Advertisement

Family Business and Technological Innovation: Evidence from the Italian Pharmaceutical Industry

  • Alessandra PerriEmail author
  • Enzo Peruffo
Chapter
  • 407 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter analyzes family and non-family firms’ innovative activity performance in the Italian pharmaceutical industry. By taking stock of literature on family firms and innovation management, as reviewed in Chaps.  2 and  3, it develops theoretical arguments regarding the multidimensional involvement of families in the innovative performance of Italian pharmaceutical firms, in terms of both the scale and quality of innovation. This chapter includes an empirical section that describes data sources, details the data collection process, and explains the methodology for the data analysis. It concludes by presenting and discussing the empirical findings and drawing conclusions from this evidence.

Keywords

Family firms Innovation performance Innovation scale and quality Italian pharmaceutical industry 

References

  1. Achilladelis, B., & Antonakis, N. (2001). The dynamics of technological innovation: The case of the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 30(4), 535–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeida, P., & Phene, A. (2004). Subsidiaries and knowledge creation: The influence of the MNC and host country on innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8–9), 847–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, R. C., Duru, A., & Reeb, D. M. (2012). Investment policy in family controlled firms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(6), 1744–1758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bammens, Y., Voordeckers, W., & Van Gils, A. (2011). Boards of directors in family businesses: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 134–152.Google Scholar
  5. Banno, M. (2016). Propensity to patent by family firms. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(4), 238–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basu, N., Dimitrova, L., & Paeglis, I. (2009). Family control and dilution in mergers. Journal of Banking & Finance, 33(5), 829–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bierly, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (1996). Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Block, J. H. (2012). R&D investments in family and founder firms: An agency perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 248–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Block, J., Miller, D., Jaskiewicz, P., & Spiegel, F. (2013). Economic and technological importance of innovations in large family and founder firms: An analysis of patent data. Family Business Review, 26(2), 180–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2002). Patents, real options and firm performance. The Economic Journal, 112(478), 97–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Broekaert, W., Andries, P., & Debackere, K. (2016). Innovation processes in family firms: The relevance of organizational flexibility. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 771–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carnes, C. M., & Ireland, R. D. (2013). Familiness and innovation: Resource bundling as the missing link. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(6), 1399–1419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cassiman, B., Veugelers, R., & Zuniga, P. (2008). In search of performance effects of (in) direct industry science links. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17(4), 611–646.Google Scholar
  14. Chen, H. L., & Hsu, W. T. (2009). Family ownership, board independence, and R&D investment. Family Business Review, 22(4), 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, 400, 0–19.Google Scholar
  16. Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Variations in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 976–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Classen, N., Carree, M., Van Gils, A., & Peters, B. (2014). Innovation in family and non-family SMEs: An exploratory analysis. Small Business Economics, 42(3), 595–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cockburn, I. M., & Henderson, R. M. (2000). Publicly funded science and the productivity of the pharmaceutical industry. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 1, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. A. (2004). The board of directors in family firms: One size fits all? Family Business Review, 17(2), 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DeCarolis, D. M. (2003). Competencies and imitability in the pharmaceutical industry: An analysis of their relationship with firm performance. Journal of Management, 29, 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duran, P., Kammerlander, N., Van Essen, M., & Zellweger, T. (2016). Doing more with less: Innovation input and output in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1224–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. The Journal of Political Economy, 88(2), 288–307.Google Scholar
  23. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency problems and residual claims. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 327–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Family Firms Institute. (2017). Family enterprise statistics from around the world. Available at: http://www.ffi.org/?page=GlobalDataPoints.
  25. Gambardella, A. (1992). Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s. Research Policy, 21(5), 391–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gambardella, A. (2005). Patents and the division of innovative labor. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(6), 1223–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gambardella, A., Harhoff, D., & Verspagen, B. (2008). The value of European patents. European Management Review, 5(2), 69–84.Google Scholar
  28. Gittelman, M., & Kogut, B. (2003). Does good science lead to valuable knowledge? Biotechnology firms and the evolutionary logic of citation patterns. Management Science, 49(4), 366–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Campbell, J. T., Martin, G., Hoskisson, R. E., Makri, M., & Sirmon, D. G. (2014). Socioemotional wealth as a mixed gamble: Revisiting family firm R&D investments with the behavioral agency model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1351–1374.Google Scholar
  30. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Nunez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 106–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hagedoorn, J. (2003). Sharing intellectual property right: An exploratory study of joint patenting amongst companies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12, 1035–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hall, B. R. H., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US. The Rand Journal of Economics, 32(1), 101–128.Google Scholar
  33. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools (No. w8498). National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  34. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. Rand Journal of Economics, 16–38.Google Scholar
  35. Hess, A. M., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2011). When are assets complementary? Star scientists, strategic alliances, and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 32(8), 895–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hsu, P., Huang, S., Massa, M., & Zhang, H. (2014). The new lyrics of the old folks: The role of family ownership in corporate innovation (Working paper). INSEAD.Google Scholar
  37. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.Google Scholar
