The intention of this paper is to investigate whether market–related factors have a stronger influence on the strategic decision making of ventures in “liberal market economies” than on that of their counterparts in “coordinated economies.” Thereby, I focus on a particularly important strategic decision that firms face—the commercialization choice. Using a unique survey data set on the commercialization of British and German biotechnology firms, I analyze the determinants of commercialization strategy, paying particular attention to national idiosyncrasies. Together, the findings indicate that the commercialization strategy follows distinct patterns in the British “liberal market economy” and the German “coordinated economy.”
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AggarwalV.A. & HsuD.H. (2009). Modes of cooperative R&D commercialization by start–ups. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 835–864.
2.
AhlstromD. & BrutonG.D. (2006). Venture capital in emerging economies: Networks and institutional change. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(2), 299–320.
3.
ArmstrongJ.B. & OvertonT.S. (1977). Estimating non–response bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.
4.
AroraA. & GambardellaA. (1998). Evolution of industry structure in the chemical industry. In AroraA., LandauR., & RosenbergN. (Eds.), Chemicals and long–term economic growth (pp. 379–414). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
5.
BarclayD., HigginsC., & ThompsonR. (1995). The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies, 2(2), 285–324.
6.
BartholomewS. (1997). National systems of biotechnology innovation: Complex interdependence in the global system. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(2), 241–266.
7.
BottazziL., Da RinM., & HellmannT. (2009). What is the role of legal systems in financial intermediation? Theory and evidence. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 18(4), 559–598.
8.
BrutonG. & AhlstromD. (2003). An institutional view of China's venture capital industry: Explaining the differences between China and the West. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 233–259.
9.
CasperS. (2000). Institutional adaptiveness, technology policy, and the diffusion of new business models: The case of German biotechnology. Organization Studies, 21(5), 887–914.
10.
CasperS., HollingsworthJ.R., & WhitleyR. (2005). Varieties of capitalism: Comparative institutional approaches to economic organization and innovation. In CasperS. & van WaardenF. (Eds.), Innovation and institutions (pp. 193–228). London: Edward Elgar.
11.
CasperS. & van WaardenF. (2005). Innovation and institutions: A multidisciplinary review of the study of innovation systems. London: Edward Elgar.
12.
CassimanB. & VeugelersR. (2002). R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review, 92(4), 1169–1184.
13.
CJA. (2006). Patent litigation insurance—A study for the European Commission on the feasibility of possible insurance schemes against patent litigation risks. Brussels: European Commission. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/patent/index_en.htm#studies, accessed 17 November, 2009.
14.
CoeurderoyR. & MurrayG. (2008). Regulatory environments and the location decision: Evidence from the early foreign market entries of new–technology–based firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 670–687.
15.
CohenP., CohenJ., TeresiJ., MarchiM., & VelezC.N. (1990). Problems in the measurement of latent variables in structural equations causal models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 183–196.
16.
CohenW.M. & LevinthalD.A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. The Economic Journal, 99, 569–596.
17.
DavidssonP. & WiklundJ. (2001). Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: Current research practices and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25, 81–99.
18.
DeegR. & JacksonG. (2008). Comparing capitalisms: Understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(4), 540–561.
19.
DeliosA. & HeniszW.J. (2000). Japanese firms’ investment strategies in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 305–323.
20.
DiMaggioP.J. & PowellW.W. (1991). Introduction. In DiMaggioP.J. & PowellW.W. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
FranksJ. & MayerC. (1995). Ownership and control. In SiebertH. (Ed.), Trends in business organization: Do participation and cooperation increase competitiveness? (pp. 171–195). Tuebingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
22.
GansJ.S., HsuD.H., & SternS. (2002). When does start–up innovation spur the gale of creative destruction?Rand Journal of Economics, 33(4), 571–586.
23.
GansJ.S., HsuD.H., & SternS. (2008). The impact of uncertain intellectual property rights on the market for ideas: Evidence from patent grant delays. Management Science, 54(5), 982–997.
24.
GansJ.S. & SternS. (2003). The product market and the market for “ideas”: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Research Policy, 32, 333–350.
25.
GranovetterM. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481–510.
26.
GulatiR. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choices. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 85–112.
27.
HaagenF., HaeusslerC., HarhoffD., MurrayG., & RudolphB. (2007). Finding the path to success—The structure and strategies of British and German biotechnology companies. Anglo–German Biotech Observatory Report. Munich: LMU.
28.
HaeusslerC. (2010). The economics of knowledge regulation—An empirical analysis of knowledge flows. R&D Management (forthcoming).
29.
HallP.A. (1986). Governing the economy: The politics of state intervention in Britain and France. New York: Oxford University Press.
30.
HallP.A. & SoskiceD. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.
HartO. & MooreJ. (1990). Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1119–1158.
32.
HerrmannA.M. (2008). Rethinking the link between labour market flexibility and corporate competitiveness: A critique of the institutionalist literature. Socio-Economic Review, 6, 637–669.
