Journal of Technology Innovation (기술혁신연구)

Korea Society for Innovation Managemetn & Economics (기술경영경제학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The effect of Forms of Openness and the Appropriation Mechanisms on Product Innovation

개방성의 형태와 전유성 메커니즘이 제품혁신에 미치는 영향

  • Received : 2020.01.09
  • Accepted : 2020.02.29
  • Published : 2020.02.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Recent studies focus on how open innovation strategies affect innovation in enterprises, but lack research related to the forms of openness. There is also a paradox that an entity should open up for open innovation but also protect its innovation. In this regard, the need for research on innovation protection has expanded. Therefore, this study looked at the effect of the form of openness on product innovation, and explored how the relationship between the form of openness and product innovation depends on the appropriation mechanisms. This study used data from the Korean Innovation Survey(KIS), which was developed and distributed by the OECD. The main findings of this study are summarized as follows. First, the forms of openness has a positive effect on product innovation. Specifically, external search has had a positive impact on exploitative innovation, and collaboration has shown to have a positive impact on exploratory innovation. Second, the appropriation mechanisms has a positive moderating effect on the relationship between the forms of openness and product innovation. Specifically, it was shown that formal appropriation mechanisms had a positive effect on the relationship between external search and product innovation, and that informal appropriation mechanisms had a positive effect on the relationship between collaboration and exploratory innovation. This study is expected to contribute to: First, this study has divided the forms of openness into external search and collaboration, unlike the existing method, and thus identified the type of product innovation and the appropriation mechanisms and forms of openness by identifying the impact on product innovation. Second, depending on the characteristics of the appropriation mechanisms, it was identified that it had the moderating effect on the forms of openness and the relationship of product innovation, so that depending on the type of openness and the type of product innovation, the type of appropriation mechanisms more suitable was identified.

최근의 연구는 개방형 혁신이 전략적 측면에서 혁신에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지에 중점을 두고 있어 개방성의 형태와 관련된 연구는 부족하다. 또한, 개방형 혁신을 위해 개방을 해야 하지만 혁신을 보호해야 하기도 한다는 모순이 존재한다. 최근 이와 관련하여 혁신 보호 연구의 필요성이 확대되고 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 개방성의 형태가 제품혁신에 미치는 영향을 살펴보고, 개방성의 형태와 제품혁신의 관계는 전유성 메커니즘에 따라 어떻게 달라지는지 탐구하였다. 본 연구는 OECD에서 개발하고 배포하는 CIS(Community Innovation Survey)를 기반으로 국내 실정에 맞게 작성된 KIS(Korean Innovation Survey) 자료를 사용하였다. 연구의 주요 연구결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 개방성의 형태는 제품혁신에 정(+)의 영향을 미친다. 구체적으로 외부 탐색은 활용적 혁신에 정(+)의 영향을 미쳤으며, 협업은 탐험적 혁신에 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 전유성 메커니즘은 개방성의 형태와 제품혁신의 관계에 정(+)의 조절효과를 가진다. 구체적으로 공식적 전유성 메커니즘은 외부 탐색과 활용적 혁신의 관계에 정(+)의 조절효과를 보였으며, 비공식적 전유성 메커니즘은 협업과 탐험적 혁신의 관계에 정(+)의 조절효과를 가지는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구는 다음과 같은 기여를 할 것으로 기대된다. 첫째, 개방성의 형태를 기존의 방식과는 다르게 외부 탐색과 협업으로 구분하였으며 이에 따라 제품혁신에 미치는 영향을 파악하여 제품혁신의 유형과 적합한 개방성의 형태를 파악하였다. 둘째, 전유성 메커니즘의 특성에 따라 개방성의 형태와 제품혁신의 관계에 정(+)의 조절효과를 미치는 것을 파악하여 개방성의 형태와 제품혁신의 유형에 따라 더 적합한 전유성 메커니즘 유형을 파악하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김현창.배영임 (2017), "기술협력 파트너 다양성과 혁신성과에 대한 연구: 흡수역량 및 전유성의 조절효과를 중심으로", 기술혁신연구, 제25권 제2호, pp57-87. https://doi.org/10.14383/SIME.2017.25.2.57
  2. 박상문.이병헌. (2008), "탐험과 활용의 혁신전략과 연구개발조직이 중소기업의 기술혁신에 미치는 영향", 기술혁신학회지, 제11권 제1호, pp118-143.
  3. 허문구 (2011), "지식탐색이 혁신에 미치는 영향", 경영학연구, 제40권 제5호, pp1247-1271.
  4. 허문구 (2015), "지식탐색과 조직양면성", 지식경영연구, 제16권 제1호, pp95-115. https://doi.org/10.15813/kmr.2015.16.1.005
  5. 황남웅.이정민.김연배 (2014), "기술협력 활동이 기업의 제품혁신 성과에 미치는 영향: 전유성의 조절효과를 중심으로", 기술혁신연구, 제22권 제1호, pp60-87.
  6. Adner, R., & Levinthal, D. (2001). "Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: implications for product and process innovation", Management Science, 47(5), 611-628. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.5.611.10482
  7. Ahuja, G. (2000). "Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 425-455. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667105
  8. Anton, J. J., & Yao, D. A. (2004). "Little patents and big secrets: managing intellectual property", RAND Journal of Economics, pp. 1-22.
  9. Arikan, A. T. (2009). "Interfirm knowledge exchanges and the knowledge creation capability of clusters", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 658-676. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2009.44885776
  10. Bao, Y., Chen, X., & Zhou, K. Z. (2012). "External learning, market dynamics, and radical innovation: Evidence from China's high-tech firms", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65, No. 8, pp. 1226-1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.06.036
  11. Becerra, M., Lunnan, R., & Huemer, L. (2008). "Trustworthiness, risk, and the transfer of tacit and explicit knowledge between alliance partners", Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 691-713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00766.x
  12. Belderbos, R., Carree, M., & Lokshin, B. (2004). "Cooperative R&D and firm performance", Research Policy, Vol. 33, No. 10, pp. 1477-1492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.07.003
  13. Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995). "Product development: Past research, present findings, and future directions", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 343-378. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1995.9507312922
  14. Chen, J., Chen, Y., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2011). "The influence of scope, depth, and orientation of external technology sources on the innovative performance of Chinese firms", Technovation, Vol. 31, No. 8, pp. 362-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.03.002
  15. Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (Eds.). (2006). Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press on Demand.
  16. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). "Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 128-152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
  17. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not) (No. w7552). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  18. Dahlander, L., & Gann, D. M. (2010). "How open is innovation?", Research Policy, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 699-709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.013
  19. Duysters, G., & Lokshin, B. (2011). "Determinants of alliance portfolio complexity and its effect on innovative performance of companies", Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 570-585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00824.x
  20. Ettlie, J. E., & Reza, E. M. (1992). "Organizational integration and process innovation", Academy of Management Journal, 35(4), 795-827. https://doi.org/10.2307/256316
  21. Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2004). "Science as a map in technological search", Strategic Management Journal, 25(8-9), 909-928. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.384
  22. Garriga, H., Von Krogh, G., & Spaeth, S. (2013). "How constraints and knowledge impact open innovation", Strategic Management Journal, 34(9), 1134-1144. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2049
  23. Gopalakrishnan, S., Bierly, P., & Kessler, E. H. (1999). "A reexamination of product and process innovations using a knowledge-based view", Journal of High Technology Management Research, Vol. 1, No. 10, pp. 147-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1047-8310(99)80007-8
  24. Grimpe, C., & Sofka, W. (2009). "Search patterns and absorptive capacity: Low-and high-technology sectors in European countries", Research policy, 38(3), 495-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.006
  25. Guan, J. C., Richard, C. M., Tang, E. P., & Lau, A. K. (2009). "Innovation strategy and performance during economic transition: Evidences in Beijing, China", Research Policy, Vol. 38, No. 5, pp. 802-812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.12.009
  26. Hall, B., Helmers, C., Rogers, M., & Sena, V. (2014). "The choice between formal and informal intellectual property: a review", Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp. 375-423. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.52.2.375
  27. Hansen, M. T. (1999). "The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 82-111. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667032
  28. Hsu, D. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2013). "Resources as dual sources of advantage: Implications for valuing entrepreneurial‐firm patents", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 34, No. 7, pp. 761-781. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2037
  29. Hurmelinna, P., Kyläheiko, K., & Jauhiainen, T. (2007). "The Janus face of the appropriability regime in the protection of innovations: Theoretical re-appraisal and empirical analysis", Technovation, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 133-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.09.011
  30. Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). "Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators", Management Science, 52(11). 1661-1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
  31. Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). "Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 217-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<217::AID-SMJ95>3.0.CO;2-Y
  32. Kani, M., & Motohashi, K. (2012). "Understanding the technology market for patents: New insights from a licensing survey of Japanese firms", Research Policy, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 226-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.002
  33. Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002). "Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45, No. 6, pp. 1183-1194. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069433
  34. Khazanchi, S., Lewis, M. W., & Boyer, K. K. (2007). "Innovation-supportive culture: The impact of organizational values on process innovation", Journal of Operations Management, 25(4), 871-884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.08.003
  35. Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). "Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  36. Laursen, K., & Salter, A. J. (2014). "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration", Research Policy, Vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 867-878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.004
  37. Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables (Vol. 7). Advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences.
