BA 590 IB

BADM 590 IB: Managing Innovation in the Global Context
Spring 2009
Monday 1-4 p.m.
Room 3021 BIF




ghoetker@illinois.edu

Glenn Hoetker
Director, Center for International Business Education & Research
Associate Professor (Business, Law, Institute for Genomic Biology)

Room 4019 BIF
265-4081


OVERVIEW

For decades, the accepted wisdom was that the West, particularly the U.S., was the central source of—-and market for—technological innovation and the resulting products. Japan’s rise in the 1980s provided the first challenge to this perception and, in many ways, launched the modern study of National Systems of Innovation. South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore quickly followed Japan in becoming major technological players. At the start of the 21st century, the field expanded again, with China and India becoming major players. There is also an important second tier, including smaller Asian countries (e.g., Malaysia) and the Middle East (which plays an important role as a source of capital). Some in the United States in turn are worried or even alarmed, concerned that the U.S. is losing its preeminent position in global science and technology. Others believe that the globalization of innovation will open new markets and create new opportunities for collaboration.

These changes have implications for societies, firms, and individuals. In this seminar, we will examine a subset of these implications. Theoretically, we will draw heavily from management research, including international business, strategy, entrepreneurship and the management of technology literature. We will also consider work from economic geography, development economics, political science and other related fields. The goal is to provide you with a well-developed sense of common concepts, key questions established empirical approaches. The field is very broad and we will omit many interesting and important topics.

We will all come to class with differing backgrounds, so I’m not making assumptions regarding pre-existing knowledge. If you’ve not encountered the literature on technology management before, you might find my syllabus for my 2004 seminar on Strategic Issues in the Management of Technology and Innovation useful. I’ve included it with the other readings (“Syllabus for 2004 MOT class.doc”).

CLASS FORMAT
The syllabus lists an extensive set of readings. We will cover a subset of the material in class and use other readings as background for term papers and subsequent research.

At the end of each meeting we will select which papers we want to discuss in our next meeting. We will divide up the assigned papers, with each student being responsible for one paper. This means being ready to lead discussion of the paper in the next class session. In addition, you are to prepare a write-up of approximately one page for distribution to the class. Approximately 2/3 of the write-up should summarize the research question, the theoretical basis for the argument, the principal hypotheses, empirical approach and key findings. The remaining 1/3 should include your evaluation of the article, your thoughts about how it contributes to the larger literature, and your thoughts about how it could extended. You are responsible for being able to discuss all of the papers chosen for discussion.

TERM PAPER
You will complete a term paper for the course. Your goal for the term paper is to prepare a draft of a publication-quality article. The focus of the paper is up to you. You may choose, for example, to develop an in-depth critique of a particular point of view; expose critical and non-obvious inconsistencies between the approaches; pursue in-depth development of testable hypotheses concerning a theory or confluence of theories; develop an empirical research design aimed at theory development or testing; or conduct empirical research using real data. The paper must contain some empirical testing or conduct an empirical test using real data. In evaluating your paper, my central criterion will be that of significance: how important are the ideas or empirical results that you generate for advancing the state of the art in strategic management research? The work must advance well beyond a simple literature review. You must use this paper as an opportunity to push the thinking within the field forward in a significant way. A one page proposal outlining your topic is due on the seventh week of class.

Your final written paper is due by Thursday, May 13.

EVALUATION
I will base grading for the course on preparation for class (30%), contribution to the discussions (30%), and the term paper (40%). I will base your final grade on the material that you hand in by the due date. I do not grant incomplete grades.

MATERIALS
Materials will be distributed via my website

XXX

Files are named by author and year. Note that you can download individual articles or a zipped file of all the articles.

There is no required textbook, although there is a book that I strongly encourage you to buy

Williams, Joseph M. (1997). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace. New York: Longman.

No matter how good your ideas are, the clarity of your exposition will play an important role in readers’ understanding of your arguments and contributions. Some academic writing provides a wonderful example of good writing. Most, unfortunately, does not. In ten simple rules, Williams provides a wonderful guide to becoming a more persuasive, interesting, and graceful writer.

We will make use of a wiki, which is at XXX. The first time you login, you will need to click on "log in" link >> Click on "Create an account" >> and create a username and password for yourself.

SESSION OUTLINE
1. Introduction
  • Jaffe, A. 2008. The “Science of Science Policy”: reflections on the important questions and the challenges they present. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 131-139.
  • Roberts, E. B. 2007. Managing invention and innovation. Research-Technology Management, 50(1): 35-54.
  • Van de ven, A. H. 1986. Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32(5): 590-607.
2. National systems of innovation -- Classics
  • Freeman, C. 1987. Generic technologies, changes of techno-economic paradigm, and technological forecasting. In C. Freeman (Ed.), Technology, policy, and economic performance : lessons from Japan: 55-90. London ; New York: Pinter Publishers.
  • Freeman, C. 1987. Introduction and summary. In C. Freeman (Ed.), Technology, policy, and economic performance : lessons from Japan: 1-30. London ; New York: Pinter Publishers.
  • Freeman, C. 1987. National systems of innovation: the case of Japan. In C. Freeman (Ed.), Technology, policy, and economic performance : lessons from Japan: 31-54. London ; New York: Pinter Publishers.
  • Freeman, C. 1987. Technology gaps, international trade and long waves. In C. Freeman (Ed.), Technology, policy, and economic performance : lessons from Japan: 91-117. London ; New York: Pinter Publishers.
  • Freeman, C. 1995. The National System of Innovation in Historical-Perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1): 5-24.
  • Lundvall B-Å. 1992. National systems of innovation : towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers. Chapter 1.
  • Mowery, D. C. & Rosenberg, N. 1993. The U.S. National Innovation System. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: a comparative analysis: 29-75. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Nelson, R. 1993. Technical Innovation and National Systems. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: a comparative analysis: 3-23. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Nelson, R. R. 1993. A Retrospective. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: a comparative analysis: 505-524. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Odagiri, H. & Goto, A. 1993. The Japanese System of Innovation: Past, Present and Future. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: a comparative analysis: 76-114. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
3. National systems of innovation -- Applications
  • Cohen, W. M., Goto, A., Nagata, A., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. R. 2002. R&D Spillovers, Patents and the Incentives to Innovate in Japan and the United States. Research Policy, 31(8-9): 1349-1367.
  • Groenewegen, J., G. & Marianne van der, S. 2006. The Evolution of National Innovation Systems. Journal of Economic Issues, 40(2): 277.
  • Kitschelt, H. 1991. Industrial Governance Structures, Innovation Strategies, and the Case of Japan - Sectoral or Cross-National Comparative-Analysis. International Organization, 45(4): 453-493.
  • Kneller, R. 2003. Autarkic drug discovery in Japanese pharmaceutical companies: insights into national differences in industrial innovation. Research Policy, 32(10): 1805-1827.
  • Meyer-Krahmer, F. & Reger, G. 1999. New perspectives on the innovation strategies of multinational enterprises: lessons for technology policy in Europe. Research Policy, 28(7): 751-776.
  • Montobbio, F. 2003. Sectoral patterns of technological activity and export market share dynamics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 27(4): 523-545.
  • Pavitt, K. 1984. Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change - Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory. Research Policy, 13(6): 343-373.
  • Sakakibara, M. 1997. Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how? Research Policy, 26(4-5): 447-473.
  • Whitley, R. 2000. The institutional structuring of innovation strategies: Business systems, firm types and patterns of technical change in different market economies. Organization Studies, 21(5): 855-886.
4. Indicators and data sources -- session 1
  • Atrostic, B. 2008. Measuring U.S. innovative activity: business data at the U.S. Census Bureau. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 153-171.
  • Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., Holmen, M., & Rickne, A. 2002. Innovation systems: analytical and methodological issues. Research Policy, 31(2): 233-245.
  • Gereffi, G., Wadhwa, V., Rissing, B., & Ong, R. 2008. Getting the Numbers Right: International Engineering Education in the United States, China, and India. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1): 13-25.
  • Howenstine, N. 2008. Innovation-related data in bureau of economic analysis international economic surveys. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 141-152.
  • Kerr, W. R. & Fu, S. H. 2008. The survey of industrial R&D - patent database link project. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 173-186.
