فعالیت "تحقیق و توسعه" سرمایه گذاری مشترک: تجزیه و تحلیل صنعت بیوتکنولوژی بین المللی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|10248||2003||17 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 6640 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of International Management, Volume 9, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 33–49
The research question we investigate is under what conditions will joint ventures engage in research and development (R&D) activity within the context of a global, high-technology environment. To explore this question, we examine the collective impact of initial conditions that influence the presence of R&D activity among joint ventures (JVs) formed in the global biotechnology industry. Our investigation is driven by two streams of research in joint ventures: transaction costs and initial conditions. Specifically, we examine whether business relatedness, cultural relatedness, country risk, and prior joint venture experience are related to R&D activity in joint ventures. Our results show that cultural relatedness and country risk factors do matter when it comes to R&D activity in biotechnology joint ventures. On the other hand, business similarities and prior JV experience between the parents do not seem to be as important as one might expect.
There has been a proliferation of theoretical and empirical research in the area of strategic alliances spanning strategy, entrepreneurship, organizational theory, economics and sociology. This interest reflects the fact that alliances are an integral part of competitive strategy in many industries (Gulati et al., 2000). Technological advances and globalization create the need for interfirm cooperation in order to stay competitive. A major finding from the literature on strategic alliances is that research and development (R&D) intensity and the level of sophistication of any particular industry are positively correlated with the intensity and number of alliances in those industry (Powell et al., 1996). This fact highlights the rapid pace of knowledge development in technologically dynamic industries and the need for firms to acquire knowledge and complementary assets from outside the organization in order to stay competitive. Collaboration is a critical component of technology strategy in these industries. Joint ventures (JVs) represent a particular type of alliance that involve two or more partners forming a separate company. These are equity arrangements and as such, signify a substantial commitment on the part of each partner in terms of financial, technical and human resources. Although the rationale for a joint venture can extend along any activity on the value chain, joint ventures that involve R&D activity may be particularly risky strategic investment Harrigan, 1985 and Kogut, 1988. Appropriation of specific knowledge or people could result in the loss of a competitive advantage. This is in addition to the already difficult organizational issues such as personnel transfer and usage, information technology sharing and corporate culture clashes. Consequently, although collaborating may be necessary in technology-intensive industries, it is also dangerous. The complications of joint ventures are magnified in international settings in the face of different cultures and political environments. Prior research, both theoretical and empirical, has addressed the motives for strategic technology partnering (see Hagedoorn, 1993, for a comprehensive review). Some of the motives already identified in the literature are the following: the increased complexity and intersectoral nature of emerging technologies, technological synergies, access to scientific knowledge, complementary technologies, reduction and minimizing of uncertainty in R&D, capturing a partner's tacit knowledge and technology transfer. To the extent that prior empirical research has established a set of strategically motivated variables stemming from scientific and/or technological characteristics of companies, we extend this literature by exploring other strategically important but not yet tested variables in the context of global R&D joint venture formation. Whereas we acknowledge the magnitude of the firm-specific variables that influence the decision to engage in R&D based joint ventures such as complimentary capabilities and nature of existing capabilities that have been the subject of prior research, our study adds to the literature by examining other equally relevant variables that may be associated with R&D joint venture formation. Two research streams in the alliance literature drive our investigation: transaction costs (Williamson, 1979) and initial conditions or coevolutionary theory (Koza and Lewin, 1998). Our model suggests that business relatedness, prior partner experience, cultural relatedness (distance) and political risk represent critical variables in the decision to participate in these cooperative efforts. We test this model in a technologically dynamic industry characterized by numerous alliances—biotechnology. This study contributes to the alliance literature by examining variables that are related to the decision to engage in R&D joint venture formation that have not been previously investigated within the context of a global high-technology environment. Prior research on alliances has investigated the performance implications of alliances Baum et al., 2000, Shan et al., 1994 and Stuart et al., 1999, knowledge flows among partners Kogut, 1988 and Mowery et al., 1996, alliance-formation processes Doz et al., 2000, Gulati, 1995 and Gulati, 1998 and value creation Anand and Khanna, 2000, Merchant and Schendel, 2000, McConnell and Nantell, 1985, Park and Kim, 1997 and Stuart, 2000, new product development (Kotabe and Swan, 1995) and, as mentioned above, motives related to the scientific and technological developments (Hagedoorn, 1993). The variables suggested in this model provide a set of strategic concepts not considered in the context of global R&D joint venture formation. The results of this study provide useful implications for both managers and government policymakers, which we discuss in our conclusion.