Conclusions
The distribution of the returns to innovative activities, whether in the software industry or more generally across high-technology industries, is highly uneven. A small number of firms account for the bulk of the returns. An extensive theoretical literature on technological competition suggests that this empirical regularity is not surprising. This is true not only in high-technology firms in general, but also in the software industry specifically.
Moreover, predicting the success of high-technology firms is exceedingly difficult. Information problems and the intangible nature of the companies’ assets make it difficult for investors to avoid making numerous unsuccessful investments for each successful one. If investors are denied profits from even a handful of their most successful investments in innovative activities, their overall return is likely to fall dramatically.
Finally, this highly skewed distribution of rewards has substantial implications for the designers of regulatory policy. Because it is often impossible to predict which innovations will succeed, investors need to be assured that they will receive substantial returns from successful investments to offset the unsatisfactory returns from the many failed or less successful projects. If investors believe that they will be denied these returns by regulators, their willingness to fund the development of the next generation of innovative technologies will be greatly reduced.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Barrett, M. James. 1994. “Testimony of M. James Barrett, Ph.D., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Genetic Therapy, Inc.,” Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress.
Fama, Eugene F., French, Kenneth R. 1997. “Industry Costs of Equity,” Journal of Financial Economics, 43, pp. 153–193.
Flanagan, Patrick. 1993. “Drug Prices: What’s the Rationale?,” Management Review, 82(July), pp. 10–15.
Fruhan, William E., Jr., Mullins, David W., Jr. 1992. “Communications Satellite Corporation: Teaching Note,” Harvard Business School Teaching Note No. 5-292-046.
Fudenberg, Drew, Gilbert, Richard J., Stiglitz, Joseph E., Tirole, Jean. 1983. “Preemption, Leapfrogging and Competition in Patent Races,” European Economic Review, 22, pp. 3–31.
Genzyme Corporation. 1992. “OTA Report on Ceredase Alglucerase Injection Released,” Business Wire, October 5.
Gilbert, Richard J., Newbery, David M.G. 1982. “Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly,” American Economic Review, 72, pp. 514–526.
Gompers, Paul A., Lerner, Josh. 1998a. “Money Chasing Deals? The Impact of Fund Inflows on Private Equity Valuations,” Unpublished Working Paper, Harvard University.
Gompers, Paul A., Lerner, Josh. 1998b. “Risk and Return in Private Equity Investments: The Challenge of Performance Assessment,” Journal of Private Equity, 1(Winter), pp. 5–12.
Gompers, Paul A., Lerner, Josh. 1998. The Venture Cycle. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Grabowski, Henry, Vernon, John. 1990. “A New Look at the Returns to Pharmaceutical R&D,” Management Science, 36, pp. 804–821.
Grabowski, Henry, Vernon, John. 1994. “Returns on New Drug Introductions in the 1980s,” Journal of Health Economics, 13, pp. 386–406.
Graham, John. 1996. “The Surge in Satellite Finance,” Institutional Investor, 30(November), pp. 117–124.
Harris, Christopher, Vickers, John. 1985. “Perfect Equilibrium in a Model of a Race,” Review of Economic Studies, 52, pp. 193–209.
Harris, Christopher, Vickers, John. 1987. “Racing with Uncertainty,” Review of Economic Studies, 54, pp. 1–22.
Horsley, Phillip. 1997. Trends in Private Equity. San Francisco: Horsley ∣ Bridge.
Huntsman, Blaine, Hoban, James P. 1980. “Investment in New Enterprise: Some Observations about Risk, Return, and Market Structure,” Financial Management, 9(Summer), pp. 44–51.
Lanjouw, Jean O. 1993. “Patent Protection: Of What Value and for How Long?,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 4475.
Lerner, Josh. 1998. “‘Angel’ Financing and Public Policy: An Overview,” Journal of Banking and Finance, 22, pp. 773–783.
Lerner, Josh, Merges, Robert P. 1998. “The Control of Technology Alliances: An Empirical Analysis of the Biotechnology Industry,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 46, pp. 125–156.
Mullins, David W., Jr. 1976. “Communications Satellite Corporation,” Harvard Business School Case No. 276-195.
Pakes, Ariel. 1986. “Patents as Options: Some Estimates of the Value of Holding European Patent Stocks,” Econometrica, 54, pp. 755–784.
Pakes, Ariel, Schankerman, Mark. 1984. “The Rate of Obsolescence of Knowledge, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources,” in Patents. R&D and Productivity, Zvi Griliches, editor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Reinganum, Jennifer R. 1983. “Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly,” American Economic Review, 73, pp. 741–748.
Reinganum, Jennifer R. 1984. “Practical Implications of Game Theoretic Models of R&D,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 74, pp. 61–66.
Reinganum, Jennifer R. 1989. “The Timing of Innovation: Research, Development and Diffusion,” in The Handbook of Industrial Organization, Richard Schmalensee and Robert D. Willig, editors. New York: North-Holland.
Scherer, F.M., Harhoff, Dietmar, Kukies, Joerg. 1998. “Uncertainty and the Size Distribution of Rewards from Technological Innovation,” Unpublished Working Paper, Harvard University.
Stevenson, Howard H., Sahlman, William A., Turner, James Z. 1986. “Orbital Sciences Corporation (A),” Harvard Business School Case No. 9-386-175.
Teisberg, Elizabeth O., Rossi, Sharon. 1993. “Genzyme Corp.: Strategic Challenges with Ceredase,” Harvard Business School Case No. 9-793-120.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1992. Federal and Private Roles in the Development and Provision of Alglucerase Therapy. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1993. Pharmaceutical R&D: Costs, Risks and Rewards. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lerner, J. (2002). The Returns to Investments in Innovative Activities: An Overview and an Analysis of the Software Industry. In: Evans, D.S. (eds) Microsoft, Antitrust and the New Economy: Selected Essays. The Milken Institute Series on Financial Innovation and Economic Growth, vol 2. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47600-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47600-2_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-7667-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47600-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive