Journal of Technology Innovation (기술혁신연구)

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

DOI QR Code

An Effect of Appropriability on R&D Collaboration and Product Innovation Performance: Focusing on the Moderated Mediation Effect of Government R&D Support

전유성이 연구개발협력 및 제품혁신성과에 미치는 영향: 정부 연구개발지원의 조절된 매개효과를 중심으로

  • 김원 (건국대학교 기술경영학과) ;
  • 정선양 (건국대학교 기술경영학과)
  • Received : 2016.09.08
  • Accepted : 2016.12.07
  • Published : 2017.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

It is almost impossible for firms to possess all of resources and capabilities needed to create technological innovations in modern competitive environment. This situation forces firms to conduct R&D collaboration. Therefore, this paper analyzes an effect of appropriability protecting knowledge exclusively on R&D collaboration and product innovation performance. In addition, we investigate how the governmental R&D support moderates and influences those relationships through empirical analysis. The results of moderated mediation show that the impact of appropriability on product innovation performance appears to be a common pattern in each conditional indirect effect of appropriability regardless of financial, direct, indirect R&D support of the government. The more governmental R&D supports increase over a certain level, the more conditional indirect effects of appropriability on product innovation performance increase through the vertical R&D collaboration. However, conditional indirect effects of appropriability through horizontal R&D collaboration are not significant in all levels of government R&D supports. If we utilize an analysis of moderated mediation by applying governmental R&D supports as a moderator, it is possible to analyze a significant strength of innovation policies and their performance. Therefore, this paper would make a contribution to an evolution of governmental R&D support and an effective formulation of innovation policy.

