Effects of Innovation Characteristics on Spillover: An Empirical Evidence from US Semiconductor Industry

기술혁신의 특성이 파급효과에 미치는 영향에 대한 분석: 반도체산업의 실증분석

  • Received : 2017.03.03
  • Accepted : 2017.06.09
  • Published : 2017.06.30


Technology innovation is regarded as the quintessential process to acquire a competitive advantage. This is especially true in high-tech industries, and firms that recognize the importance of technological innovation concentrate their capacities on developing new technologies, new products, and new processes. In general, such research requires many resources, but not all technological breakthroughs are followed by positive feedbacks. Consequently, the firms in high-tech industries are compelled to find new directions in acquiring technologies. This study examines the factors that influence technological innovation and empirically tests the effect these factors have on its diffusion. Radicality, discontinuity, and exploitation/exploration were selected as the factors from the previous literature on technological innovation and organizational learning. For the empirical test, patent data from the US semiconductor industry were used to describe innovation activities from various fields. From the result, these three factors (Ed- is this what you mean, i.e., radicality, discontinuity, and exploitation/exploration?)were found to have significant meaning as proxies for the diffusion of technological innovation.


Diffusion effect;Discontinuity;Exploitation;Exploration;Patent;Radical;Technology innovation


  1. Hage, J., Theories of Organization, Wiley Interscience, New York, 1980.
  2. Crespi, F., "Notes on the Determinants of innovation: A Multi-perspective Analysis," Working Paper 42, Department of Economics, University of Roma Tre, Rome, Italy, 2004.
  3. Arundel, A. and I. Kabla, "What percentage of innovations are patented? Empirical estimates for European firm," Research Policy, 27, pp. 127-141, 1998. DOI:
  4. Austin, D.H., "An event-study approach to measuring innovative output: the case of biotechnology," The American Economic Review, 83(2), pp. 253-258, 1993.
  5. Narin, F., K.S. Hamilton and D. Olivastro, "The increasing linkage between US technology and public science," Research Policy, 26, pp. 317-330, 1997. DOI:
  6. March, J.G., "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational learning," Organization Science, 2, pp. 71-87, 1991. DOI:
  7. Scherer, F.M., "Inter-Industry Technology Flows and Productivity Growth," Review of Economics and Statistics, 64, November 1982. DOI:
  8. Schmookler, J., Invention and Economic Growth, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966. DOI:
  9. Caballero, R.J. and A.B. Jaffe, "How High are the Giants' Shoulders. An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth," NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, 1993. DOI:
  10. Jaffe, A.B., R. Henderson and M. Trajtenberg, "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillover as Evidenced by Patent Citations," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, pp. 577-598, 1993. DOI:
  11. Kaluzny, A.D., J.E. Veney and J. T. Gentry, "Innovation in health services: A comparative study of Hospitals and Health Departments," Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly/Health and Society, 52(1), pp. 51-82, 1974. DOI:
  12. Hill, W.L. Charles and Frank T. Rothaermel, "The Performance of Incumbent Firms in the Face of Radical Technological Innovation," The Academy of Management Review, 28(2), Apr., pp. 257-274, 2003. DOI:
  13. Schumpeter, J. A., Capitalism, socialism and democracy, New York: Harper & Row, 1942.
  14. Christensen, C.M. The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.
  15. Cooper, A.C. and D. Schendel, "Strategic responses to technological threats", Business Horizons, 19(1), pp. 61-69, 1976. DOI:
  16. Rosenbloom, R.S. and C.M. Christensen, "Technological discontinuities, organizational capabilities, and strategic commitments," In G. Dosi, D. J. Teece, & J. Chytry (Eds.), Technology, organization, and competitiveness: Perspective on industrial and corporate change, pp. 215-245, 1998. DOI:
  17. Sull, D.N., R.S. Tedlow and R.S. Rosenbloom, "Managerial commitments and technological change in the U.S. tire industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, 6, pp. 461-501, 1997. DOI:
  18. Tripsas, M. and G. Gavetti, "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, 21, pp. 1147-1161, 2000. DOI:<1147::AID-SMJ128>3.0.CO;2-R<1147::AID-SMJ128>3.0.CO;2-R
  19. Utterback, J. M., Mastering the dynamics of innovation, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1994.
  20. Helfat, C.E., "Know-how and Assert Complementarity and Dynamic Capability Accumulation: The Case of R&D," Strategy management journal, 18(5), pp. 339-360, 1997.<339::AID-SMJ883>3.0.CO;2-7
  21. Acs, Z.J. and D.B. Audretsch, "Patents as a measure of innovative activity," Kylos, 42, pp. 151-180, 1989.
  22. Archibugi, D. and M. Pianta, "Measuring technological change through patents and innovation surveys," Technovation, 16(9), pp. 451-468, 1996. DOI:
  23. Brouwer, E. and A. Kleinknecht, "Innovative Output, and a Firm's Propensity to Patent: An Exploration of CIS Micro Data," Research Policy, 28, pp. 615-624, 1989. DOI:
  24. Cohen, W.M. and D.A. Levinthal, "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, 99, September, pp. 569-596, 1997.
  25. Galende, J. and J. M. de la Fuente, "Internal Factors Determining a Firm's Innovative Behavior," Research Policy, 32, pp. 715-736, 2003. DOI:
  26. Kondo, M., "R&D Dynamics of Creating Patents in the Japanese Industry," Research Policy, 28, pp. 587-600, 1999. DOI:
  27. Shefer, D. and A. Frenkel, "R&D, Firm Size and Innovation: An Empirical Analysis," Technovation, 25(1), pp. 25-32, 2005. DOI:
  28. Giliches, Z., "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature 28, pp. 1661-1707, 1990.
  29. Hall, B.H., A.B. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg, "The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, Oct.2001.
  30. Wan, D., C.H. Ong and F. Lee, "Determinants of Firm Innovation in Singapore," Technovation, 25(3), pp. 261-268, 2005. DOI:
  31. Griliches, Z., R&D, Patents, and Productivity, NBER Conference Proceedings. University of Chicago Press, 1984. DOI:
  32. Trajtenberg, M., "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovation," The Rand Journal of Economics, 21(1), pp. 172-187, 1990. DOI:
  33. Griliches, Z., Hall, B.H. and A. Pakes, "The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity," in P. Dasgupta and P. Stoneman, eds., Economic Policy and Technological Performance, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 97-124, 1987. DOI:
  34. Jaffe, A., M. Trajtenberg and M.S. Fogarty, "The Meaning of Patent Citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve Survey of Patentees," in A. Jaffe and M.Trajtenberg, eds., Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002.
  35. Harhoff, D., F.M. Scherer and K. Vopel, "Citations, Family Size, Opposition and the Value of Patent Rights," Research Policy, 32(8), pp. 1343-1363, 2003. DOI:
  36. Deng, Z., B. Lev and F. Narin, "Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance," Financial Analysts Journal, 55(3), pp. 20-32, 1999. DOI:
  37. Hall, B.H., A. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg, "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," NBER Working Paper 7741, 2000.
  38. Nagaoka, S., "Patent Quality, Cumulative Innovation and Market Value: Evidence from Japanese Firm Level Panel Data," Working Paper WP#05-06, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University, 2005.
  39. Afuah, A., Innovation management: strategies, implementation and Profits, Oxford University Press, New York, 1998.
  40. Abernathy, W. J. and K.B. Clark, "Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, 14, pp. 3-22, 1985. DOI:
  41. Abernathy, W.J. and J.M. Utterback, "Patterns of innovation in technology," Technology Review, 80(7), pp. 40-47, 1978.
  42. Foster, R.N., Innovation: The attacker's advantage, Summit Books, New York, 1986. DOI:
  43. Henderson, R. and K.B. Clark, "Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms", Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, pp. 9-30, 1990. DOI:
  44. Schumpeter, J.A., Both of Schumpeter's Positions are outlined in Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 3rd ed.Harper, New York, 1950.
  45. Tushman, M.L. and P. Anderson, "Technological discontinuities and organizational environments," Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, pp. 439-465, 1986. DOI:
  46. Tushman, M.L. and L. Rosenkopf, "On the organizational determinants of technological evolution: Towards a sociology of technology," Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, pp. 311-347, 1992.
  47. Rosenkopf, L. and A. Nerkar, "Beyond local search: boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), pp. 287-306, 2001. DOI:
  48. Fleming, L., "Recombinant uncertainty in technological search," Management Science, 47(1), pp. 117-132, 2001. DOI:
  49. Ahuja, G. and R. Katila, "Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), pp. 197-220, 2001. DOI:
  50. Heeley, M.B. and R. Jacobson, "The recency of technological input and financial performance," Strategic Management Journal, 29, pp. 723-744, 2008. DOI:
  51. Egghe, L. and R. Rousseau, Introduction to Informetrics: Quantitative Methods in Library, Documentation and Information Science, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, p.220, 1990.