Appropriating returns to research and development is a crucial concern for firms conducting research and development under weak intellectual property rights regimes. To safeguard against such risks, firms can resort to an internal collaboration strategy in which technologies are developed in cross-border inventor teams. We argue that the adoption of such organizational strategies depends on the characteristics of the technology: its codifiability and complexity. We develop and test a framework in which the adoption of organizational strategies for appropriation is a function of excludability and imitability, with technology characteristics influencing imitability and misappropriation risks. Our patent-level study of cross-border internal collaboration strategies by 613 foreign research and development establishments of 101 leading multinational enterprises suggests strong technological boundary conditions to the use of organizational strategies to deal with intellectual property risks abroad.
AgarwalRGancoMZiedonisRH (2009) Reputations for toughness in patent enforcement. Implications for knowledge spillovers via inventor mobility. Strategic Management Journal30(13): 1349–1374.
2.
AlcácerJChungW (2007) Location strategies and knowledge spillovers. Management Science53(5): 760–776.
3.
AlcácerJZhaoM (2012) Local R&D strategies and multilocation firms: The role of cross-border internal collaborations. Management Science58(4): 734–753.
4.
AllredBBParkWG (2007) Patent rights and innovative activity: Evidence from national and firm-level data. Journal of International Business Studies38(6): 878–900.
5.
AlnuaimiTGeorgeG (2016) Appropriability and the retrieval of knowledge after spillovers. Strategic Management Journal37(7): 1263–1279.
6.
AmoreMDMurtinuS (2021) Tobit models in strategy research: Critical issues and applications. Global Strategy Journal11: 331–355.
7.
AnderssonUGaurAMudambiR, et al. (2015) Unpacking inter-unit knowledge transfer in multinational enterprises. Global Strategy Journal5: 241–255.
8.
ArgyresNSilvermanBS (2004) R&D, organization structure, and the development of corporate technological knowledge. Strategic Management Journal25: 929–985.
9.
ArgyresNRiosASilvermanBS (2020) Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: Formal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks. Strategic Management Journal41(11): 2015–2049.
10.
AroraABelenzonSRiosLA (2014) Make, buy, organize: The interplay between research, external knowledge, and firm structure. Strategic Management Journal35: 317–337.
11.
ArrowKJ (1969) Classificatory notes on the production and transmission of technological knowledge. The American Economic Review59(2): 29–35.
12.
AthukoralaPCKohpaiboonA (2010) Globalization of R&D by US-based multinational enterprises. Research Policy39(10): 1335–1347.
BelderbosRSomersD (2015) Do technology leaders deter inward R&D investments? Evidence from regional R&D location decisions in Europe. Regional Studies49(11): 1805–1821.
15.
BelderbosRCassimanBFaemsD, et al. (2014) Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners. Research Policy43(5): 841–852.
16.
BelderbosRGrabowskaMKelchtermansS, et al. (2021) Whither geographic proximity? Bypassing local R&D units in foreign university collaboration. Journal of International Business Studies52(7): 1302.
17.
BelderbosRLetenBSuzukiS (2013) How global is R&D? Firm-level determinants of home-country bias in R&D. Journal of International Business Studies44: 765–786.
18.
BelderbosRLokshinBSadowskiB (2015) The returns to foreign R&D. Journal of International Business Studies46(4): 491–504.
19.
BelderbosRLykogianniEVeugelersR (2008) Strategic R&D location in European manufacturing industries. Review of World Economics144(2): 183–206.
20.
BelderbosRParkJCarreeM (2021) Do R&D investments in weak IPR countries destroy market value? The role of cross-border internal collaborations. Strategic Management Journal42(8): 1401–1431.
21.
BelenzonS (2012) Cumulative innovation and market value: Evidence from patent citations. The Economic Journal122(559): 265–285.
22.
BerryH (2014) Global integration and innovation: Multicountry knowledge generation within MNCs. Strategic Management Journal35(6): 869–890.
