The purpose of this article is three-fold: first, it tests whether inter-industry R&D spillovers are positively associated with the likelihood of experiencing high growth episodes among R&D intensive firms in Europe, US and Japan; second, it tests whether such a relationship is conditional on their level of absorptive capacity (ACAP); third, it tests whether the acquisition of foreign patents, an additional channel to access external knowledge, trigger high growth episodes among a sub-set of R&D intensive firms. For the empirical analysis, we focus on R&D intensive manufacturing firms observed between 2002 and 2017, located in Europe, US and Japan. The empirical findings support the hypotheses suggesting that: a) inter-industry R&D spillovers are associated with the likelihood of experiencing high growth episodes; b) ACAP conditions the relationship between inter-industry R&D spillovers and the likelihood of experiencing high growth episodes and c) shares of foreign patents are positively associated with the likelihood of experiencing high growth episodes among high-tech R&D intensive firms.
AcemogluDAghionPZilibottiF (2006) Distance to frontier, selection, and economic growth. Journal of the European Economic Association4(1): 37–74.
2.
AcemogluDAkcigitUAlpH, et al. (2018) Innovation, reallocation and growth. American Economic Review108(11): 3450–3491.
3.
AghionPJaravelX (2015) Knowledge spillovers, innovation and growth. The Economic Journal125: 533–573.
4.
AldieriL (2011) Technological and geographical proximity effects on knowledge spillovers: evidence from the US patent citations. Economics of Innovation and New Technology20: 597–607.
5.
AldieriLSenaVVinciCP (2018) Domestic R&D spillovers and absorptive capacity: some evidence for US, Europe and Japan. International Journal of Production Economics198: 38–49.
6.
AldieriL.VinciC. P. (2016). Technological spillovers through a patent citation analysis. International Journal of Innovation Management, DOI: 10.1142/S1363919616500286, 20(2): 1650028–01.
7.
AlexanderA.MartinD. P.ManolchevC.MillerK. (2018) University-industry collaboration: using meta-rules to overcome barriers to knowledge transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer45: 371–392.
8.
Anyadike-DanesMHartMDuJ (2015) Firm dynamics and job creation in the United Kingdom: 1998-2013. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship33(1): 12–27. DOI: 10.1177/0266242614552334
9.
ArditoLMesseni PetruzzelliAPascucciF, et al. (2019) Inter-firm R&D collaborations and green innovation value: the role of family firms’ involvement and the moderating effects of proximity dimensions. Business Strategy and The Environment28: 185–197.
10.
Barba NavarettiGCastellaniDPieriF (2014) Age and firm growth: evidence from three European countries. Small Business Economics43(4): 823–837.
11.
BartakJJabłońskiŁJastrzębskaA (2021) Examining GDP growth and its volatility: an episodic approach. Entropy23: 890. DOI: 10.3390/e23070890.
12.
BeckerBDriffieldNLancherosS, et al. (2020) FDI in hot labour markets: the implications of the war for talent. Journal of International Business Policy3: 107–133.
13.
BianchiniSBottazziGTamagniF (2017) What does (not) characterize persistent corporate high-growth?Small Business Economics48(3): 633–656.
BresmanHBirkinshawJNobelR (2010) Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies41: 5–20.
16.
BrownR (2011) The determinants of high growth entrepreneurship in the scottish food and drink cluster. In: AlsosGCarterSLjunggrenE, et al. (eds), The handbook of research on entrepreneurship in agriculture and rural development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 131–146.
17.
BrunswickerSVan de VrandeV (2014) Exploring open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises. In: ChesbroughHVanhaverbekeWWestJ (eds), New Frontiers in Open Innovation. Oxford University Press.
18.
CapaldoALavieDMesseni PetruzzelliA (2017) Knowledge maturity and the scientific value of innovations. Journal of Management43: 503–533.
19.
CapaldoAPetruzzelliAM (2014) Partner geographic and organizational proximity and the innovative performance of knowledge-creating alliances. European Management Review11: 63–84.
20.
CapaldoAMesseni PetruzzelliA (2015) Origins of knowledge and innovation in R&D alliances: a contingency approach. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management27: 461–483.
21.
ChesbroughHW (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press.
22.
CinceraM (2005) Firms, productivity growth and R&D spillovers: an analysis of alternative technological proximity measures. Economics of Innovation and New Technology14(7): 657–682.
23.
CinceraMVeugelersR (2014) Differences in the rates of return to R&D for European and US young leading R&D firms. Research Policy43: 1413–1421.
24.
CoadADaunfeldtS-OHalvarssonD (2018) Bursting into life: firm growth and growth persistence by age. Small Business Economics50(1): 55–75. DOI: 10.1007/s11187-017-9872-8.
25.
CoadADaunfeldtS-OHolzlW, et al. (2014) High-growth firms: introduction to the special section. Industrial and Corporate Change23(1): 91–112.
26.
CoadARaoR (2008) Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: a quantile regression approach. Research Policy37: 633–648.
27.
SrhojS. (2020) Catching gazelles with a lasso: big data techniques for the prediction of high growth firms. Small Business Economics55: 541–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00203-3.
28.
CohenWMLevinthalDA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly35: 128–152. DOI: 10.2307/2393553.
29.
CrescenziRGagliardiL (2018) The innovative performance of firms in heterogeneous environments: the interplay between external knowledge and internal absorptive capacities. Research Policy47: 782–795.
30.
DaunfeldtS-OElertNJohanssonD (2016) Are high-growth firms overrepresented in high-tech industries?Industrial and Corporate Change25: 1–21. DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtv035.
31.
DaunfeldtS-OHalvarssonD (2015) Are high-growth firms one-hit wonders? Evidence from Sweden. Small Business Economics44(2): 361–383.
32.
Di LorenzoFAlmeidaP (2017) The role of relative performance in inter-firm mobility of inventors. Research Policy46: 1162–1174.
33.
DuJTemouriY (2015) High-growth firms and productivity: evidence from the United Kingdom. Small Business Economics44: 123–143.
EsteveSPieriFRodríguezD (2021) One swallow does not make a summer: episodes and persistence in high growth. Small Business Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00443-8.
Eurostat-OECD (2007) Eurostat-OECD Manual on Business Demography Statistics. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
38.
FernandesCIFerreiraJJM (2013) Knowledge spillovers: cooperation between universities and KIBS. R&D Management43: 461–472.
39.
García-MuiñaFEGonzález-SánchezR (2017) Absorptive routines and international patent performance. BRQ Business Research Quarterly20: 96–111.
40.
GiovannettiEPigaCA (2017) The contrasting effects of active and passive cooperation on innovation and productivity: evidence from british local innovation networks. International Journal of Production Economics187: 102–112.
41.
GrilichesZ (1979) Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. The Bell Journal of Economics10: 92–116.
42.
HaltiwangerJJarminRSMirandaJ (2013) Who creates jobs? Small versus large versus young. Review of Economics and Statistics95: 347–361.
43.
HurW (2017) The patterns of knowledge spillovers across technology sectors evidenced in patent citation networks. Scientometrics111: 595–619.
44.
IbhaguiO (2019) Do large firms benefit more from R&D investment?The European Journal of Applied Economics16: 155–173.
45.
JaffeAB (1986) Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms’ patents, profits and market value. American Economic Review76: 984–1001. DOI: 10.3386/w1815.
46.
JeppesenLBMolinMJ (2003) Consumers as co-developers: learning and innovation outside the firm. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management15: 363–383.
47.
KancsDASiliverstovsB (2016) R&D and non-linear productivity growth. Research Policy45: 634–646.
48.
LeeCKimJHLeeD (2017) Intra-industry innovation, spillovers, and industry evolution. Telematics and Informatics34: 1503–1513. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.06.013.
49.
LiuZUzunidisD (2016) Globalisation of R&D, accumulation of knowledge and network innovation: the evolution of the firm’s boundaries. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. DOI: 10.1007/s13132-016-0381-9.
50.
MarautSDernisHWebbC, et al. (2008) The OECD REGPAT Database: A Presentation. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Paper N. 2008/’2. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/241437144144.
51.
Messeni PetruzzelliA (2008) Proximity and knowledge gatekeepers: the case of the polytechnic University of Turin. Journal of Knowledge Management12: 34–51.
52.
PetruzzelliAM (2011) The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university-industry collaborations: a joint-patent analysis. Technovation31: 309–319.
53.
Messeni PetruzzelliAAlbinoVCarbonaraN (2007) Technology districts: proximity and knowledge access. Journal of Knowledge Management11: 98–114.
54.
Messeni PetruzzelliAMurgiaG (2020) University-industry collaborations and international knowledge spillovers: a joint-patent investigation. The Journal of Technology Transfer45: 958–983.
55.
Messeni PetruzzelliAMurgiaG (2021) A multilevel analysis of the technological impact of university-SME joint innovations. Journal of Small Business Management . DOI: 10.1080/00472778.2021.1874003.
56.
MinaASantoleriP (2021) The effect of the great recession on the employment growth of young vs. small firms in the Eurozone. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics56: 184–194.
57.
MonteiroGFA (2019) High-growth firms and scale-ups: a review and research agenda. RAUSP Management Journal54: 96–111.
58.
MorenoFCoadA (2015) High-growth firms: stylized facts and conflicting results. In: KatzJCorbettA (eds), Entrepreneurship Growth: Individual, Firm, and Region. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 187–230.
59.
NooteboomBVan HaverbekeWDuystersG, et al. (2007) Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy36: 1016–1034.
OrlandoMJ (2004) Measuring spillovers from industrial R&D: on the importance of geographic and technological proximity. The Rand Journal of Economics35: 777–786.
62.
ParkerSCStoreyDJvan WitteloostuijnA (2010) What happens to gazelles? The importance of dynamic management strategy. Small Business Economics35(2): 203–226.
63.
RajapathiranaRPJHuiY (2018) Relationship between innovation capability, innovation type, and firm performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge3: 44–55.
64.
RobertsNGalluchPSDingerM, et al. (2012) Absorptive capacity and information systems research: review, synthesis, and directions for future research. MIS Quarterly36: 625–648.
65.
RomerPM (1986) Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy94: 1002–1037.
66.
RosenkopfLAlmeidaP (2003) Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Management Science49: 751–766.
67.
SantangeloGD (2021) Internalization process perspecitives: revisiting the link between market knowledge and market commitment. In: MellahiKMeyerKMarulaR, et al. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Business Strategy. Oxford University Press, pp. 248–268. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198868378.013.7.
68.
SantarelliE (2006) Entrepreneurship, growth, and innovation. In: The Dynamics of Firms and Industries. Springer.
69.
SavinoTMesseni PetruzzelliAAlbinoV (2017) Teams and lead creators in cultural and creative industries: evidence from the Italian haute cuisine. Journal of Knowledge Management21: 607–622.
70.
ScanduraA (2019) The role of scientific and market knowledge in the inventive process: evidence from a survey of industrial inventors. The Journal of Technology Transfer44: 1029–1069.
71.
SchreyerP (2000) High growth firms and employment. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers.
72.
SchrollAMildA (2011) Determinants of open innovation: an empirical study on organisational, market, and human drivers of open innovation adoption across Europe. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development3: 465–485.
73.
StefanIBengtssonL (2017) Unravelling appropriability mechanisms and openness depth effects on firm performance across stages in the innovation process. Technological Forecasting and Social Change120: 252–260.
74.
Haghighi TalabAScholtenVvan BeersC (2018) The role of universities in inter-organizational knowledge collaborations. Journal of the Knowledge Economy11: 458–478.
75.
VahlneJ-EJohansonJ (2017) From internationalization to evolution: the uppsala model at 40 years. Journal of International Business Studies48: 1087–1102.
76.
VértesyDDel SorboMDamioliG (2017) High growth, innovative enterprises in Europe. In: EUR 28606 EN. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
77.
WangXDassM (2017) Building innovation capability: the role of top management innovativeness and relative-exploration orientation. Journal of Business Research76: 127–135.
78.
Weissenberger-EiblMAHampelT (2021) Bridging the gap: integrating external knowledge from open innovation platforms. SN Business & Economics98: DOI: 10.1007/s43546-021-00101-5.
79.
World Bank (2019) High Growth Firms: Facts, Fiction, and Policy Options for Emerging Economies. Washington, DC: World Bank.
80.
WrightMStiglianiI (2012) Entrepreneurship and growth. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship31: 3–22. DOI: 10.1177/0266242612467359.
81.
ZahraSAGeorgeG (2002) Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review27: 185–203.
82.
ZouTErtugGGeorgeG (2018) The capacity to innovate: a meta-analysis of absorptive capacity. Innovation20: 87–121.