연구개발의 비용과 속도가 증가하고 있는 현대의 경쟁환경에서 기술혁신을 창출하기 위해 필요한 모든 자원 및 역량을 갖추는 것은 불가능에 가까우며 이와 같은 환경은 연구개발협력의 필요성을 강조한다. 따라서 본 논문은 지식의 보호수단인 전유성이 연구개발협력과 그 성과물인 제품혁신성과에 어떤 영향을 미치는지 분석하였다. 동시에 이 관계를 정부 연구개발지원이 어떻게 조절하고 영향을 미치는지 탐색적으로 실증분석 하였다. 연구결과, 전유성이 연구개발협력을 경유하여 제품혁신성과에 미치는 간접효과는 정부의 재무적, 직접적, 간접적 연구개발지원 각각의 유형 모두에서 공통적인 패턴을 보였다. 전유성이 수직적 연구개발협력을 경유하여 제품혁신성과에 미치는 조건부간접효과는 정부 연구개발지원의 강도가 일정수준 이상에서 증가하면 할수록 그 효과 역시 증가하였다. 반면, 수평적 연구개발협력을 경유한 조건부간접효과의 경우 모든 정부 연구개발지원 강도에서 유의하지 않았다. 혁신과 관련된 정부 연구개발지원 정책을 조절변수로 설정하여 조절된 매개분석을 수행한다면, 정책의 유의한 정책강도 및 그에 따른 성과를 분석할 수 있다. 따라서 본 논문의 활용은 정부 연구개발지원의 평가와 효과적인 정책수립에 기여할 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. 고현수.박재민.이정수 (2015), "방산기업의 기술혁신 특성과 성공요인 그리고 정부지원효과에 관한 연구", 산업혁신연구, 제31권 제1호, pp. 139-163.
  2. 김대진.박다인 (2016), "기업의 전략 및 정부 지원 정책이 기업 성과에 미치는 영향: 혁신형 인증을 중심으로", 벤처창업연구, 제11권 제1호, pp. 13-27.
  3. 이후성.이정수.박재민 (2015), "정부 R&D지원 유형에 따른 중소기업 기술적 성과 분석", 기술혁신학회지, 제18권 제1호, pp. 73-97.
  4. 정선양.박동현 (1997), 중소기업의 기술혁신체제, 과학기술정책관리연구소, 서울.
  5. 최은영.정진욱 (2015), "기술혁신에 대한 R&D투자와 전유성의 역할에 관한 연구", 西江經濟論集, 제44권 제3호, pp. 81-105.
  6. 하태정.강희종.박경순.강원목 (2010), 2010년도 한국의 기술혁신조사: 제조업부분, 서울: 과학기술정책연구원.
  7. 황남웅.이정민.김연배 (2014), "기술협력 활동이 기업의 제품혁신 성과에 미치는 영향: 전유성의 조절효과를 중심으로", 기술혁신연구, 제22권 제1호, pp. 59-87. https://doi.org/10.14383/SIME.2014.22.1.003
  8. 황정태.한재훈.강희종 (2010), "혁신을 위한 외부협력이 중소기업성과에 미치는 영향에 대한 다각적 분석", 기술혁신학회지, 제13권 제2호, pp. 332-364.
  9. Alexy, O., Criscuolo, P. and Salter, A. (2009), "Does IP Strategy Have to Cripple Open Innovation?", MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 71-77.
  10. Amara, N., Landry, R. and Traore, N. (2008), "Managing the Protection of Innovations in Knowledge-intensive Business Services", Research Policy, Vol. 37, pp. 1530-1547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.001
  11. Arranz, N., de Arroyabe, J. C. F. (2008), "The Choice of Partners in R&D Cooperation: An Empirical Analysis of Spanish Firms", Technovation, Vol. 28, pp. 88-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2007.07.006
  12. Arrow, K. (1962), "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention", In The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Princeton University Press, 609-626.
  13. Audretsch, D. B., Böonte, W. and Mahagaonkar, P. (2012), "Financial Signaling by Innovative Nascent Ventures: The Relevance of Patents and Prototypes", Research Policy, Vol. 41, pp. 1407-1421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.003
  14. Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A. (1986), "The Moderator-mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 1173-1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
  15. Baum, J. A. C. and Oliver, C. (1991), "Institutional Linkages and Organizational Mortality", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 187-218. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393353
  16. Cassiman, B. and Veugelers, R. (2002), "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium", American Economic Review, Vol. 92, No. 4, pp. 1169-1184. https://doi.org/10.1257/00028280260344704
  17. Chesbrough, H. (2003), Open Innovation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  18. Chesbrough, H. (2006), Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
  19. Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J. (Eds.) (2006), Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  20. Cincera, M., Czarnitzki, D. and Thorwarth, S. (2009), Efficiency of Public Spending In Support of R&D Activities, Directorate General Economic and Monetary Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
  21. Cohen, W. M., Goto, A., Nagata, A., Nelson, R. R. and Walsh, J. P. (2002), "R&D Spillovers: Patents and the Incentives to Innovate in Japan and the United States", Research Policy, Vol. 31(8-9), pp. 1349-1367. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00068-9
  22. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., Walsh, J. (2000), Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or not), No. w7552, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  23. Czarnitzki, D. and Hussinger, K. (2004), "The Link between R&D Subsidies, R&D Spending and Technological Performance", ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper.
  24. Eberhart, A. C., Maxwell, W. F. and Siddique, A. R. (2004), "An Examination of Long‐Term Abnormal Stock Returns and Operating Performance Following R&D Increases", The Journal of Finance, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 623-650. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2004.00644.x
  25. Feldman, M. and Kelley, M. (2006), "The Ex Ante Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers: Government R&D Policy, Economic Incentives and Private Firm Behavior", Research Policy, Vol. 35, No. 10, pp. 1509-1521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.019
  26. Freel, M. S. (2003), "Sectoral Patterns of Small Firm Innovation, Networking and Proximity", Research Policy, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 751-770. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00084-7
  27. Gallie, E. P. and Legros, D. (2012). "French Firms' Strategies for Protecting Their Intellectual Property", Research Policy, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 780-794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.008
  28. Gans, J. S. and Stern, S. (2003), "The Product Market and the Market for ''Ideas'': Commercialization Strategies for Technology Entrepreneurs", Research Policy, Vol. 32, pp. 333-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00103-8
  29. Gassmann, O., Enkel, E. and Chesbrough, H. (2010), "The Future of Open Innovation", R&D Management, Vol. 40, pp. 213-221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00605.x
  30. Guo, D., Guo, Y. and Jiang, K. (2016). "Government-subsidized R&D and Firm Innovation: Evidence from China", Research Policy, Vol. 45, No. 6, pp. 1129-1144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.002
  31. Hagedoorn, J. and Zober, A. K. (2015), "The Role of Contracts and Intellectual Property Rights in Open Innovation", Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 27, No. 9, pp. 1050-1067. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2015.1056134
  32. Hayes, A. F. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach, Guilford Press.
  33. Hayes, A. F. (2015), "An Index and Test of Linear Moderated Mediation", Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.962683
  34. Henk, D. and Guus, B. (1994), "Towards a Policy Framework for the Use of Knowledge in Innovation System", Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 24, pp. 211-221.
  35. Henttonen, K., Hurmelinna‐Laukkanen, P. and Ritala, P. (2016), "Managing the Appropriability of R&D Collaboration", R&D Management, Vol. 46(S1), pp. 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12121
  36. Laursen, K. (2012), "Keep Searching and You'll Find: What Do We Know about Variety Creation through Firms' Search Activities for Innovation?", Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 21, pp. 1181-1220. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dts025