23.
BerryH (2017) Managing valuable knowledge in weak IP protection countries. Journal of International Business Studies48: 787–807.
24.
BerryH (2018) The influence of multiple knowledge networks on innovation in foreign operations. Organization Science29(5): 855–872.
BertrandMDufloEMullainathanS (2004) How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?The Quarterly Journal of Economics119(1): 249–275.
27.
BranstetterLGlennonBJensenJB (2018) Knowledge transfer abroad: The role of U.S. Inventors within global R&D networks. NBER Working Paper 24453, March. DOI 10.3386/w24453
28.
BranstetterLGFismanRFoleyCF (2006) Do stronger intellectual property rights increase international technology transfer? Empirical evidence from US firm-level panel data. Quarterly Journal of Economics121(1): 321–349.
29.
BrunoRLCrescenziREstrinS (2022) Multinationals, innovation, and institutional context: IPR protection and distance effects. Journal of International Business Studies53: 1945–1970.
30.
BrusoniSMarsiliOSalterA (2005) The role of codified sources of knowledge in innovation: Empirical evidence from Dutch manufacturing. Journal of Evolutionary Economics15(2): 211–231.
31.
CantwellJSantangeloGD (1999) The frontier of international technology networks: Sourcing abroad the most highly tacit capabilities. Information Economics and Policy11: 101–123.
32.
CarnabuciGOpertiE (2013) Where do firms’ recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganizational networks, knowledge, and firms’ ability to innovate through technological recombination. Strategic Management Journal34(13): 1591–1613.
33.
CastellanetaFContiRKacperczykA (2017) Money secrets: How does trade secret legal protection affect firm market value? Evidence from the uniform trade secret act. Strategic Management Journal38: 834–853.
34.
CastellaniDLavoratoriK (2020) The lab and the plant: Offshore R&D and co-location with production activities. Journal of International Business Studies51(1): 121–137.
35.
CertoSTBusenbarkJRWooHS, et al. (2016) Sample selection bias and Heckman models in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal37(13): 2639–2657.
36.
ChenDGaoHMaY (2020) Human capital-driven acquisition: Evidence from the inevitable disclosure doctrine. Management Science67(8): 4643–5300.
37.
CohenWMNelsonRRWalshJP (2000) Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (Or Not). NBER working paper No. 7552. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
38.
Commission of the European Communities (2010) Market Integration and Technological Leadership in Europe, European Economy. Economic Papers No. 403, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.
39.
CuiVNarulaRMinbaevaD, et al. (2022) Towards integrating country-and firm-level perspectives on intellectual property rights. Journal of International Business Studies53(9): 1880–1894.
CzarnitzkiDHussingerKLetenB (2020) How valuable are patent blocking strategies. Review of Industrial Organization56(3): 409–434.
42.
D’AgostinoLMLaursenKSantangeloGD (2013) The impact of R&D offshoring on the home knowledge production of OECD investing regions. Journal of Economic Geography13(1): 145–175.
43.
Den UijlSBekkersRde VriesHJ (2013) Managing intellectual property using patent pools: Lessons from three generations of pools in the optical disc industry. California Management Review55(4): 31–50.
44.
DuHSBelderbosRSomersD (2022) Research versus development: Global cities and the location of MNCs’ cross-border R&D investments. Regional Studies56(12): 2001–2018.
45.
FaemsDBosBNoseleitF, et al. (2020) Multistep knowledge transfer in multinational corporation networks: When do subsidiaries benefit from unconnected sister alliances?Journal of Management46(3): 414–442.
46.
FlemingLSorensonO (2001) Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data. Research Policy30(7): 1019–1039.
47.
FrostTSZhouC (2005) R&D co-practice and “reverse” knowledge integration in multinational firms. Journal of International Business Studies36: 676–687.
48.
GancoMZiedonisRHAgarwalR (2015) More stars stay, but the brightest ones still leave: Job hopping in the shadow of patent enforcement. Strategic Management Journal36(5): 659–685.
49.
GrantRM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal17(S2): 109–122.
50.
GrigoriouKRothaermelT (2017) Organizing for knowledge generation: Internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing. Strategic Management Journal38(2): 395–414.
51.
GrindleyPCTeeceDJ (1997) Managing intellectual property: Licensing and cross-licensing in semiconductors and electronics. California Management Review39(2): 8–41.
52.
HallBHZiedonisRH (2001) The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979-1995. RAND Journal of Economics: 101–128.
53.
HallBHJaffeATrajtenbergM (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics36: 16–38.
54.
HarhoffDSchererFMVopelK (2003) Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy32(8): 1343–1363.
55.
HarhoffDVon GraevenitzGWagnerS (2015) Conflict resolution, public goods, and patent thickets. Management Science62(3): 704–721.
56.
HeeleyMBMatusikSFJainN (2007) Innovation, appropriability, and the underpricing of initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal50(1): 209–225.
57.
HuAPngI (2009) Patent rights and economic growth: Cross-country evidence, January. National University of Singapore Business School, Singapore.
58.
KafourosMHashaiNTardiosJA, et al. (2022) How do MNEs invent? An invention-based perspective of MNE profitability. Journal of International Business Studies53(7): 1420–1448.
59.
KerrSPKerrWR (2018) Global collaborative patents. Economic Journal128: F235–F272.
60.
KogutBZanderU (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science3(3): 383–397.
61.
KuemmerleW (1999) The drivers of foreign direct investment into research and development: An empirical investigation. Journal of International Business Studies: 1–24.
62.
KumarN (1996) Intellectual property protection, market orientation and location of overseas R&D activities by multinational enterprises. World Development24(4): 673–688.
63.
LaminARamosMA (2016) R&D investment dynamics in agglomerations under weak appropriability regimes: Evidence from Indian R&D labs. Strategic Management Journal37(3): 604-621.
64.
LeoneMIReichsteinT (2012) Licensing-in fosters rapid invention! The effect of the grant-back clause and technological unfamiliarity. Strategic Management Journal33(8): 965–985.
65.
LevinRCKlevorickAKNelsonRR, et al. (1987) Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: 783–831.
66.
LewinAYMassiniSPeetersC (2009) Why are companies offshoring innovation? The emerging global race for talent. Journal of International Business Studies40(6): 901–925.
67.
LiuMCChenSH (2012) MNCs’ offshore R&D networks in host country’s regional innovation system: The case of Taiwan-based firms in China. Research Policy41(6): 1107–1120.
68.
LybbertTJZolasNJ (2014) Getting patents and economic data to speak to each other: An “algorithmic links with probabilities” approach for joint analyses of patenting and economic activity. Research Policy43(3): 530–542.
69.
MarxMStrumskyDFlemingL (2009) Mobility, skills, and the Michigan non-compete experiment. Management Science55(6): 875–889.
70.
MelitzJToubalF (2014) Native language, spoken language, translation and trade. Journal of International Economics93(2): 351–363.
71.
MergesRPNelsonRR (1990) On the complex economics of patent scope. Columbia Law Review90(4): 839–916.
72.
MezzanottiFSimcoeT (2023) Innovation and Appropriability: Revisiting the Role of Intellectual Property. NBER Working Paper No. 31428. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
73.
MinbaevaDSantangeloGD (2018) Boundary spanners and intra-MNC knowledge sharing: The roles of controlled motivation and immediate organizational context. Global Strategy Journal8(2): 220–241.
74.
MoreiraSMarkusALaursenK (2018) Knowledge diversity and coordination: The effect of intrafirm inventor task networks on absorption speed. Strategic Management Journal39: 2517–2546.
75.