  38. Magazzini, L., Pammolli, F., Riccaboni, M., & Rossi, M. A. (2009). "Patent disclosure and R&D competition in pharmaceuticals", Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 467-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590802547183
  39. March, J. G. (1991). "Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning", Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  40. Nelson, C. R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. harvard university press.
  41. Oerlemans, L. A., Knoben, J., & Pretorius, M. W. (2013). "Alliance portfolio diversity, radical and incremental innovation: The moderating role of technology management", Technovation, Vol. 33, No. 6-7, pp. 234-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.02.004
  42. Pavitt, K. (1984). "Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory", Research Policy, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 343-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(84)90018-0
  43. Penin, J., Hussler, C., & Burger-Helmchen, T. (2011). "New shapes and new stakes: a portrait of open innovation as a promising phenomenon", Journal of Innovation Economics Management, No. 1, pp. 11-29.
  44. Pisano, G. P., & Teece, D. J. (2007). "How to capture value from innovation: Shaping intellectual property and industry architecture", California Management Review, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 278-296. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166428
  45. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). "Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology", Administrative Science Quarterly, pp. 116-145.
  46. Reagans, R., & Mcevily, B. (2003). "Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 240-267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556658
  47. Rivkin, J. W. (2000). "Imitation of complex strategies", Management Science, Vol. 46, No. 6, pp. 824-844. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.6.824.11940
  48. Rothwell, R., Freeman, C., Horlsey, A., Jervis, V. T. P., Robertson, A. B., & Townsend, J. (1974). "SAPPHO updated-project SAPPHO phase II", Research Policy, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 258-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(74)90010-9
  49. Schilling, M. A. (2010). Strategic Management of Technological Innovation. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
  50. Schumpeter, J. A. (1982). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (1912/1934). Transaction Publishers.-1982.-January, 1, 244.
  51. Simonin, B. L. (1999). "Transfer of marketing know-how in international strategic alliances: An empirical investigation of the role and antecedents of knowledge ambiguity". Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 463-490. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490079
  52. Somaya, D. (2012). "Patent strategy and management: An integrative review and research agenda", Journal of Management, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 1084-1114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312444447
  53. Szulanski, G. (1996). "Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm", Strategic Management Journal, Vo. 17, No. S2, pp. 27-43. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171105
  54. Teece, D. J. (1986). "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy", Research Policy, Vol. 15, No. 6, pp. 285-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2
  55. Teece, D. J. (2007). "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 13, pp. 1319-1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  56. Urban, G. L., & Von Hippel, E. (1988). "Lead user analyses for the development of new industrial products", Management Science, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 569-582. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.34.5.569
  57. Von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. 1988. New York, NY: Oxford University.
  58. West, J. (2003). "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies", Research Policy, Vol. 32, No. 7, pp. 1259-1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00052-0
  59. Zobel, A. K., Lokshin, B., & Hagedoorn, J. (2017). "Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: The role of openness and innovativeness", Technovation, Vol. 59, pp. 44-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.10.001