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Collaboration is critical in technologically intensive industries, and increasingly these collaborations are global in nature as firms pursue the latest technological advances. This article developed hypotheses concerning the relationship between initial conditions and the global formation of R&D-based joint ventures. Specifically, we looked at the impact of the partners' prior JV experience, business relatedness, cultural relatedness (distance), and country risk, on the likelihood of global biotechnology joint ventures to engage in R&D activity. Our empirical analysis yielded some interesting findings. Surprisingly, two partners in similar industry spaces are not more likely to engage in R&D-based joint ventures. We hypothesized, in accordance with transaction cost theory, that having firms operating in similar industries facilitates production and transaction-oriented gains. Moreover, the instances of opportunistic behavior would be reduced and communication would be greater. Our results suggest otherwise. This may be explained by the nature of the biotechnology industry. Firms seeking joint venture partners may deliberately look outside the industry because technological advances in other industries are now being integrated with developments in biotechnology. For example, there are advances in plastics, adhesives, new metals and pollution abatement that are based in biotechnology. Thus, our results may reflect the leveraging of biotechnology knowledge into different industry applications. Other research has shown that products introduced by firms that are cooperating across industries tend to be more innovative than products introduced by firms that are cooperating within the same industry (Kotabe and Swan, 1995). Another unexpected finding is that partners with prior experience with each other are not more likely to collaborate in an R&D-based joint venture. We hypothesized that prior experience would engender a degree of trust between partners. There could be several explanations for this finding. First, it is possible that instead of generating trust, a prior experience between two firms was not successful. Second, companies that have had prior joint ventures together may have exhausted what they need from the other, so that a future relationship would not be productive. Finally, as science and technology advance in this industry, there may be diminishing returns to partnering again with the same firm. Biotechnology companies need to seek new sources of knowledge and relying on former partners may not be the best strategy. This study further found that partners from similar cultures are more likely to engage in R&D-based joint ventures than are partners from different backgrounds. This finding supports the transaction cost (Eiteman, 1990) and learning (Mowery et al., 1996) views. Cultural differences would increase the costs of monitoring and negotiating due to opportunism and different mindsets. This would be a critical issue in R&D-based joint ventures where knowledge sharing is imperative yet risky as firms chance losing proprietary knowledge. In addition, cultural differences among joint venture partners may impede learning. Our empirical analysis also indicates that that there is less likely to be technological activity in joint ventures located in high-risk countries. This finding further supports transaction cost theory, which would suggest that higher levels of country risk decrease the chances that a venture will achieve its goals, as the collaboration is exposed to the negative effects of government driven disturbances (Root, 1988). Again, for R&D-based joint ventures, political instability jeopardizes proprietary knowledge. We found that marketing agreements are related to the formation of R&D joint ventures but not manufacturing agreements. This finding can be explained by the nature of the biotechnology industry itself. As noted before, the knowledge base of biotechnology is relatively immature but so is manufacturing of these very new types of products. Because scaling up to bioengineer a new product can be a source of competitive advantage, many companies may decide to keep this process secret. Joint venture partners may agree to discover and develop a new product, and then at some point market that product together, but go it alone with the manufacturing Arora and Gambardella, 1990 and Daly, 1985. Joint manufacturing of a biotechnology product requires more trust between the two partners than simply joint marketing efforts. There is a greater risk of technology expropriation when the two partners not only engage in joint R&D but also joint manufacturing. Another interesting finding is that there is less likely to be technological activity in joint ventures between two multinationals operating in a third country, as opposed to joint ventures between one local firm and a foreign multinational. This finding suggests that host country governments encourage the transfer of technology to local firms. Another explanation is that there is no need for two multinationals to do joint technological activity in a third country when they could maintain greater control over their proprietary knowledge in their home country or at a wholly owned subsidiary. In sum, our analysis provides evidence that cultural relatedness and country risk factors do matter when it comes to technological activity in biotechnology joint ventures. Cultural differences and disagreements between partners can severely hamper technological efforts. Moreover, country risk, which includes both economic risk and political instability, are key factors to consider in the establishment of an R&D-based joint venture. Without reliable legal protection, a company could risk losing valuable information, formulas, and even equipment to its partner. Business similarities and prior joint venture experience between the parents do not seem to be as important as one might expect. It is possible that a firm's reputation precedes it. Thus, a partner may be willing to trust a firm with a good reputation in sharing R&D activity, even without firsthand experience.