Journal of the Korea Convergence Society (한국융합학회논문지)

Korea Convergence Society (한국융합학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Knowledge Combination and the Usefulness of Inventions: Focusing on the Moderating Effects of Technological Change

지식 조합과 발명 유용성 간의 관계에 대한 연구: 기술 변화의 조절 효과를 중심으로

  • Received : 2018.07.16
  • Accepted : 2018.10.20
  • Published : 2018.10.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The study examines the effects of knowledge combination and of its interaction with technological change on the usefulness of inventions. We argue that inventing with knowledge components of prior art or with those in a variety of technical fields results in useful inventions, which changes after the emergence of dominant design because external actors' perception of which knowledge components are appropriate in current technological environments changes. Based on data from U.S. granted optical disc patents filed from 1992 to 2000, the results show that inventions with more new knowledge components relative to their prior art are less useful but that inventions with more diversified knowledge components are more useful. Also, the empirical findings show that the negative relationship between new knowledge components of inventions and their usefulness strengthens after dominant design emerges.

본 논문은 지식 조합과 기술 변화 간의 상호 작용이 발명 유용성에 미치는 영향을 분석한다. 본 연구는 기술 변화에 따라 외부 주체들이 현 기술 환경에 적합하다고 판단하는 지식 요소가 달라져 선행 기술 대비 새로운 지식 요소나 다양한 기술 분야의 지식 요소를 조합한 발명의 유용성이 변함을 주장한다. 1992년부터 2000년까지 미국에 출원된 광학 디스크 등록 특허들을 분석한 결과는 선행 기술 대비 새로운 지식 요소를 많이 가지는 발명의 유용성은 낮음을 보였다. 그러나 다각화된 지식 요소를 가지는 발명의 유용성은 높았다. 또한, 실증 분석 결과는 선행 기술 대비 새로운 지식 요소와 발명 유용성 간의 부의 관계는 지배적 디자인이 나타난 이후 강화됨을 보였다.

