability in R&D Intensity," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 233-248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), 2002. "Innovation and Firm Performance," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-59588-0, October.
    33. Carter Bloch, 2005. "R&D investment and internal finance: the cash flow effect," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 213-223.
    34. Paul Stoneman & Otto Toivanen, 2001. "The Impact of Revised Recommended Accounting Practices on R&D Reporting by UK Firms," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 123-136.
    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. Andræs Barge-Gil, 2013. "Open Strategies and Innovation Performance," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 585-610, October.
    2. Patrik Karpaty & Patrik Gustavsson Tingvall, 2015. "Offshoring and Home Country R&D," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 655-676, April.
    3. Reichardt, Kristin & Rogge, Karoline, 2014. "How the policy mix and its consistency impact innovation: Findings from company case studies on offshore wind in Germany," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S7/2014, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).

    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. 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.
    2. William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "The determinants of research and development and intellectual property usage among Australian Companies, 1989 to 2002," Centre for International Economic Studies Working Papers 2004-15, University of Adelaide, Centre for International Economic Studies.
    3. Bettina Becker, 2013. "The Determinants of R&D Investment: A Survey of the Empirical Research," Discussion Paper Series 2013_09, Department of Economics, Loughborough University, revised Sep 2013.
    4. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "Examining Biases in Measures of Firm Innovation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    5. Lee, Chang-Yang & Sung, Taeyoon, 2005. "Schumpeter's legacy: A new perspective on the relationship between firm size and R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 914-931, August.
    6. Harhoff, Dietmar, 1991. "R&D incentives and spillovers in a two-industry model," ZEW Discussion Papers 91-06, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2009. "Competition favors the prepared firm: Firms' R&D responses to competitive market pressure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 861-870, June.
    8. Richard Gilbert, 2006. "Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where Are We in the Competition-Innovation Debate?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 159-215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Galende, Jesus & de la Fuente, Juan Manuel, 2003. "Internal factors determining a firm's innovative behaviour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 715-736, May.
    10. Sumit Majumdar, 2011. "Scalability versus flexibility: firm size and R&D in Indian industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 101-116, February.
    11. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Cuervo-Cazurra, Alvaro & Un, C. Annique, 2007. "Regional economic integration and R&D investment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 227-246, March.
    13. repec:cte:wbrepe:6525 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. José Ángel Zúñiga-Vicente & César Alonso-Borrego & Francisco J. Forcadell & José I. Galán, 2014. "Assessing The Effect Of Public Subsidies On Firm R&D Investment: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 36-67, February.
    15. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 1999. "Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 63-80, January.
    16. Kang, Taewon & Baek, Chulwoo & Lee, Jeong-Dong, 2017. "The persistency and volatility of the firm R&D investment: Revisited from the perspective of technological capability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1570-1579.
    17. Andrea Bellucci & Ilario Favaretto & Germana Giombini, 2014. "Does Innovation Affect Credit Access? New Empirical Evidence from Italian Small Business Lending," IAW Discussion Papers 104, Institut für Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschung (IAW).
    18. Lerner, Josh, 2006. "The new new financial thing: The origins of financial innovations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 223-255, February.
    19. Smolny, Werner, 1997. "Endogenous innovations in a model of the firm: Theory and empirical application for West-German manufacturing firms," Discussion Papers 39, University of Konstanz, Center for International Labor Economics (CILE).
    20. Smolny, Wernerr, 1996. "Innovations, prices, and employment: A theoretical model and an empirical application for West-German manufacturing firms," Discussion Papers 37, University of Konstanz, Center for International Labor Economics (CILE).
    21. Frederico Rocha & Ana Urraca Ruiz & Bruno Campos, 2006. "Measuring Technological Opportunity: The Brazilian Case," Anais do XXXIV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 34th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 7, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].

    More about this item

    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:iae:iaewps:wp2009n13. 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: Sheri Carnegie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.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.