NandkumarASrikanthK (2016) Right person in the right place: How the host country IPR influences the distribution of inventors in offshore R&D projects of multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal37(8): 1715–1733.
76.
NayakDMoreiraSMudambiR (2025) Restrictive immigration policies and MNE innovation. Journal of International Business Studies56(1): 84–104.
77.
NelsonRRWinterSG (1982) The Schumpeterian tradeoff revisited. The American Economic Review72(1): 114–132.
78.
NonakaI (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science5(1): 14–37.
79.
O’LearyMBCummingsJN (2007) The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in teams. MIS Quarterly: 433–452.
80.
OECD (2016) Where to locate innovative activities in global value chains: Does colocation matter?. (February), Paris, DSTI/IND(2016)2.
81.
PapageorgiadisNSofkaW (2020.) Patent enforcement across 51 countries—patent enforcement index 1998–2017. Journal of World Business55(4): 101092.
82.
ParkJBelderbosR (2022) Patent protection and foreign R&D investment location choices: Inventor mobility and policy convergence. Industrial and Corporate Change31(4): 1113–1136.
83.
ParkWG (2008) International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy37(4): 761–766.
84.
PolanyiM (1966) The Tacit Dimension. New York: Doubleday.
85.
QuanXChesbroughH (2010) Hierarchical segmentation of R&D process and intellectual property protection: Evidence from multinational R&D laboratories in China. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management57(1): 9–21.
86.
SantangeloGDMeyerKEJindraB (2016) MNE subsidiaries’ outsourcing and insourcing of R&D: The role of local institutions. Global Strategy Journal6(4): 247–268.
87.
SeoEKangHSongJ (2020) Blending talents for innovation: Team composition for cross-border R&D collaboration within multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies51: 851–885.
88.
ShapiroCVarianHR (2003) The art of standards wars. In: GarudRKumaraswamyALangloisRN (eds) Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures Networks, and Organizations. Malden MA: Blackwell, pp. 247–269.
89.
SnihurYZottCAmitR (2021) Managing the value appropriation dilemma in business model innovation. Strategy Science6(1): 22–38.
90.
SongJAsakawaKChuY (2011) What determines knowledge sourcing from host locations of overseas R&D operations?: A study of global R&D activities of Japanese multinationals. Research Policy40(3): 380–390.
91.
SrikanthKNandkumarAManiD, et al. (2020) How firms build isolating mechanisms for knowledge: A study in offshore research and development activities. Strategy Science5(2): 98–116.
92.
SzulanskiG (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal17(S2): 27–43.
93.
TeeceDJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy15(6): 285–305.
94.
TohPKKimTK (2013)) Why put all your eggs in one basket? A competition-based view of how technological uncertainty affects a firm’s technological specialization. Organization Science24: 1214–1236.
95.
USTR (2017) 2016Report to Congress On China’s WTO Compliance. Report, January, United States Trade Representative, Washington, DC.
96.
Von GraevenitzGWagnerSHarhoffD (2011) How to measure patent thickets—A novel approach. Economics Letters111(1): 6–9.
97.
VestalADanneelsE (2021) Technological distance and breakthrough inventions in multi-cluster teams: How intra- and inter-location ties bridge the gap. Administrative Science Quarterly67: 167–206.
98.
Von HippelE (1994) Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovations. Management Science40: 429–439.
99.
WicksACBermanSL (2004)) The effects of context on trust in firm-stakeholder relationships: the institutional environment, trust creation, and firm performance. Business Ethics Quarterly14: 141–160.
100.
YanYLiJZhangJ (2022) Protecting intellectual property in foreign subsidiaries: An internal network defense perspective. Journal of International Business Studies53: 1924–1944.
101.
ZhaoM (2006) Conducting R&D in countries with weak intellectual property rights protection. Management Science52(8): 1185–1199.
102.
ZiedonisRH (2004) Don’t fence me in: Fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms. Management Science50(6): 804–820.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
