Exploring the use of patents in a weak institutional environment: The effects of innovation partnerships, firm ownership, and new management practices

Barros, Henrique M.

doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2015.05.003

Cited by 41 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 159 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…patent protection is significant), firms use less hierarchical governance mechanisms, but a weak regime urges firms to choose more hierarchical forms of governance (Gulati and Singh 1998). Other studies have focused on similar trade-offs (Barros 2015;Miozzo et al 2016). Miozzo et al (2016) emphasize that knowledge-intensive business services generally focus on 'modest levels of formal appropriability', yet enforce patent protection, in spite of its low effectiveness.…”

Section: Governance Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Niesten

Stefan

2019

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reviews literature on paradoxical tensions between value co‐creation and capture in interorganizational relationships (IORs). The purpose of this review is to make a re‐evaluation of the literature by engaging a paradox theory lens, thereby identifying factors that render tensions salient and factors that lead to virtuous or vicious cycles. This review of 143 articles reveals factors that make tensions salient: these relate to plurality (e.g. coopetition), scarcity (e.g. lack of experience with IORs), change (e.g. changes in collaboration scope) or combinations thereof (e.g. IORs in weak appropriability regimes). Results also uncover factors that resolve paradoxical tensions of value co‐creation and capture, thus spurring virtuous cycles (e.g. carefully mixing trust and contracts), as well as factors that promote vicious cycles, owing to the emphasis on either value co‐creation or capture (e.g. myopia of learning). This review further reveals a new category of factors that may stimulate either virtuous or vicious cycles, depending on the extent to which they are enforced. This finding expands the value co‐creation–capture paradox resolution and brings to light new dynamics in the paradox framework of dynamic equilibrium. This study thus contributes by: (1) reassessing the existing literature and applying paradox theory to the well‐known hazard of value co‐creation and capture; (2) highlighting factors that amplify paradoxical tensions related to this hazard; and (3) outlining factors that help solve the paradox by embracing its contradictory poles and factors that hinder paradox resolution by emphasizing either value co‐creation or appropriation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Governance Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Niesten

Stefan

2019

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many instruments for experimentation must be connected to physical computers through conventional cables; however, most light and simple mobile devices do not contain ports that support these connections. In addition to insufficient space, the layout of laboratories (Barros, 2015) poses significant risks regarding instrument or computer damage resulting from researchers accidentally falling over instruments and pulling wires while conducting experiments related to patented inventions. Moreover, public spaces and computing arrangements can interrupt researchers' creative thought processes (Thundiyil, Chiaburu, Li, & Wagner, 2016).…”

Section: Environmental Conditions In Regular Scientific Laboratoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By combining the modified information layout complexity theory (Tullis, 1983), which states that arranging information according to fields reduces layout complexity (Barros, 2015), and CSE theory (Yang & Cheng, 2009), it can be inferred that laboratories, a public space, are similar to large computer screens that contain boundaries. When instruments are arranged in columns and the data are properly formatted on screens, the following hypotheses can be made:…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory Environmental Conditions Influence Patent Inventors’ Creative Self-efficacy

Wang¹,

Tsai²,

Chang³

2018

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comfortable experimental environment usually enables stress relief among inventors, allowing them to focus on inventing. However, to facilitate smooth and continuous experimental procedures, the public spaces and computing environments of conventional laboratories are usually replete with heavy instruments and interconnected wires; consequently, inventors have limited space to conduct complex experiments. These public spaces and computing environments negatively affect the creative self-efficacy (CSE) of inventors. Based on CSE theory and modified information layout complexity theory, in this study, 100 inventors who had obtained patents were recruited. The results indicated that a wireless cloud public space and computing environment positively moderated and enhanced the relationship between low layout complexity and inventor CSE; conventional public spaces and computing environments featuring cables negatively moderated and weakened the relationship between high layout complexity and inventor CSE. More than 40% of participants highly supported using one electronic tablet to manipulate multiple instruments. The results also revealed that approximately 64% of participants did not think they were essential in promoting critical mass in the laboratory. This finding was significantly different from the degree centrality of creativity perspective. Critical indicators of inventor CSE were found to be inventors' decision-making capabilities regarding innovative research directions and their communication skills with supervisors.

show abstract

“…According to these studies, domestic ownership does not exert a significant influence on companies' innovation decisions (Dachs et alii, 2008). For example, Barros (2015) points out that both, domestically and foreign-owned companies, show the same innovative behaviour when the institutional environment is weak, not being evidence of significant differences among them. Other scholars have argued that it could be expected a negative influence of domestic ownership on innovation efforts (HyeogUg and Tomohiko, 2013).…”

Section: Domestically Vs Foreign-owned Companiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A descriptive longitudinal analysis of the ownership structure of Spanish innovative companies

Bustos

Hernández‐Lara

2016

RIO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exploring the use of patents in a weak institutional environment: The effects of innovation partnerships, firm ownership, and new management practices

Cited by 41 publications

References 159 publications

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Laboratory Environmental Conditions Influence Patent Inventors’ Creative Self-efficacy

A descriptive longitudinal analysis of the ownership structure of Spanish innovative companies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About