If you cannot block, you better run: Small firms, cooperative innovation, and appropriation strategies

By Aija Leiponen, Justin P. Byma. 2009

326 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/57c0e539a5bceb5f085423055885bb118b1fc832

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. J. Love
2. S. Roper
3. Mark Freel
4. Priit Vahter
5. P. Robson
6. Sonja Radas
7. Efstathios Tapinos
8. M. A. Mansury

In Management of Technology and Innovation

1. J. Love
2. S. Roper
3. P. Robson
4. Priit Vahter
5. Sonja Radas
6. Panos Desyllas
7. Ji Yan
8. Carlos M. P. Sousa

In Strategy and Management

1. J. Love
2. S. Roper
3. Mark Freel
4. P. Robson
5. Panos Desyllas
6. Ji Yan
7. M. Miozzo
8. Carlos M. P. Sousa

Citations in the corpus

• Patent Management in Entrepreneurial SMEs: A Literature Review and an Empirical Study of Innovation Appropriation, Patent Propensity, and Motives (2013, unknown): “…for appropriation has been confirmed by a number of subsequent studies (Harabi, 1995; Kitching and Blackburn, 1998; Brouwer and Kleinknecht, 1999; Cohen et al., 2000; Leiponen and Byma, 2009), an exception being large Japanese firms rating patents as the most effective means (Granstrand, 1999).”
• Openness and Innovation Performance: Are Small Firms Different? (2014, background): “Weaker internal knowledge resources and ability to invest in in-house knowledge creation may make external sourcing of knowledge especially important for small firms (Leiponen and Byma 2009; Edwards, Delbridge, and Munday 2005).”
• Process Innovation: Open Innovation and the Moderating Role of the Motivation to Achieve Legitimacy (2018, methodology): “Cooperation with external parties and use of external information were also operationalized based on previously-used measures (e.g. Lee et al., 2010; Leiponen and Byma, 2009).”
• How Firms Capture Value From Their Innovations (2013, background): “A few others have discussed the relative effectiveness of secrecy and lead time advantages used in combination with patents (Amara, Landry, & Traoré, 2008; Leiponen & Byma, 2009) versus patents alone.”
• Taking risks in the face of uncertainty: An exploratory analysis of green innovation (2016, background): “Rivals' new product announcements may reduce future returns (Fosfuri and Giarratana, 2009), for example, while appropriability conditions may shape firms' ability to benefit from new innovations and therefore shape their market strategy (Leiponen and Byma, 2009).”
• Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms (2016, background): “…mechanisms in most manufacturing sectors, with firms emphasising more heavily secrecy and lead-time advantages (Cohen et al., 2000; Hall et al., 2014; Leiponen and Byma, 2009).1 1 The importance of patents, however, has been increasing compared to earlier surveys (see Levin et al., 1987).”
• The effects of public support schemes on small and medium enterprises (2015, background): “Third, SMEs are less likely to practice formal intellectual property protection (Leiponen and Byma, 2009), which exposes their innovation results to ready imitation by competitors.”
• Appropriation strategies and open innovation in SMEs (2016, background): “However, Leiponen and Byma (2009) find no relationship between the use of informal protection mechanisms and vertical cooperation.”