33.
HittM.A., AhlstromD., DacinT., LevitasE., & SvobodinaL. (2004). The institutional effects on strategic alliance partner selection in transition economies: China vs. Russia. Organization Science, 15(2), 173–185.
34.
HoffmannJ. (2004). Co–ordinated continental European market economies under pressure from globalization: Germany's “Rhineland capitalism.”German Law Journal, 5(8), 985–1002.
35.
HollingsworthJ.R. (2000). Doing institutional analysis: Implications for the study of innovations. Review of International Political Economy, 7(4), 595–644.
36.
HoskissonR.E., EdenL., LauC.M., & WrightM. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 249–267.
37.
HsuD. (2001). The role of venture capitalists in financing and developing high–technology start–ups. Unpublished PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
KogutB., WalkerG., & AnandJ. (2002). Agency and institutions: Organizational form and national divergences in diversification behavior. Organization Science, 13, 162–178.
40.
KollmerH. & DowlingM. (2004). Licensing as a commercialisation strategy for new technology–based firms. Research Policy, 22, 1141–1151.
41.
KrahnenJ.P. & SchmidtR.H. (2004). The purpose and structure of the book. In KrahnenJ.P. & SchmidtR.H. (Eds.), The German financial system (pp. 3–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42.
LangeK. (2009). Institutional embeddedness and the strategic leeway of actors: The case of the German therapeutical biotech industry. Socio-Economic Review, 7, 181–207.
43.
La PortaR., Lopez–de–SilanesF., & ShleiferA. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54, 471–518.
LernerJ. & MergesR.P. (1998). The control of technology alliances: An empirical analysis of the biotechnology industry. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 66(2), 125–156.
46.
LevinR.C. (1988). Appropriability, R&D spending and technological performance. American Economic Review, 78(2), 424–448.
47.
LukC.–L., YauO., SinL.Y., TseA., ChowR., & LeeJ. (2008). The effects of social capital and organizational innovativeness in different institutional contexts. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(4), 589–612.
48.
LundvallB.–A. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.
49.
McKelveyM. (1996). Evolutionary innovations: The business of biotechnology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50.
MergesR.P. (1999). Intellectual property rights, input markets and the value of intangible assets. Working paper. Berkeley: University of California.
51.
NelsonR.R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
52.
NelsonR.R. (2002). The problem of market bias in modern capitalist economies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11, 207–244.
53.
NorthD. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54.
OECD. (2005a). A framework for biotechnology statistics. Paris: OECD.
55.
OECD. (2005b). Compendium of patent statistics. Paris: OECD.
56.
ReddingG. (2005). The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 36, 123–165.
57.
RobinsonD. & StuartT.E. (2007). Financial contracting in biotech strategic alliances. Journal of Law and Economics, 50(3), 559–596.
58.
RosenbergN., LandauR., & MoweryD. (1992). Technology and the wealth of nations. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
59.
SandersW.G. & TuschkeA. (2007). The adoption of institutionally contested organizational practices: The emergence of stock option pay in Germany. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 33–56.
60.
SchmidtR.H. & TyrellM. (2004). What constitutes a financial system in general and the German financial system in particular? In KrahnenJ.P. & SchmidtR.H. (Eds.), The German financial system (pp. 19–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
61.
ScottW.R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
62.
SorensonJ. (2007). Bureaucracy and entrepreneurship: Workplace effects on entrepreneurial entry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 387–412.
63.
StreekW. (1997). German capitalism: Does it exist? Can it survive? In CrouchC. & StreekW. (Eds.), Political economy of modern capitalism: Mapping convergence and divergence (pp. 33–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
64.
TeeceD. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15, 285–305.
65.
TeeceD. (1988). Technological change and the nature of the firm. In DosiG., FreemanC., NelsonR., & SoeteL. (Eds.), Technological change and economic theory (pp. 256–281). London: Printer Publisher.
66.
TeeceD. (1998). Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy, markets for know–how, and intangible assets. California Management Review, 40(3), 55–79.
67.
TylecoteA. & ConesaE. (1999). Corporate governance, innovation systems and industrial performance. Industry and Innovation, 6, 25–50.
68.
UzziB. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–68.
69.
von MeibomW. & MeyerM. (2008). Licensing and patent exhaustion: A comparison of German and US case law. Licensing in the Boardroom—IAM Magazine 2008, 29–32.
70.
WhitleyR. (1999). Divergent capitalisms: The social structuring and change of business systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
71.
WhitleyR. (2002). Developing innovative competences: The role of institutional frameworks. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 497–528.
72.
WilliamsR. (2009). Using heterogeneous choice models to compare logit and probit coefficients across groups. Sociological Methods and Research, 37(4), 531–559.
73.
World Bank. (2007). World development indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.
74.
ZacharakisA.L., McMullenJ.S., & ShepherdD.A. (2007). Venture capitalists’ decision policies across three countries: An institutional theory perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 691–708.
