Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 294

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Firm-Specificity in Corporate Applied R&D

Helfat, Constance E.·1994·Organization Science

Abstract

Much corporate research and development (R&D) has characteristics that tie it strongly to the firm in which it takes place, and which may make the process of undertaking R&D or the outcome of the R&D difficult for other firms to duplicate perfectly. That is, the R&D is firm-specific. This is particularly true for more highly applied R&D, which tends to involve incremental technological change and often entails alterations and enhancements to existing firm assets, production processes, and products. The often firm-specific nature of corporate R&D tends to receive relatively little attention in the study of technological innovation. This article outlines the primary characteristics of firm-specificity in R&D, and discusses two interrelated consequences of such firm-specificity: (1) heterogeneity in the R&D applications of firms within an industry, and (2) increased ability of firms to earn returns to R&D (often termed “appropriability”). Both factors have important implications for firm strategy. Empirical evidence from the U.S. petroleum industry is presented that documents differences between firms in their R&D applications. The evidence is consistent with firm-specificity in R&D.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.5.2.173

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Metadata

Authors
Helfat, C. E.
Venue
Organization Science
Published
1994-05
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
173-184
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2164242109
Cited by
294
References
1
FWCI
8.75
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.