|
|
|
| Breakthroughs in Technology Bottlenecks:The Influence of Knowledge Development Mode on the Key Technologies and Derivative Technologies of Enterprises |
| Gong Hong1,2,3,Li Changhao1 |
| (1. Economics and Management School, Wuhan University;2. Research Center of Strategic Emerging Industries, Wuhan University;3. China Research Center for Industry University Research Cooperation, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With the intensification of economic globalization and technological competition, the competition among enterprises is also intensifying. If an enterprise wants to be in a dominant position in the competition, it must ensure the leading position of science and technology level and possess the core competitiveness. However, Chinese enterprises are restricted or even muscled out of the high technology development by other developed countries, which is unfavorable to the sustainable development of Chinese enterprises.The technology bottlenecks involve key technologies, and it is strategic and related to the whole industrial chain, even national defense and social stability. In the new revolution of science& technology and economy of the new normal situation, it is a hot issue of how enterprises achieve self-breakthrough to take a dominant position in the competition of enterprises. However, the exploration of the impact results and action mechanism of key technologies and derivative technologies is very insufficient.This paper defines bottleneck technologies as key technologies and the derivative technologies. It is believed that Chinese enterprises need to not only master a single key patent to achieve breakthroughs, but also conduct in-depth research on derivative technology in related fields so as to master the complete technical chain.#br#In this paper, the fixed effect model and robustness test are adopted to study the influence of external model and internal model on enterprises' development of key and core technologies, derivative technologies and breakthroughs of bottleneck technologies. This paper takes the data of the number of invention patents of Chinese A-share listed manufacturing enterprises from 2011 to 2020 as samples to test the impact of knowledge development mode on the breakthrough of key technologies and their derivative technologies. The patent data of listed manufacturing companies in the past 10 years is selected as samples to ensure the stability and availability of the data. The key technologies and the derived technologies based on the key technology are the explained variables, and the knowledge development mode of the company is the explanatory variable. Meanwhile it is more realistic and urgent to study the bottleneck dilemma of manufacturing industry. Both internal and external innovation modes are confirmed to promote the breakthrough of key technologies and their derivative technologies, but compared with the two, the external innovation mode plays a more significant role.#br#The study further discusses whether the intensity of market competition has a moderating effect on the breakthrough of key technologies. The research shows that the more competitive the market is, the more obvious the role of external model in promoting derivative technology breakthrough. This promoting effect is not only reflected in the growth of the quantity of derivative technology, but is also conducive to the improvement of its quality and realize the improvement of quantity and quality. In addition, it is also found that the transformation of derivative technology results will produce the feedback effect which is conducive to the breakthrough of new key and core technologies.#br#To sum up, on the one hand, Chinese enterprises need to increase the proportion of external cooperation in their activities to improve the breakthrough possibility and probability of key core technologies and their derivative technologies. On the other hand, enterprises also need to pay attention to the mining and transformation of derivative technology to ensure the cohesion of derivative technology achievements.Furthermore enterprises should take core competitiveness as their development strategy, invest more resources in external cooperation in knowledge development, and realize the "double improvement" of patent quantity and quality on the basis of finding a suitable knowledge development mode. The conclusions of this paper have important reference value for Chinese enterprises to choose more efficient innovation paths for knowledge development, complete relevant technological breakthroughs and industrial transformation and upgrading, and realize breakthroughs in bottleneck technologies.#br#
|
|
Received: 14 July 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 陈劲, 阳镇, 朱子钦. “十四五”时期“卡脖子”技术的破解:识别框架、战略转向与突破路径[J]. 改革, 2020,33(12):5-15.
[2] 董坤, 白如江, 许海云. 省域视角下产业潜在“卡脖子”技术识别与分析研究——以山东省区块链产业为例[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2021, 44(11): 197-203.
[3] 王璐瑶, 曲冠楠, JUAN ROGERS. 面向“卡脖子”问题的知识创新生态系统分析:核心挑战、理论构建与现实路径[J]. 科研管理, 2022, 43(4): 94-102.
[4] KAPLAN S, VAKILI K. The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2015, 36(10): 1435-1457.
[5] GRANT R M, C BADEN-FULLER. A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2004, 41(1): 61-84.
[6] 张治河, 苗欣苑. “卡脖子”关键核心技术的甄选机制研究[J]. 陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2020, 49(6):5-15.
[7] 陈强远, 林思彤, 张醒. 中国技术创新激励政策:激励了数量还是质量[J]. 中国工业经济,2020,37(4): 79-96.
[8] 汤志伟, 李昱璇, 张龙鹏. 中美贸易摩擦背景下“卡脖子”技术识别方法与突破路径——以电子信息产业为例[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2021,38(1): 1-9.
[9] 韩天琪. 关键核心技术,我们为什么“如鲠在喉”[N].中国科学报, 2018-11-19 (6).
[10] 宋河发, 穆荣平,任中保.自主创新及创新自主性测度研究[J]. 中国软科学, 2006,21(6):60-66.
[11] SPITHOVEN A, FRANTZEN R, CLARYSSE R. Heterogeneous firm level effects of knowledge exchanges on product innovation: differences between dynamic and lagging product innovators[J]. Journal of Production and Innovation Management, 2010, 27 (3): 362-381.
[12] BRUSONI S, PRENCIPE A. Patterns of modularity: the dynamics of product architecture in complex systems[J]. European Management Review, 2011(8): 67-80.
[13] PAMMOLLI F, MAGAZZINI L, RICCABONI M. The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D[J]. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 2011, 10:428-438.
[14] ROTHAERMEL F T, DEEDS D L. Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high technology ventures[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2006, 21: 429-460.
[15] LI Y H. Internal R&D and acquisition performance of Chinese pharmaceutical firms: moderation effect of acquisition motive and corporate ownership[J]. Processes, 2019, 7(5):292.
[16] KAMURIWO D S, C BADEN-FULLER, JING Z. Knowledge development approaches and breakthrough innovations in technology-based new firms[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2017, 34(4): 492-508.
[17] SRENSEN J B, STUART T E. Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2000, 45(1): 81-112.
[18] FAEMS D, VAN LOOY B, DEBACKERE K. Inter-organizational collaboration and innovation: toward a portfolio approach[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2005, 22(3):238-250.
[19] BELDERBOS R, GILSING V, LOKSHIN B, et al. The antecedents of new R&D collaborations with different partner types: on the dynamics of past R&D collaboration and innovative performance[J]. Long Range Planning, 2018, 51(2): 285-302.
[20] NAMBISAN S, SAWHNEY M. Orchestration processes in network centric innovation: evidence from the field[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2011, 25(3): 40-57.
[21] 吴言波, 邵云飞, 殷俊杰. 战略联盟知识异质性对焦点企业突破性创新的影响研究[J]. 管理学报, 2019, 16(4): 541-549.
[22] ASKENAZY P, THESMAR D, THOENIG M. On the relation between organizational practices and new technologies: the role of (time based) competition[J]. The Economic Journal, 2006, 116: 128-154.
[23] WEN-BIN CHUANG, TO-HAN CHANG, HUI-LIN LIN. The productivity effects of local R&D outsourcing: the moderating role of subsidiary mandate and internal R&D[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2015, 27(10): 1239-1254.
[24] DOLOREUX D, SHEARMUR R, RODRIGUEZ M. Internal R&D and external information in knowledge-intensive business service innovation: complements, substitutes or independent[J]. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2018, 24(6): 2255-2276.
[25] ANZOLA-ROMN P,BAYONA-SEZ C,GARCA-MARCO T.Organizational innovation, internal R&D and externally sourced innovation practices: effects on technological innovation outcomes[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2018, 91: 233-247.
[26] FLOR M L,COOPER S Y,OLTRA M J.External knowledge search,absorptive capacity and radical innovation in high-technology firms[J].European Management Journal,2018,36(2):183-194.
[27] MUOZ-BULLN F,SANCHEZ-BUENO M J, MASSIS A D. Combining internal and external R&D: the effects on innovation performance in family and nonfamily firms[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2020, 44(5):996-1031.
[28] SAHAI R, FRESE M. If you have a hammer, you only look for nails: the relationship between the einstellung effect and business opportunity identification[J]. Journal of Small Business Management, 2019, 57(3): 927-942.
[29] LIPPARINI A, LORENZONI G, FERRIANI S. From core to periphery and back: a study on the deliberate shaping of knowledge flowsin interfirm dyads and networks[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2014, 35(4): 578-595.
[30] KRZEMINSKA A, ECKERT C. Complementarity of internal and external R&D: is there a difference between product versus process innovations[J]. R&D Management, 2016, 46(S3): 931-944.
[31] JUNG H J. Recombination sources and breakthrough inventions: university-developed technology versus firm-developed technology[J]. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2020, 45:1121-1166.
[32] NGUYEN T M, SIRI N S, MALIK A. Multilevel influences on individual knowledge sharing behaviours: the moderating effects of knowledge sharing opportunity and collectivism[J]. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2022, 26(1):70-87.
[33] 杨震宁, 赵红. 中国企业的开放式创新:制度环境、“竞合”关系与创新绩效[J]. 管理世界, 2020, 36(2): 139-160.
[34] AW B Y, ROBERTS M J, XU D. R&D investment,exporting,and productivity dynamics[J]. American Economic Review, 2011, 101(4): 1312-1344.
[35] BAPNA R, LONGER N, MEHRA A, et al.Human capital investments and employee performance: an analysis of IT services industry[J]. Management Science, 2013, 59(3): 641-658.
[36] LEONARD-BARTON D. Core capabilities and core rigidities: aparadox in managing new product development[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1992, 13: 111-125.
[37] PIHLAJAMAA M, KAIPIA R, SAILA J, et al. Can supplier innovations substitute for internal R&D? a multiple case study from an absorptive capacity perspective[J]. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 2017, 23(4): 242-255.
[38] 梅玲, 刘慧慧, 郭林晓. 风险投资对企业创新的影响机制与异质性研究[J]. 珞珈管理评论, 2022,43(3): 114-134.
[39] ILINITCH A Y, D AVENI R A, LEWIN A Y. New organizational forms and strategies for managing in hypercompetitive environments[J]. Organization Science, 1996, 7(3): 211-220.
[40] 张杰, 张少军, 刘志彪. 多维技术溢出效应、本土企业创新动力与产业升级的路径选择[J]. 南开经济研究, 2007,23(3): 47-66.
[41] 张艳辉, 庄贞贞, 李宗伟. 电子商务能否促进传统制造业的创新行为[J]. 数量经济技术经济研究, 2018,35(12): 100-115.
[42] BLAZSEK S, ESCRIBANO A. Patent propensity, R&D and market competition: dynamic spillovers of innovation leaders and followers[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2016, 191(1): 145-163.
[43] LAKSMANA I, YANG Y W. Product market competition and corporate investment decisions[J]. Review of Accounting and Finance, 2015, 14(2): 128-148.
[44] 陈信元, 靳庆鲁, 肖土盛, 等. 行业竞争、管理层投资决策与公司增长/清算期权价值[J]. 经济学(季刊), 2014, 13(1): 305-332.
[45] 郭晓川, 刘虹, 张晓英. 双元创新选择、市场竞争强度与商业模式迭代——基于高新技术制造企业的实证研究[J]. 软科学, 2021, 35(10): 9-14.
[46] 周华林, 李雪松. Tobit模型估计方法与应用[J]. 经济学动态, 2012,53(5): 105-119.
|
|
|
|