  37. Laursen, K. and Salter, A. J. (2006), "Open for Innovation: The Role of Openness in Explaining Innovative Performance among UK Manufacturing Firms", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  38. Lawson, B., Samson, D. and Roden, S. (2012), "Appropriating the Value from Innovation: Inimitability and the Effectiveness of Isolating Mechanisms", R&D Management, Vol. 42, pp. 420-434. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2012.00692.x
  39. Lee, C. Y. (2003), "Firm Density and Industry R&D Intensity: Theory and Evidence", Review of Industrial Organization, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022965830769
  40. Leiponen, A. and Byma, J. (2009), "If You Cannot Block, You Better Run: Small Firms, Cooperative Innovation, and Appropriation Strategies", Research Policy, Vol. 38, No. 9, pp. 1478-1488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.003
  41. Lemola, T. (2002), "Convergence of National Science and Technology Policies: The Case of Finland", Research Policy, Vol. 31, pp. 1481-1490. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00077-X
  42. Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Alvin, K., Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1987), "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development", Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 18, pp. 783-831.
  43. Lichtenthaler, U. and Lichtenthaler, E. (2004). "Alliance Functions: Implications of the International Multi-R&D-alliance Perspective", Technovation, Vol. 24, No. 7, pp. 541-552. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00093-2
  44. Lin, F. J. and Lin, Y. H. (2012), "The Determinants of Successful R&D Consortia: Government Strategy for the Servitization of Manufacturing", Service Business, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 489-502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-012-0157-7
  45. Lundvall, B. A. (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Pinter Publishers, London, UK.
  46. March, J. G. (1991), "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning", Organization Science, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  47. Martin, S. and Scott, J. T. (2000), "The Nature of Innovation Market Failure and the Design of Public Support for Private Innovation", Research Policy, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 437-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00084-0
  48. Miozzo, M., Desyllas, P., Lee, H. F. and Miles, I. (2016), "Innovation Collaboration and Appropriability by Knowledge-intensive Business Services Firms", Research Policy, Vol. 45, No. 7, pp. 1337-1351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.018
  49. Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E. and Silverman, B. S. (1996), "Strategic Alliances and Interfirm Knowledge Transfer", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17(S2), pp. 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171108
  50. Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  51. OECD (2005), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, Organisation for Economic Cooporation and Development.
  52. Okamuro, H., Kato, M. and Honjo, Y. (2011), "Determinants of R&D Cooperation in Japanese Start-ups", Research Policy, Vol. 40, pp. 728-738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.012
  53. 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
  54. Pisano, G. (2006), "Profiting from Innovation and the Intellectual Property Revolution", Research Policy, Vol. 35, pp. 1122-1130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.008
  55. Ritala, P. and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. (2013), "Incremental and Radical Innovation in Coopetition - The Role of Absorptive Capacity and Appropriability", Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 30, pp. 154-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00956.x
  56. Romer, P. M. (1986), "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth", The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 94, No. 5, pp. 1002-1037. https://doi.org/10.1086/261420
  57. Rosenzweig, E., Roth, A. and Dean, J. (2003), "The Influence of an Integration Strategy on Competitive Capabilities and Business Performance: An Exploratory Study of Consumer Products Manufacturers", Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21, pp. 437-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(03)00037-8
  58. Sampson, R. C. (2007), "R&D Alliances and Firm Performance: The Impact of Technological Diversity and Alliance Organization on Innovation", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50, pp. 364-386. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24634443
  59. Sawers, J. L., Pretorius, M. W. and Oerlemans, L. A. (2008), "Safeguarding SMEs Dynamic Capabilities in Technology Innovative SME-large Company Partnerships in South Africa", Technovation, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 171-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2007.09.002
  60. Shu, C., Wang, Q., Gao, S. and Liu, C. (2015), "Firm Patenting, Innovations, and Government Institutional Support as a Double‐Edged Sword", Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 290-305. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12230
  61. Sobel, M. E. (1982). "Asymptotic Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effects in Structural Equation Models", Sociological Methodology, Vol. 13, pp. 290-312. https://doi.org/10.2307/270723
  62. 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
  63. Teece, D. J. (2002), Managing Intellectual Capital, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  64. zTether, B. S. (2002), "Who Co-operates for Innovation, and Why: An Empirical Analysis", Research Policy, Vol. 31, No. 6, pp. 947-967. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00172-X
  65. Tidd, J. and Bessant, J. (2013), Managing Innovation, 5th Edition, Chichester: Wiley.
  66. Tubbs, M. (2007), "The Relationship between R&D and Company Performance", Technology Management, Vol. 50, No. 6, pp. 23-30.
  67. Turban, D. B. and Cable, D. M. (2003), "Firm Reputation and Applicant Pool Characteristics", Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp. 733-751. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.215
  68. Vickery, S., Droge, J. C. and Calantone, R. (2003), "The Effects of an Integrative Supply Chain Strategy on Customer Service and Financial Performance: An Analysis of Direct versus Indirect Relationships", Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21, pp. 523-539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2003.02.002
  69. von Hippel, E. (1988), The Sources of Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York.
  70. von Hippel, E. and von Krogh, G. (2006), "Free Revealing and the Private-collective Model for Innovation Incentives", R&D Management, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 295-306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00435.x