R&D or R vs. D? Firm Innovation Strategy and Equity Ownership

James Driver, Adam Kolasinski, J. Stanfield
{"title":"R&D or R vs. D? Firm Innovation Strategy and Equity Ownership","authors":"James Driver, Adam Kolasinski, J. Stanfield","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3489616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We analyze a unique dataset that separately reports research and development expenditures for a large panel of public and private firms. Definitions of “research” and “development” in this dataset, respectively, correspond to definitions of knowledge “exploration” and “exploitation” in the innovation theory literature. We can thus test theories of how equity ownership status relates to innovation strategy. We find that public firms have greater research intensity than private firms, inconsistent with theories asserting private ownership is more conducive to exploration. We also find public firms invest more intensely in innovation of all sorts. These results suggest relaxed financing constraints enjoyed by public firms, as well as their diversified shareholder bases, make them more conducive to investing in all types of innovation. Reconciling several seemingly conflicting results in prior research, we find private-equity-owned firms, though not less innovative overall than other private firms, skew their innovation strategies toward development and away from research.","PeriodicalId":11881,"journal":{"name":"Entrepreneurship & Finance eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Entrepreneurship & Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3489616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

We analyze a unique dataset that separately reports research and development expenditures for a large panel of public and private firms. Definitions of “research” and “development” in this dataset, respectively, correspond to definitions of knowledge “exploration” and “exploitation” in the innovation theory literature. We can thus test theories of how equity ownership status relates to innovation strategy. We find that public firms have greater research intensity than private firms, inconsistent with theories asserting private ownership is more conducive to exploration. We also find public firms invest more intensely in innovation of all sorts. These results suggest relaxed financing constraints enjoyed by public firms, as well as their diversified shareholder bases, make them more conducive to investing in all types of innovation. Reconciling several seemingly conflicting results in prior research, we find private-equity-owned firms, though not less innovative overall than other private firms, skew their innovation strategies toward development and away from research.
研发还是研发vs研发?企业创新战略与股权
我们分析了一个独特的数据集,该数据集分别报告了大量公共和私营公司的研发支出。本数据集中“研究”和“开发”的定义分别对应于创新理论文献中知识“探索”和“利用”的定义。因此,我们可以检验股权状况如何与创新战略相关的理论。我们发现上市公司的研究强度大于民营公司,这与私有制更有利于探索的理论不一致。我们还发现,上市公司在各种创新方面的投资力度更大。这些结果表明,上市公司享有宽松的融资限制,以及它们多元化的股东基础,使它们更有利于投资于所有类型的创新。综合先前研究中几个看似矛盾的结果,我们发现,尽管私募股权公司的整体创新能力并不比其他私营公司差,但它们的创新战略更倾向于开发,而不是研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信