The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
R&D Collaborations and Product Innovation*
Abstract
This paper studies the relative impact on product innovation of research and development (R&D) collaborations with universities, suppliers, customers, and competitors. It argues that each type of R&D collaboration differs in terms of the breadth of new knowledge provided to the firm and in the ease of access of this new knowledge, resulting in a different impact on product innovation. As a result, it proposes that R&D collaborations with universities are likely to have the highest impact on product innovation, followed by R&D collaborations with suppliers, customers, and, finally, competitors. These arguments are tested on the R&D collaborations undertaken by a sample of 781 manufacturing firms during 1998–2002. The tests find that R&D collaborations with suppliers have the highest positive impact on product innovation, followed by collaborations with universities. Surprisingly, R&D collaborations with customers do not appear to affect product innovation, and collaborations with competitors appear to harm it. Moreover, the positive influence of R&D collaborations with universities and suppliers is sustained over the long‐term, but the negative influence of R&D collaborations with competitors is, fortunately, short‐lived. These findings indicate that ease of knowledge access, rather than breadth of knowledge, appears to drive the success of R&D collaborations for product innovation. R&D collaborations with suppliers or universities, which are characterized by relatively easy knowledge access, have a positive influence on product innovation, whereas R&D collaborations with customers or competitors, which are characterized by reduced ease in knowledge access, are not related or are even negatively related to product innovation. Moreover, to achieve product innovation with the help of R&D collaborations, it appears that the collaboration must first have mechanisms in place to facilitate the transfer of knowledge; once these are in place, it is better if the partner has a relatively narrow knowledge base. Thus, while R&D collaborations with both suppliers and universities are positively related to product innovation, the narrow knowledge base provided by collaborations with suppliers appears to have a larger positive impact on product innovation than the wider knowledge base provided by collaborations with universities. These arguments and findings are important and novel. The paper is one of the first to theoretically explain and empirically show that various types of collaborations have a differential influence on product innovation. It goes beyond previous literature by providing a theoretical logic for ranking the likely impact of types of collaborations on product innovation. The study also suggests to managers to carefully select the partners for their firms' R&D collaborations. Collaborations with suppliers appear to be the most promising for product innovation, followed by collaborations with universities, whereas collaborations with competitors may be detrimental to product innovation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage
Barney, J. B. (2004) · Advances in Strategic Management · doi:10.1016/s0742-3322(00)17018-4 · Cited by 38,152
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171110 · Cited by 16,157
Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics
Maddala, G. S. (1983) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511810176 · Cited by 13,240
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
(1986) · The Antitrust Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0003603x8603100308 · Cited by 10,730
Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393549 · Cited by 8,357
Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage
Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.12.1504 · Cited by 8,353
Cited by
Leveraging External Sources of Innovation: A Review of Research on Open Innovation
West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12125 · Cited by 2,049
When Is Open Innovation Beneficial? The Role of Strategic Orientation
Cheng, C. C. J., & Huizingh, E. K. R. E. (2014) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12148 · Cited by 485
Un, C. A., & Asakawa, K. (2015) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12229 · Cited by 332
Self-citationUniversity–industry cooperation: A systematic literature review and research agenda
Mascarenhas, C., Ferreira, J. J., & Marques, C. (2018) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scy003 · Cited by 264
Hofmann, K. H., Theyel, G., & Wood, C. H. (2012) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.739 · Cited by 263
Metadata
- Authors
- Un, C. A., Cuervo‐Cazurra, A., & Asakawa, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-07-07
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 673-689
- ISSN
- 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5885
- OpenAlex
- W3123753940
- Cited by
- 573
- References
- 86
- FWCI
- 74.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: R&D Collaborations and Product Innovation*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00744.x
- The paper
- Un, C. A., Cuervo‐Cazurra, A., & Asakawa, K. (2010). R&D Collaborations and Product Innovation*. Journal of Product Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00744.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.