Keywords

References

  1. M. B. Heeley & R. Jacobson. (2008). The recency of technological inputs and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(7), 723-744. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.682
  2. O. Alexy, G. George & A. J. Salter. (2013). Cui bono? The selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 270-291. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0193
  3. P. K. Toh & T. Kim. (2013). Why put all your eggs in one basket? A competition-based view of how technological uncertainty affects a firm's technological specialization. Organization Science, 24(4), 1214-1236. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0782
  4. L. Fleming, S. Mingo & D. Chen. (2007). Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 443-475. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.3.443
  5. P. G. Audia & J. A. Goncalo. (2007). Past success and creativity over time: A study of inventors in the hard disk drive industry. Management Science, 53(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0593
  6. L. Fleming. (2001). Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science, 41(1), 117-132.
  7. L. Fleming & O. Sorenson. (2004). Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8-9), 909-928. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.384
  8. M. A. Schilling & E. Green. (2011). Recombinant search and breakthrough idea generation: An analysis of high impact papers in the social sciences. Research Policy, 40(10), 1321-1331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.06.009
  9. S. Grodal, A. Gotsopoulos & F. F. Suarez. (2015). The coevolution of technologies and categories during industry emergence. Academy of Management Review, 40(3), 423-445. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0359
  10. S. Kaplan & M. Tripsas. (2008). Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change. Research Policy, 37(5), 790-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002
  11. J. P. Murmann & K. Frenken. (2006). Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change. Research Policy, 35(7), 925-952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.011
  12. R. Kapoor & R. Adner. (2012). What firms make vs. what they know: How firms' production and knowledge boundaries affect competitive advantage in the face of technological change. Organization Science, 23(5), 1227-1248. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0686
  13. J. B. Sorensen & T. E. Stuart. (2000). Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666980
  14. S. Kaplan & K. Vakili. (2015). The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10), 1435-1457. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2294
  15. S. Jain. (2012). Pragmatic agency in technology standards setting: The case of Ethernet. Research Policy, 41(9), 1643-1654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.025
  16. S. den Uijl, R. Bekkers & H. J. de Vries. (2013). Managing intellectual property using patent pools: Lessons from three generations of pools in the optical disc industry. California Management Review, 55(4), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2013.55.4.31
  17. T. Rayna & L. Striukova. (2015). What makes patent pools successful? An analysis of optical disc and mobile phone industries. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 19(1-2), 6-29. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2015.068435
  18. L. G. Zucker, M. R. Darby & J. S. Armstrong. (2002). Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science, 48(1), 138-153. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.1.138.14274
  19. J. M. Podolny, T. E. Stuart & M. T. Hannan. (1996). Networks, knowledge, and niches: Competition in the worldwide semiconductor industry, 1984-1991. American Journal of Sociology, 102(3), 659-689. https://doi.org/10.1086/230994
  20. J. G. March & H. A. Simon. (1993). Organizations (2nd Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
  21. R. Katila & G. Ahuja. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1183-1194. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069433
  22. J. Denrell & J. G. March. (2001). Adaptation as information restriction: The hot stove effect. Organization Science, 12(5), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.5.523.10092
  23. M. Gruber, D. Harhoff & K. Hoisl. (2013). Knowledge recombination across technological boundaries: Scientists vs. engineers. Management Science, 59(4), 837-851. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1572
  24. G. Carnabuci & E. Operti. (2013). Where do firms' recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganizational networks, knowledge, and firms' ability to innovate through technological recombination. Strategic Management Journal, 34(13), 1591-1613. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2084
  25. J. Singh & L. Fleming. (2010). Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Science, 56(1), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1072
  26. A. Nerkar & S. Paruchuri. (2005). Evolution of R&D capabilities: The role of knowledge networks within a firm. Management Science, 51(5), 771-785. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0354
  27. J. Alcácer M. & M. Gittelman. (2006). Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: The influence of examiner citations. Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 774-779. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.88.4.774
  28. M. Trajtenberg. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172-187. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555502
  29. M. Benner & J. Waldfogel. (2008). Close to you? Bias and precision in patent-based measures of technological proximity. Research Policy, 37(9), 1556-1567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.05.011
  30. A. M. Joshi & A. Nerkar. (2011). When do strategic alliances inhibit innovation by firms? Evidence from patent pools in the global optical disc industry. Strategic Management Journal, 32(11), 1139-1160. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.929
  31. D. Dranove & N. Gandal. (2003). The Dvd-vs.-Divx standard war: Empirical evidence of network effects and preannouncement effects. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 12(3), 363-386. https://doi.org/10.1162/105864003322309518
  32. P. M. Wiegmann, H. J. de Vries & K. Blind. (2017). Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 46(8), 1370-1386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.06.002
  33. R. Garud, S. Jain & A. Kumaraswamy. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 196-214. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069292
  34. J. Lee & N. Berente. (2013). The era of incremental change in the technology innovation life cycle: An analysis of the automotive emission control industry. Research Policy, 42(8), 1469-1481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.004
  35. B. Kim, E. Kim, D. J. Miller & J. T. Mahoney. (2016). The impact of the timing of patents on innovation performance. Research Policy, 45(4), 914-928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.017
  36. K. Vakili. (2016). Collaboration promotion of technology standards and the impact on innovation, industry structure, and organizational capabilities: Evidence from modern patent pools. Organization Science, 27(6), 1504-1524. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1098
  37. W. Schoenmakers & G. Duysters. (2010). The technological origins of radical inventions. Research Policy, 39(8), 1051-1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.05.013
  38. A. Mehta, M. Rysman & T. Simcoe. (2010). Identifying the age profile of patent citations: New estimates of knowledge diffusion. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 25(7), 1179-1204. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.1086
  39. J. Stock & M. Watson. (2003). Introduction to Econometrics. Boston: Addison Wesley.
  40. M. Trajtenberg, R. Henderson & A. Jaffe. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), 19-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599700000006
  41. B. H. Hall. (2005). A note on the bias in Herfindahl-type measures based on count data. Revue d'economie industrielle, 110(2), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.3406/rei.2005.3076
  42. A. Taylor & H. R. Greve. (2006). Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 723-740. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083029
  43. J. Bessen. (2008). The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics. Research Policy, 37(5), 932-945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.005
  44. R. M. O'Brien. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41(5), 673-690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6
  45. D. J. Miller, M. J. Fern & L. B. Cardinal. (2007). The Use of Knowledge for Technological Innovation Within Diversified Firms. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 307-325. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24634437
  46. S. Arts & R. Veugelers. (2015). Technology familiarity, recombinant novelty, and breakthrough invention. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(6), 1215-1246. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtu029