Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Teece (1986) - Profiting From Technological Innovation (view source)
Revision as of 13:52, 6 June 2010
, 13:52, 6 June 2010→Implications for R&D Strategy, Industry Structure and Trade Policy
==Implications for R&D Strategy, Industry Structure and Trade Policy==
The firm should adjust its R&D investment portfolio towards innovations that are appropriable and for which the firm already has complementary assets (duh!). '''Large firms''' are more likely to hold complementary assets (also duh!). Likewise, in '''industries''' that have inherently weak appropriability regimes, the control of cospecialized assets will be needed for '''long-run survival'''. As industries mature, they are both more likely to be paradigmatic (I claim), and firms are more likely to hold cospecialized assets already, making entry harder. When entry does occur it will involve coalition formation (strategic partnering, etc) early on. In industries with a high degree of change, assets may become redundant, and firm boundaries may be fragile.
The paper concludes with some thoughts, in terms of appropriability regimes and cospecialized asset holdings, on international competitiveness and trade implications.