Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms—A cross-country comparison
Introduction
Global economic growth is spurred by international knowledge transfers (Romer, 1990). Multinational companies (MNCs) and their international subsidiaries have been identified as major channels for these knowledge flows (see for example Kogut and Zander, 1993). Against this background, innovation activities of MNCs abroad have been an important theme of discussion for both academics and practitioners. International business literature has primarily focused on MNCs knowledge acquisitions in host countries (e.g. Almeida and Phene, 2004) while international economics literature concentrates on spillovers from MNCs to host country firms (e.g. Keller, 2002). The topic has also caught the attention of policy makers, prompting many governments to provide substantial financial support for MNC investment in their country or region (e.g. Daimler AG investing in Alabama or Motorola in Scotland, Haskel et al., 2007).
However, as Alcácer and Chung (2007) point out, research has paid relatively little attention to MNCs strategies for preventing knowledge spillovers or has treated MNCs subsidiaries as rather passive actors in host country knowledge exchanges. One reason for this discrepancy may be that major studies in the field of international economics and business research use patenting, the most prominent form of knowledge protection, to trace knowledge spillovers, instead of inquiring about firms’ strategies to protect knowledge (e.g. Jaffe et al., 1993, Audretsch and Feldman, 1996). Our goal is to contribute to the analysis of MNC knowledge management by investigating the knowledge protection strategies of MNC subsidiary managers. More precisely, we focus on the protection methods that subsidiary managers put in place to shield firms’ knowledge from spilling over to competitors. If successful, these protection methods enable firms to appropriate the economic returns from their investments in knowledge production through R&D activities (Arrow, 1962). We go beyond formal forms of knowledge protection (patents, copyrights, trademarks), which rest upon legal protection, and include strategic ones (secrecy, lead time, complex design), which are built around organizational processes and procedures. These knowledge protection strategies vary widely with regard to how firms are able to apply them (e.g. firm size) and their effectiveness in protecting knowledge (e.g. Harabi, 1995). Hence, we consider the various forms of knowledge protection instruments an MNC subsidiary manager may use to generate breadth in its knowledge protection strategy. We connect this discussion to the specific needs and opportunities of MNCs. In addition, we argue that these arrangements reflect different host country threats and opportunities in knowledge exchanges. We address these issues empirically with data from the European Community Innovation Survey 2001 (CIS) for more than 1800 firms from Portugal and Germany. The harmonized survey provides us with the unique opportunity to compare MNC knowledge protection strategies in host country environments that differ significantly.
This setting enables us to derive important recommendations for both managers and policy makers. First, the presence of foreign MNCs in a host country has been considered a source of competitive advantage because of valuable knowledge that may spill over to domestic firms. Governments have gone to great length to attract MNC investments (e.g. Haskel et al., 2007). However, this perspective needs to be re-evaluated if MNC subsidiaries can effectively prevent the assumed knowledge flows. Secondly, the underlying knowledge exchange mechanisms have been found to differ significantly between low- and high-technology host countries (for a recent review see Meyer and Sinani, 2009). A comparison of Portugal and Germany based on a harmonized survey enables us to investigate and empirically validate how the differences in knowledge sourcing opportunities are reflected in MNC's protection strategies. Hence, recommendations can be derived that reflect the distinctive context of managers and policy makers in both high- and low-technology environments.
This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 presents our conceptual framework of international knowledge flows and knowledge protection methods. It concludes with the development of hypotheses based on this discussion. Section 3 presents the empirical study for testing these hypotheses; the results follow in Section 4. We discuss them in Section 5, draw conclusions and suggest some pathways for future research in Section 6.
Section snippets
Knowledge protection in MNC innovation activities
The advantages of multinational firms for transferring knowledge across borders have been conceptualized in several ways, such as the internalization of transaction costs (e.g. Buckley and Casson, 1981), differentiated networks that provide a fit with varying environmental and resource contingencies (e.g. Ghoshal and Nohria, 1989) or social communities spanning borders (e.g. Kogut and Zander, 1993). Research in international economics has focused on their potential to transfer knowledge to the
Data
The quantitative analysis of our hypotheses requires the comparison of at least two different host country environments with different characteristics. We test our hypotheses through a harmonized survey for Portugal and Germany. Both countries are part of the European Union and use the single European currency Euro. Hence, they are comparable countries with regard to basic economic infrastructure. However, important differences remain, making the comparison between both countries a good fit for
Results
Table 3 presents the marginal effects at the mean value of each continuous variable and the discrete change between 0 and 1 of each binary variable included in our multivariate estimations. These results allow the comparison of the determinants of knowledge protection in Portugal and Germany. We estimate separate, identical models for Portugal and Germany because legal restrictions and confidentiality agreements prevent merging both datasets. We estimate two models for each country sample.
Conclusions
Our study investigates the choices of MNC subsidiary managers with regard to knowledge protection strategies including not only formal methods (patents, copyrights, trademarks) but also strategic ones (secrecy, lead time, complex design). We conceptualize firm's breadth of knowledge protection strategies and its unique relevance for MNCs compared to domestic firms. Moreover, we argue that these approaches differ with regard to host country challenges and opportunities.
Our empirical findings are
Future research
Our study has certain limitations which may provide fruitful paths for future research projects. First, our measures for firms’ knowledge protection strategy may give a coarse reflection of the underlying construct. We conduct several consistency checks to test their robustness. Future studies may develop more fine-grained constructs. Secondly, we find relatively few Portuguese MNC subsidiaries in our existing German dataset and vice versa. A dedicated study may reveal important differences or
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Francisco Lima, Christian Geisler Asmussen, Torben Pedersen, Christian Rammer, Peter Rodriguez, Thorsten Teichert, Rob van Tulder, Franco Malerba, Joana Mendonça, Wilfred Dolfsma, and two anonymous referees for their valuable comments. We also thank the participants and organizers of the JIBS paper development workshop as part of the Academy of International Business 2008 as well as the research seminar of the Center for Strategic Management and Globalization at
References (80)
- et al.
Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services
Research Policy
(2008) - et al.
What percentage of innovations are patented? Empirical estimates for European firms
Research Policy
(1998) Overseas innovations by Japanese firms: an analysis of patent and subsidiary data
Research Policy
(2001)- et al.
Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent: an exploration of CIS micro data
Research Policy
(1999) - et al.
Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments
International Journal of Industrial Organization
(2002) - et al.
Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis
Research Policy
(2006) - et al.
Determinants of patent rights: a cross-national study
Research Policy
(1997) - et al.
Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game
Journal of Economic Psychology
(2002) Appropriability of technological innovations—an empirical analysis
Research Policy
(1995)- et al.
What factors determine the mode of overseas R&D by multinationals? Empirical evidence
Research Policy
(2007)
An empirical test of models explaining research expenditures and research cooperation: evidence for the German service sector
International Journal of Industrial Organization
If you cannot block, you better run: small firms, cooperative innovation, and appropriation strategies
Research Policy
Signalling the strategic value of knowledge
Journal of Management
The determinants of overseas R&D by Japanese firms: an empirical study at the industry and company levels
Research Policy
International patent protection: 1960–2005
Research Policy
On the dynamics of appropriability, of tacit and of codified knowledge
Research Policy
Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public-policy
Research Policy
Trade-related influences, foreign intellectual property rights and outbound international patenting
Research Policy
Bounding the effects of R&D: an investigation using matched establishment-firm data
The RAND Journal of Economics
Desperately seeking spillovers? Increasing returns, industrial organization and the location of new entrants in geographic and technological space
Industrial & Corporate Change
Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment?
American Economic Review
Location strategies and knowledge spillovers
Management Science
Knowledge sourcing by foreign multinationals: patent citation analysis in the U.S. semiconductor industry
Strategic Management Journal
Subsidiaries and knowledge creation: the influence of the MNC and host country on innovation
Strategic Management Journal
Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention
R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production
American Economic Review
Subsidiary initiatives to develop new markets
Sloan Management Review
Multinational subsidiary evolution: capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies
Academy of Management Review
Patents, real options and firm performance
Economic Journal
Do stronger intellectual property rights increase international technology transfer? Empirical evidence from U.S. firm-level panel data
Quarterly Journal of Economics
The optimal timing of a foreign direct investment
Economic Journal
Econometric models based on count data: comparisons and applications of some estimators and tests
Journal of Applied Econometrics
Regression Analysis of Count Data
MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates
Strategic Management Journal
R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence from Belgium
American Economic Review
Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D
The Economic Journal
Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation
Administrative Science Quarterly
Europe in Figures—Eurostat Yearbook 2006–2007
Cited by (0)
- 1
Tel.: +31 13 466 4051; fax: +31 13 466 8354.