  • Moris, F., Jankowski, J., & Perrolle, P. 2008. Advancing measures of innovation in the United States. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 123-130.
  • OECD & Communities, E. 2005. Chapter 2. In O. E. Communities (Ed.), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data. Paris, France: OECD/European Communities.
5. Indicators and data sources -- session 2
  • Comin, D., Hobijn, B., & Rovito, E. 2008. A new approach to measuring technology with an application to the shape of the diffusion curves. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 187-207.
  • Eaton, J. & Kortum, S. 1999. International technology diffusion: Theory and measurement. International Economic Review, 40(3): 537-570.
  • Globerman, S., Kokko, A., & Sjoholm, F. 2000. International technology diffusion: Evidence from Swedish patent data. Kyklos, 53(1): 17-38.
  • Hafner, K. 2008. The pattern of international patenting and technology diffusion. Applied Economics, 40(21): 2819-2837.
  • Katz, J. & Hicks, D. 1998. Bibliometric indicators for national systems of innovation.
  • Kumar, S. & Garg, K. C. 2005. Scientometrics of computer science research in India and China. Scientometrics, 64(2): 121-132.
  • Leydesdorff, L. & Fritsch, M. 2006. Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a Triple Helix dynamics. Research Policy, 35(10): 1538-1553.
  • Mairesse, J. & Mohnen, P. 2002. Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: An illustrative framework and an application. American Economic Review, 92(2): 226-230.
  • Makhija, M. V., Kim, K., & Williamson, S. D. 1997. Measuring globalization of industries using a national industry approach: Empirical evidence across five countries and over time. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4): 679-710.
  • Wagner, C. S. & Leydesdorff, L. 2005. Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10): 1608-1618.
  • Youtie, J. & Shapira, P. 2008. Mapping the nanotechnology enterprise: a multi-indicator analysis of emerging nanodistricts in the US South. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(2): 209-223.
  • Zhou, P. & Leydesdorff, L. 2006. The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1): 83-104.
6. R&D in the MNC -- Background and classics
  • Almeida, P., Song, J. Y., & Grant, R. M. 2002. Are Firms Superior to Alliances and Markets? An Empirical Test of Cross-Border Knowledge Building. Organization Science, 13(2): 147-161.
  • Florida, R. 1997. The globalization of R&D: Results of a survey of foreign- affiliated R&D laboratories in the USA. Research Policy, 26(1): 85-103.
  • Frost, T. S. 2001. The geographic sources of foreign subsidiaries' innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 22(2): 101-123.
  • Granstrand, O. 1999. Internationalization of corporate R&D: a study of Japanese and Swedish corporations. Research Policy, 28(2-3): 275-302.
  • Kogut, B. & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary-Theory of the Multinational-Corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4): 625-645.
  • Pearce, R. & Papanastassiou, M. 1999. Overseas R & D and the strategic evolution of MNEs: evidence from laboratories in the UK. Research Policy, 28(1): 23-41.
  • Roberts, E. B. 1995. Benchmarking the strategic management of technology - I. Research Technology Management, 38(1): 44-56.
  • Teece, D. 1977. Technology transfer by multinational firms: The resource cost of transferring technological know-how. The Economic Journal(June): 242-261.
7. R&D in the MNC -- Knowledge flows
  • Beaverstock, J. V. 2004. 'Managing across borders': knowledge management and expatriation in professional service legal firms. Journal of Economic Geography, 4(2): 157.
  • Becker, M. C. 2001. Managing dispersed knowledge: Organizational problems, managerial strategies, and their effectiveness. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7): 1037-1051.
  • Gupta, A. K. & Govindarajan, V. 2000. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4): 473-496.
  • Lam, A. & Egham, S. 2006. The tacit knowledge problem in multinational corporations: a comparative analysis of Japanese and US MNCs’ transnational learning strategies.
  • Martin, X. & Salomon, R. 2003. Tacitness, learning, and international expansion: A study of foreign direct investment in a knowledge-intensive industry. Organization Science, 14(3): 297-311.
  • Nobel, R. & Birkinshaw, J. 1998. Innovation in multinational corporations: Control and communication patterns in international R & D operations. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5): 479-496.
  • Subramaniam, M. & Venkatraman, N. 2001. Determinants of transnational new product development capability: Testing the influence of transferring and deploying tacit overseas knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4): 359-378.
  • Veugelers, R. & Cassiman, B. 2004. Foreign subsidiaries as a channel of international technology diffusion: Some direct firm level evidence from Belgium. European Economic Review, 48(2): 455-476.
  • Zander, I. 1998. The evolution of technological capabilities in the multinational corporation - dispersion, duplication and potential advantages from multinationality. Research Policy, 27(1): 17-35.
8. R & D in the MNC -- Location
  • Kuemmerle, W. 1999. The drivers of foreign direct investment into research and development: An empirical investigation. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1): 1-24.
  • Lehrer, M. & Asakawa, K. 2002. Offshore knowledge incubation: the "third path" for embedding R & D labs in foreign systems of innovation. Journal of World Business, 37(4): 297-306.
  • McDonough, E. F., Kahn, K. B., & Barczak, G. 2001. An investigation of the use of global, virtual, and colocated new product development teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(2): 110-120.
  • Patel, P. 1996. Are large firms internationalizing the generation of technology? Some new evidence. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 43(1): 41-47.
  • Pearce, R. D. 1999. Decentralised R&D and strategic competitiveness: globalised approaches to generation and use of technology in multinational enterprises (MNEs). Research Policy, 28(2-3): 157-178.
9. R&D in the MNC -- Organization and management
  • Asakawa, K. 2001. Organizational tension in international R&D management: the case of Japanese firms. Research Policy, 30(5): 735-757.
  • Birkinshaw, J. 1997. Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3): 207-229.
  • Cardinal, L. B. & Hatfield, D. E. 2000. Internal knowledge generation: the research laboratory and innovative productivity in the pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17(3-4): 247-271.
  • Chiesa, V. 1999. Technology development control styles in multinational corporations: a case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 16(2): 191-206.
  • Frost, T. S., Birkinshaw, J. M., & Ensign, P. C. 2002. Centers of excellence in multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11): 997-1018.
  • Lam, A. 2003. Organizational Learning in Multinationals: R&D Networks of Japanese and US MNEs in the UK*. Journal of Management Studies, 40(3): 673-703.
  • Lehrer, M. & Asakawa, K. 2003. Managing intersecting R&D social communities: A comparative study of European 'knowledge incubators' in Japanese and American firms. Organization Studies, 24(5): 771-792.
  • Mendez, A. 2003. The coordination of globalized R&D activities through project teams organization: an exploratory empirical study. Journal of World Business, 38(2): 96-109.
10. The role of the entrepreneur
  • Feldman, M. 2001. The Entrepreneurial Event Revisited: Firm Formation in a Regional Context. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4): 861-891.
  • Florida, R. & Kenney, M. 1988. Venture Capital and High Technology Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 3(4): 301-319.
  • Florida, R. L. & Kenney, M. 1988. Venture Capital, High Technology and Regional Development. Regional Studies, 22(1): 33 - 48.
  • Portes, A., Haller, W. J., & Guarnizo, L. E. 2002. Transnational entrepreneurs: An alternative form of immigrant economic adaptation. American Sociological Review, 67(2): 278-298.
  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., Bowie, J. I., & Smith-Doerr, L. 2002. The spatial clustering of science and capital: Accounting for biotech firm-venture capital relationships. Regional Studies, 36(3): 291-305.
  • Stam, E., Suddle, K., Hessels, S. J. A., & Van Stel, A. J. High Growth Entrepreneurs, Public Policies and Economic Growth: SSRN.
  • Wright, M., Pruthi, S., & Lockett, A. 2005. International venture capital research: From cross-country comparisons to crossing borders. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(3): 135-165.
  • Zook, M. A. 2002. Grounded capital: venture financing and the geography of the Internet industry, 1994-2000. J Econ Geogr, 2(2): 151-177.
11. Mobility of scientific talent
  • Basri, E. & Box, S. 2008. Knowledge diffusion and impacts of international mobility. In E. Basri & S. Box & O. f. E. C.-o. a. Development. (Eds.), The global competition for talent : mobility of the highly skilled: 21-68. Paris: OECD.
  • Gillespie, K., Riddle, L., Sayre, E., & Sturges, D. 1999. Diaspora interest in homeland investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3): 623-634.
  • Hart, D. 2007. Understanding immigration in a national systems of innovation framework. Science and Public Policy, 34(1): 45-53.
  • Kerr, W. R. 2008. Ethnic scientific communities and international technology diffusion. Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(3): 518-537.
  • Saxenian, A. 2002. BRAIN CIRCULATION. How high-skill immigration makes everyone better off. BROOKINGS REVIEW, 20(1): 28-31.
