¿Cómo afectan las características de la industria a la relación entre la capacidad de I+D y la adopción de innovación abierta de entrada?

Referencias bibliográficas

• AGRESTI, A. (2010): Analysis of ordinal categorical data, 2ª ed., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.
• ARORA, A. y GAMBARDELLA, A. (1994): «Evaluating technological information and utilizing it – Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology», Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 24, nº 1, pp. 91-114.
• ARROW, K. (1962): «Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention». En The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors, Nber, pp. 609-626.
• BAYONA, C.; GARCÍA, M. y HUERTA, E. (2001): «Firms’ motivations for cooperative R&D: An empirical analysis of Spanish firms», Research Policy, vol. 30, nº 8, pp. 1289-1307.
• BERCHICCI, L. (2011): “Heterogeneity and intensity of R&D partnership in Italian manufacturing firms”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 58, nº 4, pp. 674-687.
• BERCHICCI, L. (2013): «Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance», Research Policy, vol. 42, pp. 117-127.
• BIANCHI, M.; CAVALIERE, A.; CHIARONI, D.; FRATTINI, F. y CHIESA, V. (2011): «Organisational modes for Open Innovation in the biopharmaceutical industry: An exploratory analysis», Technovation, vol. 31, nº 1, pp. 22-33.
• BOZEMAN, B.; LARÉDO, P. y MANGEMATIN, V. (2007): «Un ders tanding the emergence and deployment of ‘nano’ S&T», Research Policy, vol. 36, nº 6, pp. 807-812.
• CALANTONE, R.J. y STANKO, M.A. (2007): «Drivers of outsourced innovation: an exploratory study», Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 24, nº 3, pp. 230-241.
• CAMISÓN, C. y FORÉS, B. (2010): «Knowledge absorptive capacity: new insights for its conceptualization and measurement», Journal of Business Research, vol. 63, nº 7, pp. 707-715.
• CASSIMAN, B. y VEUGELERS, R. (2002): «R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence from Belgium», American Eco no mic Review, vol. 92, nº 4, pp. 1169-1184.
• CHESBROUGH, H. (2005): «Open Innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation», DRUID Summer Confe rence, Copenhague, junio, pp. 27–29.
• CHESBROUGH, H. (2006): «Open Innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation». En H. Chesbrough, W. Van ha verbeke y J. West (Eds), Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm (pp. 1-12). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
• CHRISTENSEN, R. H. B. (2013): Package «ordinal»: Regression models for ordinal data. Disponible en: http://cran.at.r-project. org/web/packages/ordinal/index.html.
• COCKBURN, I. y HENDERSON, R. (1998): «Absorptive capacity, coathouring behavior, and the organization of research in drug discovery», The Journal of Industrial Economics, vol. 46, nº 2, pp. 157-183.
• COHEN, W. y LEVINTHAL, D. (1989): «Innovation and learning: The two faces of R & D», The Economic Journal, vol. 99, nº 397, pp. 569-596.
• COHEN, W. y LEVINTHAL, D. (1990): «Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation», Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 35, pp. 128-152.
• CYERT, R. M., y MARCH, J. G. (1963): A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
• DAHLANDER, L. y GANN, D. M. (2010): «How open is innovation?», Research Policy, vol. 39, nº 6, pp. 699-709.
• DYER, J.H. y SINGH, H. (1998): «The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage», Academy of Management Review, vol. 23, nº 4, pp. 660- 679.
• ESCRIBANO, A.; FOSFURI, A. y TRIBÓ, J.A. (2009): «Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity», Research Policy, vol. 38, pp. 96-105.
• FOX, J. y ANDERSEN, R. (2006): «Effect displays for multinomial and proportional-odds logit models», Sociological Methodology, vol. 36, pp. 225-255.
• GALLINI, N.T. (2002): «The economics of patents: Lessons from recent US patent reform», The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 16, nº 2, pp. 131-154.
• GELMAN, A. y HILL, J. (2007): Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models, Cambridge University Press, New York.
• GREENE, W.H. (2003): Econometric analysis, 5ª ed., Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
• GUAN, J. y MA, N. (2007): «China’s emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’», Research Policy, vol. 36, nº 6, pp. 880-886.
• GULATI, G. y SINGH, H. (1998): «The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances», Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 43, nº. 4, pp. 781-814
• HAGEDOORN, J. (2002): «Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An over view of major trends and patterns since 1960”, Research Policy, vol. 31, nº 4, pp. 477-492.
• HAGEDOORN, J. y RIDDER, A.K. (2012): Open innovation, contracts, and intellectual property rights: An exploratory empirical study. UNU-MERIT, Maastricht Economic and Social Research and Training Centre on Innovation and Technology.
• HERVÁS-OLIVER, J.L. y ALBORS-GARRIGOS, J. (2009): «The role of the firm’s internal and relational capabilities in clusters: When distance and embeddedness are not wnough to explain innovation», Journal of Economic Geography, vol. 9, pp. 263-283.
• KEUPP, M. M. y GASSMANN, O. (2009): «Determinants and archetype users of open innovation», R&D Management, vol. 39, nº 4, pp. 331-341.
• LANE, P.J. y LUBATKIN, M. (1998): «Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning», Strategic Management Journal, vol. 19, nº 5, pp. 461-477.
• LEAHY, D. y NEARY, J.P. (2007): «Absorptive capacity, R&D spillovers and public policy», International Journal of Industrial Organization, vol. 25, nº 5, pp. 1089-1108.
• LEIPONEN, A. y HELFAT, C.E. (2010): «Innovation objectives, knowledge sources and the benefits of breadth», Strategic Ma nagement Journal, vol. 31, nº 2, pp. 224-236.
• LICHTENTHALER, U. (2011): «Open Innovation: Past research, current debates, and future directions», The Academy of Mana gement Perspectives, vol. 25, nº 1, pp. 75-93.
• LICHTENTHALER, U. y ERNST H. (2007): «External technology commercialization in large firms: Results of a quantitative benchmarking study», R&D Management, vol. 37, nº 5, pp. 383-397.
• LICHTENTHALER, U., y LICHTENTHALER, E. (2009): «A capability-based framework for open innovation: Complementing absorptive capacity», Journal of Management Studies, vol. 46, nº 8, pp. 1315-1338.
• MCGAHAN, A.M. y SILVERMAN, B.S. (2001): «How does innovative activity change as industries mature?», International Journal of Industrial Organization, vol. 19, nº 7, pp. 1141-1160.
• NELSON, R.R. y WINTER, S.G. (1982): «The Schumpeterian tradeoff revisited», The American Economic Review, vol. 72, nº 1, pp. 114-132.
• NOCEDAL, J. y WRIGHT, S.J. (1999): Numerical optimization, Springer-Verlag, New York.
• OLTRA, M.J. y FLOR, M. (2003): «The impact of technological opportunities and innovative capabilities on firms’ output innovation», Creativity and Innovation Management, vol. 12, nº 3, pp. 137-144.
• RIGBY, D. y ZOOK, C. (2002): «Open market innovation», Harvard Business Review, vol. 80, nº 10, pp.80-89.
• ROTHAERMEL, F.T. y DEEDS, D.L. (2006): «Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures», Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 21, nº 4, pp. 429-460.
• ROTHAERMEL, F.T. y THURSBY, M. (2007): «The nanotech versus the biotech revolution: Sources of productivity in incumbent firm research», Research Policy, vol. 36, nº 6, pp. 832-849.
• SANDULLI, F. D., FERNANDEZ-MENENDEZ, J., RODRIGUEZ-DUARTE, A., y LOPEZ-SANCHEZ, J. I. (2012): «Testing the Schumpeterian hypotheses on an open innovation framework», Management Decision, vol. 50, nº 7, pp. 1222-1232.
• SEGARRA-CIPRÉS, M.; BOU-LLUSAR, J.C. y ROCA-PUIG, V. (2012): «Exploring and exploiting external knowledge: The effect of sector and firm technological intensity», Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, vol. 14, nº 2, pp. 203–217.
• SPITHOVEN, A., CLARYSSE, B. y KNOCKAERT, M. (2011): «Building absorptive capacity to organise inbound open innovation in traditional industries», Technovation, vol. 31, nº 1, pp. 10-21.
• TEECE, D.J. (1986): «Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public po licy», Research Policy, vol. 15, nº 6, pp. 285-305.
• TER WAL, A.L. y BOSCHMA, R.A. (2007): «Co-evolution of firms, industries and networks in space», Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, vol. 7, pp. 1-19.
• TETHER, B.S. (2002): «Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis», Research Policy, vol. 31, nº 6, pp. 947-967.
• TODOROVA, G. y DURISIN, B. (2007): «Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization», Academy of Management Review, vol. 32, nº 3, pp. 774-786.
• VAN DE BOSCH, F.A.J.; VOLBERDA, H.W. y DE BOER, M. (1999): «Co-evolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment organizational forms and combinative capabilities», Or ganizational Science, vol. 10, nº 5, pp.551-568.
• VEUGELERS, R. (1997): «Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing», Research Policy, vol. 26, nº 3, 303-315.
• VON HIPPEL. E. (2005): Democratizing innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
• WINTER, S. G. (1984): «Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes», Journal of Economic Behavior & Orga nization, vol. 5, nº 3, pp. 287-320.
• ZAHRA, S.A. y GEORGE, G. (2002): «Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension», Academy of Manage ment Review, vol. 27, nº 2, pp. 185-203.
• ZAHRA, S.A. y HAYTON, J.C. (2008): «The effect of international venturing on firm performance: The moderating influence of absorptive capacity.» Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 23, nº 2, pp. 195-220.