Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/use/tkiwps/0809.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Post Merger Innovative Patterns in Small and Medium Firms

Author

Listed:
  • E. Cefis
  • M. Ghita
Abstract
This paper investigates whether involvement in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) triggers distinct patterns of innovative behaviour across firms situated at different points on the firm size distribution. Firms use more and more M&As as mechanisms to bridge the gap between where they are and what they want to achieve in terms of innovation and performance. We explore the different impact of M&A activity on the likelihood that firms begin to innovate using an unique dataset combining innovation and economic firm-level data from two different sources: the 4 waves of Community Innovation Survey and the Business Register, for the Dutch manufacturing sector. The analysis is carried out at different size classes. The results show that both new entry and persistence in innovative activities are fostered by M&A involvement. Medium firms are the ones showing the highest probabilities of entering /persisting in innovative activities after M&As. For small firms, M&As do not ease the overcome of “the innovative threshold†; on the contrary they seem to increase the probability of exiting innovative status in the post-merger period.

Suggested Citation

  • E. Cefis & M. Ghita, 2008. "Post Merger Innovative Patterns in Small and Medium Firms," Working Papers 08-09, Utrecht School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:use:tkiwps:0809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/31436/08-09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 100-133, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2005. "Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 39-54, January.
    3. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    4. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    5. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    6. Shantanu Dutta & Om Narasimhan & Surendra Rajiv, 2005. "Conceptualizing and measuring capabilities: methodology and empirical application," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 277-285, March.
    7. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 2, pages 16-23, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Huergo, Elena & Jaumandreu, Jordi, 2004. "Firms' age, process innovation and productivity growth," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 541-559, April.
    9. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    10. Geroski, P. A. & Van Reenen, J. & Walters, C. F., 1997. "How persistently do firms innovate?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 33-48, March.
    11. Schulz, Norbert, 2007. "Review of the Literature on the Impact of Mergers on Innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Xulia Gonzalez & Consuelo Pazo, 2004. "Firms' R&D dilemma: to undertake or not to undertake R&D," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 55-59.
    13. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    14. Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2001. "Markets for Technology and Their Implications for Corporate Strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(2), pages 419-451, June.
    15. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2002. "Accounting for Innovation and Measuring Innovativeness: An Illustrative Framework and an Application," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 226-230, May.
    16. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
    17. Gautam Ahuja & Riitta Katila, 2001. "Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 197-220, March.
    18. Evangelista, Rinaldo & Perani, Giulio & Rapiti, Fabio & Archibugi, Daniele, 1997. "Nature and impact of innovation in manufacturing industry: some evidence from the Italian innovation survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 521-536, December.
    19. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 55-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    21. Cloodt, Myriam & Hagedoorn, John & Van Kranenburg, Hans, 2006. "Mergers and acquisitions: Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 642-654, June.
    22. E. Cefis & A. Sabidussi & E.J.J Schenk, 2007. "Do mergers of potentially dominant firms foster innovation? An empirical analysis for the manufacturing sector," Working Papers 07-20, Utrecht School of Economics.
    23. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    24. Schulz, Norbert, 2007. "Review of the Literature on the Impact of Mergers on Innovation," W.E.P. - Würzburg Economic Papers 76, University of Würzburg, Department of Economics.
    25. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    26. John E. Butler, 1988. "Theories of technological innovation as useful tools for corporate strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 15-29, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matthias Deschryvere, 2014. "R&D, firm growth and the role of innovation persistence: an analysis of Finnish SMEs and large firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 767-785, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2015. "Crossing the innovation threshold through mergers and acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 698-710.
    2. Walter Park & Ralph Sonenshine, 2012. "Impact of Horizontal Mergers on Research & Development and Patenting: Evidence from Merger Challenges in the U.S," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 143-167, March.
    3. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    4. Cloodt, Myriam & Hagedoorn, John & Van Kranenburg, Hans, 2006. "Mergers and acquisitions: Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 642-654, June.
    5. Elena Cefis, 2010. "The impact of M&A on technology sourcing strategies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 27-51.
    6. E. Cefis & A. Sabidussi & E.J.J Schenk, 2007. "Do mergers of potentially dominant firms foster innovation? An empirical analysis for the manufacturing sector," Working Papers 07-20, Utrecht School of Economics.
    7. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    8. Montresor, Sandro & Vezzani, Antonio, 2015. "The production function of top R&D investors: Accounting for size and sector heterogeneity with quantile estimations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 381-393.
    9. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    10. Baumann, Julian & Kritikos, Alexander S., 2016. "The link between R&D, innovation and productivity: Are micro firms different?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1263-1274.
    11. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2009. "Innovative Sales, R&D and Total Innovation Expenditures: Panel Evidence on their Dynamics," CESifo Working Paper Series 2716, CESifo.
    12. Uwe Cantner, 2017. "Foundations of Economic Change: An Extended Schumpeterian Approach," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 9-49, Springer.
    13. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    14. Dosi Giovanni & Gambardella Alfonso & Grazzi Marco & Orsenigo Luigi, 2008. "Technological Revolutions and the Evolution of Industrial Structures: Assessing the Impact of New Technologies upon the Size and Boundaries of Firms," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-49, June.
    15. Mickey Folkeringa & Andre van Stel & Joris Meijaard, 2005. "Innovation, strategic renewal and its effect on small firm performance," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-36, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    16. Stefano Breschi, 2000. "The Geography of Innovation: A Cross-sector Analysis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 213-229.
    17. Beneito, Pilar, 2003. "Choosing among alternative technological strategies: an empirical analysis of formal sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 693-713, April.
    18. Tsai, Kuen-Hung & Wang, Jiann-Chyuan, 2008. "External technology acquisition and firm performance: A longitudinal study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 91-112, January.
    19. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    20. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mergers and acquisitions; innovation; small and medium enterprises; transition probabilities; probit models;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:use:tkiwps:0809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marina Muilwijk (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eiruunl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.