  • Saxenian , A. 2002. Transnational communities and the evolution of global production networks: The cases of Taiwan, China and India. Industry and Innovation, 9(3): 183.
  • Svanfeldt, C. & Ullström, J. 2001. Firm demography: Mapping firm dynamics using human resource data, Innovative people: Mobility of skilled personnel in national innovation systems. Paris: OECD.
  • ter Weel, B. 1999. Investing in Knowledge: On the Trade-Off between R&D, ICT, Skills and Migration. Maastricht Economic Research Institute (MERIT), Maastricht University.
12. Impact on national development
  • Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., Braunerhjelm, P., & Carlsson, B. 2005. Growth and Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Assessment: Centre for Economic Policy Research.
  • Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D. B., & Sarkar, M. B. The Process of Creative Construction: Knowledge Spillovers, Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth: SSRN.
  • Braunerhjelm, P. & Borgman, B. 2004. Geographical Concentration, Entrepreneurship and Regional Growth: Evidence from Regional Data in Sweden, 1975-99. Regional Studies, 38(8): 929-947.
  • Detragiache, E. 1998. Technology diffusion and international income convergence. Journal of Development Economics, 56(2): 367-392.
  • Gong, G. & Keller, W. 2003. Convergence and polarization in global income levels: a review of recent results on the role of international technology diffusion. Research Policy, 32(6): 1055-1079.
13. Outside the Triad--Background, theory and policy
  • Contractor, F. J. K., S. 2004. The role of export-driven entrepreneurship in economic development: A comparison of software exports from India, China, and Taiwan. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71(8): 799-822.
  • Hoekman, B. M., Maskus, K. E., & Saggi, K. 2005. Transfer of technology to developing countries: Unilateral and multilateral policy options. World Development, 33(10): 1587-1602.
  • Ma, Z. D. 2002. Social-capital mobilization and income returns to entrepreneurship: the case of return migration in rural China. Environment and Planning a, 34(10): 1763-1784.
  • Oliveira, F. H. P. J., F. G.Lemos, M. B. 2006. Increasing returns to scale and international diffusion of technology: An empirical study for Brazil (1976-2000). World Development, 34(1): 75-88.
  • Potì, B. 2001. Differences in the propensity to innovate between less and more developed regions: How a system of innovation approach can explain them In OECD (Ed.), Innovative networks: Co-operation in national innovation systems: 169-192. Paris, France: OECD.
  • Savvides, A. Z., M. 2005. International technology diffusion and the growth of TFP in the manufacturing sector of developing economies. Review of Development Economics, 9(4): 482-501.
  • Yang, Q. & Jiang, C. 2007. Location advantages and subsidiaries’ R&D activities in emerging economies: Exploring the effect of employee mobility. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(3): 341-358.
14. Beyond the Triad -- Country studies
  • Choung, J. Y. & Hwang, H. R. 2000. National systems of innovation: Institutional linkages and performances in the case of Korea and Taiwan. Scientometrics, 48(3): 413-426.
  • Djankov, S., Qian, Y. Y., Roland, G., & Zhuravskaya, E. 2006. Entrepreneurship in China and Russia compared. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4(2-3): 352-365.
  • Dossani, R. & Kenney, M. 2002. Creating an environment for venture capital in India. World Development, 30(2): 227-253.
  • Lee, C.-K. & Saxenian, A. 2008. Coevolution and coordination: a systemic analysis of the Taiwanese information technology industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(2): 157-180.
  • Mani, S. 2006. The incremental innovator Vs the trader Contrasts between the sectoral systems of innovation of the Indian pharmaceutical and telecommunications industries, Globelicsindia2006.
  • Shapiro, M. 2007. Public-Private R&D Collaboration in Korea - A Cross-Sector Survey of Incentive Structures, Innovation and Technology in Korea: 93-113.
  • Shulin, G. & Lundvall, B.-Ö. 2006. China's Innovation System and the Move Toward Harmonious Growth and Endogenous Innovation. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 8(1): 1-26.
  • Steinfeld, E. 2004. Chinese Enterprise Development and the Challenge of Global Integration.
  • von Zedtwitz, M. & UNCTAD. 2005. International R&D Strategies in Companies from Developing Countries: The Case of China: UN.
  • Watkins-Mathys, L. & Foster, M. J. 2006. Entrepreneurship: the missing ingredient in China's STIPs? Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 18(3): 249-274.
  • Yang, J. Y. & Li, J. T. 2008. The development of entrepreneurship in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(2): 335-359.
  • Yang, K. M. 2004. Institutional holes and entrepreneurship in China. Sociological Review, 52(3): 371-389.