Publication:
The impact of R&D sources on new product development: Sources of funds and the diversity versus control of knowledge debate

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Identifiers
Publication date
2018-10
Defense date
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Elsevier
Impact
Google Scholar
Export
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Abstract
We build on the knowledge-based view to study the relative impact of alternative R&D sources on innovation performance. We contrast two arguments that have created a debate in the literature: One is that diversity of knowledge is better for innovation, because the integration of a larger variety of knowledge helps create new products that can fulfill unmet customer needs; another is that control of knowledge is better, because the incentives and contextual system of the firm facilitate employees' experimentation, which supports the creation of new products. We provide one solution to this debate by arguing that the relative importance of diversity and control of knowledge on innovation depends on the sources of finance. Hence, we find that, in general, control of knowledge has a higher impact than diversity of knowledge on the sale of new products. We also find that alternative sources of finance moderate the relationships: internal funds strengthen the impact of R&D sources with more diversity of knowledge on the sale of new products, while external funds strengthen the impact of R&D sources with more control of knowledge on the sale of new products.
Description
Keywords
R&D, Innovation, Outsourcing, Offshoring, Finance, External knowledge, Innovation perfomance, Empirical-analysis, Property-rights, Multinational-corporation, Technological innovation, Development cooperation, Offshoring innovation, Financial constraints, Manufacturing firms
Bibliographic citation
Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Nieto, M. J. & Rodríguez, A. (2018). The impact of R&D sources on new product development: Sources of funds and the diversity versus control of knowledge debate. Long Range Planning, 51(5), 649–665.