  38. Jensen, M. C. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. The Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.Google Scholar
  40. Kraiczy, N. D., Hack, A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2015). What makes a family firm innovative? CEO risk-taking propensity and the organizational context of family firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 334–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kraiczy, N. D., Hack, A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2014). New product portfolio performance in family firms. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1065–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Krause, R. (2017). Being the CEO’s boss: An examination of board chair orientations. Strategic Management Journal, 38, 697–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Krause, R., & Semadeni, M. (2013). Apprentice, departure, and demotion: An examination of the three types of CEO-board chair separation. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 805–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  45. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Le Breton-Miller, I., Miller, D., & and Lester, R. H. (2011). Stewardship or agency? A social embeddedness reconciliation. Organization Science, 22(3), 704–721.Google Scholar
  47. Lee, J., & Berente, N. (2012). Digital innovation and the division of innovative labor: Digital controls in the automotive industry. Organization Science, 23(5), 1428–1447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lerner, J. (1994). The importance of patent scope: An empirical analysis. The Rand Journal of Economics, 319–333.Google Scholar
  49. Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Nelson, R. R., Winter, S. G., Gilbert, R., & Griliches, Z. (1987). Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, 783–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lodh, S., Nandy, M., & Chen, J. (2014). Innovation and family ownership: Empirical evidence from India. Corporate Governance—An International Review, 22(1), 4–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Matzler, K., Veider, V., Hautz, J., & Stadler, C. (2015). The impact of family ownership, management, and governance on innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 319–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Maury, B. (2006). Family ownership and firm performance: Empirical evidence from Western European corporations. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(2), 321–341.Google Scholar
  53. McConaughy, D. L., Matthews, C. H., & Fialko, A. S. (2001). Founding family controlled firms: Performance, risk, and value. Journal of Small Business Management, 39(1), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Miller, D., Minichilli, A., & Corbetta, G. (2013). Is family leadership always beneficial? Strategic Management Journal, 34(5), 553–571. doi: 10.1002/smj.2024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., Lester, R. H., & Cannella, A. A. (2007). Are family firms really superior performers?. Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(5), 829–858.Google Scholar
  56. Mishra, C. S., & McConaughy, D. C. (1999). Founding family control and capital structure: The risk of loss of control and the aversion to debt. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23, 53–65.Google Scholar
  57. Munari, F., Oriani, R., & Sobrero, M. (2010). The effects of owner identity and external governance systems on R&D investments: A study of western european firms, Research Policy, 39(8), 1093–1104.Google Scholar
  58. Nerkar, A., & Paruchuri, S. (2005). Evolution of R&D capabilities: The role of knowledge networks within a firm. Management Science, 51(5), 771–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Nieto, M. J., Santamaria, L., & Fernandez, Z. (2015). Understanding the innovation behavior of family firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(2), 382–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. OECD. (2011). Technology-science linkages. In OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard 2011. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2011-25-en.
  61. Patel, P. C., & Chrisman, J. J. (2014). Risk abatement as a strategy for R&D investments in family firms. Strategic Management Journal, 35, 617–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Penner-Hahn, J., & Shaver, J. M. (2005). Does international research and development increase patent output? An analysis of Japanese pharmaceutical firms. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Perri, A., & Andersson, U. (2014). Knowledge outflows from foreign subsidiaries and the tension between knowledge creation and knowledge protection: Evidence from the semiconductor industry. International Business Review, 23(1), 63–75.Google Scholar
  64. Perri, A., Scalera, V. G., & Mudambi, R. (2017). What are the most promising conduits for foreign knowledge inflows? Innovation networks in the Chinese pharmaceutical industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 26(2), 333–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Phene, A., & Almeida, P. (2008). Innovation in multinational subsidiaries: The role of knowledge assimilation and subsidiary capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 901–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Scalera, G. V., Mukherjee, D., Perri, A., & Mudambi, R. (2014). A longitudinal study of MNE innovation: The case of Goodyear. Multinational Business Review, 22(3), 270–293.Google Scholar
  68. Schmid, T., Achleitner, A. K., Ampenberger, M., & Kaserer, C. (2014). Family firms and R&D behavior–New evidence from a large-scale survey. Research Policy, 43(1), 233–244.Google Scholar
  69. Schmid, T., Ampenberger, M., Kaserer, C., & Achleitner, A. K. (2015). Family firm heterogeneity and corporate policy: Evidence from diversification decisions. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 23(3), 285–302.Google Scholar
  70. Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2), 99–116.Google Scholar
  71. Sirmon, D. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Spriggs, M., Yu, A., Deeds, D., & Sorenson, R. L. (2013). Too many cooks in the kitchen: Innovative capacity, collaborative network orientation, and performance in small family businesses. Family Business Review, 26(1), 32–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tijssen, R. J. (2001). Global and domestic utilization of industrial relevant science: Patent citation analysis of science–technology interactions and knowledge flows. Research Policy, 30, 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 172–187.Google Scholar
  76. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), 19–50.Google Scholar
  77. Vanhaverbeke, W., Chesbrough, H., & West, J. (2014). Surfing the new wave of open innovation research. New Frontiers in Open Innovation, 281.Google Scholar
  78. Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2006). How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Villalonga, B., & Amit, R. (2009). How are US family firms controlled? Review of Financial Studies, 22, 3047–3091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wadhwa, A., & Kotha, S. (2006). Knowledge creation through external venturing: Evidence from the telecommunications equipment manufacturing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 819–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wiseman, R. M., & Gomez-Mejia L. M. (1998). A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. The Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 133–153.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ManagementCa’ Foscari UniversityVeniceItaly
  2. 2.Department of Business and ManagementLUISS Guido CarliRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations