The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Capturing Value from Technological Innovation: Integration, Strategic Partnering, and Licensing Decisions
Abstract
The competitive potential embedded in new technology is not always captured by the innovator. Follower firms, customers, and suppliers are often the principal beneficiaries. When innovating firms lose to followers or imitators, the reason is often the failure of the innovator to build or access competitive capacity in activities, such as manufacturing, which are complementary to the innovation. This paper analyzes the make-or-buy decision with respect to these capacities in different competitive environments, including that of rapid technological change and easy imitation. Often it is pointless for firms to invest in R&D unless they are also willing to invest in the development of certain complementary capacities, at home or abroad.
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
Cited by
The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation
Grant, R. M. (1991) · California Management Review · doi:10.2307/41166664 · Cited by 9,699
SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SEARCH BEHAVIOR AND NEW PRODUCT INTRODUCTION.
Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/3069433 · Cited by 3,640
Unruh, G. C. (2000) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/s0301-4215(00)00070-7 · Cited by 3,304
Innovation, Openness, and Platform Control
Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2018) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2017.2757 · Cited by 549
Garrison, G., Wakefield, R. L., & Kim, S. (2015) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.03.001 · Cited by 250
Technology development in the multinational firm: a framework for planning and strategy
Contractor, F. J., & Narayanan, V. K. (1990) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1990.tb00720.x · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Teece, D. J.
- Venue
- Interfaces
- Published
- 1988-06
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 46-61
- ISSN
- 0092-2102 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-551X
- OpenAlex
- W2163125255
- Cited by
- 430
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 42.04
- 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
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.
