Knowledge Management Research (지식경영연구)

The Knowledge Management Society of Korea (한국지식경영학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Environment Dynamism and Strategic Technology Resource Protection: Claims of Priority of Korean High-tech Electronics Firms

환경 역동성과 전략적 기술자원의 보호: 한국 하이테크 전자기업의 우선권주장출원

  • Received : 2020.09.16
  • Accepted : 2021.02.15
  • Published : 2021.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this paper, we explore market and environmental factors which affecting organization's priority claim application which is more powerful and prompt strategic method to protect technology from competitors under uncertain and volatile environments. This study empirically examines why organizations strategically choose the priority claim application which is more strong tactics to protect technology as the source of sustainable competitive advantage. We suggest that market and environmental factors, such as exogenous shock, volatility, and uncertainty, may also affect strategic decision that organization take patent application with claiming priority. The results of our analysis of priority claim application in the Korean high-tech electronics industry from 1994 to 2008 showed that these three strategic factors affected the technology protection decision and organization's status also moderate theses effects, as predicted in our hypotheses.

본 연구는 21세기형 초경쟁 환경에서 지속가능한 경쟁우위를 위해 전략적 자원인 기술자원을 보호하기 위한 기업의 시도에 영향을 미치는 요인들을 실증 연구한다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 전략경영의 자원기반관점과 거시 조직이론의 관점에서 기업들이 불확실하고 급변하는 환경에 대응하여 신속하고 강력하게 자신의 혁신적 기술을 보호하는 동시에 경쟁자들의 기술탐색을 제한할 수 있는 제도인 '우선권주장출원'이라는 기술보호전략의 실행에 영향을 미치는 시장 환경요인들을 분석한다. 본 연구에서는 기업들이 특허출원이라는 기술혁신 성과를 보호하기 위한 일반적 전략을 넘어서서, 더 강력한 경쟁전략인 우선권주장출원을 왜 선택하는지, 그리고 이 강화된 기술자원 보호전략이 어떻게 경쟁자들을 견제할 수 있는지에 대해, 대표적인 초경쟁 산업인 대한민국 하이테크 전자기업들 특허데이터와 재무데이터를 이용하여 실증 연구한다. 1994년부터 2008년까지 우리나라 하이테크 전자기업들이 출원한 특허출원 데이터와 재무데이터를 기반으로 한 실증분석의 결과, 기업들의 우선권주장출원전략을 실행하는 것은 외생적 충격과 환경불확실성에 의해 부정적인 영향을 받는 반면, 시장변동성에 의해 긍정적인 영향을 받는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 각 기업의 지위는 위 세 가지 요인들의 영향을 약화시키는 방향으로 조절효과를 가지는 것으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. 안연식 (2010). 기업의 특허 역량이 성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 실증 분석: 우수 벤처기업을 중심으로. 지식경영연구, 11(1), 83-96.
  2. 이종선, 김나미 (2020). 특허분쟁이 기업의 향후 혁신 활동에 미치는 영향. 지식경영연구, 21(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.15813/kmr.2020.21.1.001
  3. 추기능, 박규호 (2010). 특허의 경제적 수명의 결정요인에 관한 연구: 갱신자료를 활용한 생존분석. 지식경영연구, 11(1), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.15813/KMR.2010.11.1.005
  4. Arora, A. (1995). Licensing tacit knowledge: Intellectual property rights and the market for know-how. The Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 4, 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599500000013
  5. Arora, A. (1997). Patents, licensing, and market structure in the chemical industry. Research Policy, 26(4/5), 391-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00014-0
  6. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  7. Barnett, W. P., & Hansen, M. T. (1996). The red queen in organizational evolution. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S1), 139-157. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171010
  8. Barnett, W. P., & Sorenson, O. (2002). The red queen in organizational creation and development. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(2), 289-325. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/11.2.289
  9. Barnett, W. P. (2016). The red queen among organizations: How competitiveness evolves. Princeton University Press.
  10. Beckman, C. M., Haunschild, P. R., & Phillips, D. J. (2004). Friends or strangers? Firm-specific uncertainty, market uncertainty, and network partner selection. Organization Science, 15(3), 259-275. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0065
  11. Benjamin, B. A., & Podolny, J. M. (1999). Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(3), 563-589. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666962
  12. Bennett, N., & Lemoine, J. (2014). What VUCA really means for you. Harvard Business Review, 92(1/2).
  13. Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170-1182. https://doi.org/10.1086/228631
  14. Bourgeois III, L. J. (1981). On the measurement of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review, 6(1), 29-39. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1981.4287985
  15. Burris, V. (2004). The academic caste system: Prestige hierarchies in PhD exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 239-264. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900205
  16. Burt, R. S. (1987). Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. American Journal of Sociology, 92(6), 1287-1335. https://doi.org/10.1086/228667
  17. Chandler, A. D. (1966). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise. Doubleday.
  18. Chatterjee, S., & Hadi, A. S. (2013). Regression analysis by example. John Wiley & Sons.
  19. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  20. D'aveni, R. A. (2010). Hypercompetition. Simon and Schuster.
  21. Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 52-73. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393080
  22. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
  23. Dobrev, S. D., Kim, T. Y., & Hannan, M. T. (2001). Dynamics of niche width and resource partitioning. American Journal of Sociology, 106(5), 1299-1337. https://doi.org/10.1086/320821
  24. Gaba, V., & Terlaak, A. (2013). Decomposing uncertainty and its effects on imitation in firm exit decisions. Organization Science, 24(6), 1847-1869. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0823
  25. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.
  26. Gould, S. J. (2002). The structure of evolutionary theory. Harvard University Press.
  27. Greene, W. H. (2018). Econometric analysis. Pearson Education India.
  28. Greve, H. R. (1996). Patterns of competition: The diffusion of a market position in radio broadcasting. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 29-60. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393985
  29. Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979-1995. Rand Journal of Economics, 32(1), 101-128. https://doi.org/10.2307/2696400
  30. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929-964. https://doi.org/10.1086/226424
  31. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149-164. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095567
  32. Haunschild, P. R. (1994). How much is that company worth?: Interorganizational relationships, uncertainty, and acquisition premiums. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 391-411. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393296
  33. Huergo, E., & Jaumandreu, J. (2004). How does probability of innovation change with firm age? Small Business Economics, 22(3/4), 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SBEJ.0000022220.07366.b5
  34. Jensen, M. (2008). The use of relational discrimination to manage market entry: When do social status and structural holes work against you? Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 723-743. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.33665259
  35. Jensen, M., Kim, B., & Kim, H. (2011). The importance of status in markets: A market identity perspective. In J. L. Pearce (Ed.), Status in management and organizations. Cambridge University Press
  36. Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 570-598. https://doi.org/10.2307/256460
  37. Keller, R. T., & Holland, W. E. (1983). Communicators and innovators in research and development organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 742-749. https://doi.org/10.2307/255920
  38. Leblebici, H., & Salancik, G. R. (1981). Effects of environmental uncertainty on information and decision processes in banks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4), 578-596. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392341
  39. Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2002). Mimicry and the market: Adoption of a new organizational form. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 144-162. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069289
  40. Lerner, J. (1995). Patenting in the shadow of competitors. The Journal of Law and Economics, 38(2), 463-495. https://doi.org/10.1086/467339
  41. Mathews, J. A. (2003). Competitive dynamics and economic learning: An extended resource‐based view. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(1), 115-145. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/12.1.115
  42. March, J. G., & Simon, H. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.
  43. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  44. March, J. G. (1994). Primer on decision making: How decisions happen. Simon and Schuster.
  45. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1976). Organizational choice under ambiguity. Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations, 2, 10-23.
  46. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
  47. Meyer, J., & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational environments. Beverly Hills.
  48. Miller, K. D., & Leiblein, M. J. (1996). Corporate risk-return relations: Returns variability versus downside risk. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 91-122. https://doi.org/10.2307/256632
  49. Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied linear statistical models: Regression, analysis of variance, and experimental designs. CRC Press.
  50. Oriani, R., & Sobrero, M. (2008). Uncertainty and the market valuation of R&D within a real options logic. Strategic Management Journal, 29(4), 343-361. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.664
  51. Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the organization. Blackwell: Oxford.
  52. Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review, 32, 194-208. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091811
  53. Phillips, D. J., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Middle-status conformity: Theoretical restatement and empirical demonstration in two markets. American Journal of Sociology, 107(2), 379-429. https://doi.org/10.1086/324072
  54. Podolny, J. M. (1993). A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98(4), 829-872. https://doi.org/10.1086/230091
  55. Podolny, J. M. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton University Press.
  56. Podolny, J. M., & Phillips, D. J. (1996). The dynamics of organizational status. Industrial and Corporate Change, 5(2), 453-471. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/5.2.453
  57. Podolny, J. M., Stuart, T. E., & Hannan, M. T. (1996). Networks, knowledge, and niches: Competition in the worldwide semiconductor industry, 1984-1991. American Journal of Sociology, 102(3), 659-689. https://doi.org/10.1086/230994
  58. Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. Free Press.
  59. Sauder, M., Lynn, F., & Podolny, J. M. (2012). Status: Insights from organizational sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 267-283. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071811-145503
  60. Simcoe, T. S., & Waguespack, D. M. (2011). Status, quality, and attention: What's in a (missing) name? Management Science, 57(2), 274-290. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1270
  61. Singh, J. V. (1986). Performance, slack, and risk taking in organizational decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 562-585. https://doi.org/10.2307/256224
  62. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4), 501-524. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392337
  63. Teece, D. J. (1988). Capturing value from technological innovation: Integration, strategic partnering, and licensing decisions. Interfaces, 18(3), 46-61. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.18.3.46
  64. Teece, D. J., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industrial Corporate Change, 3(3), 537-556. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/3.3.537-a
  65. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
  66. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Transaction Publishers.
  67. Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1), 22-39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392383
  68. Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 439-465. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392832
  69. Urban, G. L., & Von Hippel, E. (1988). Lead user analyses for the development of new industrial products. Management Science, 34(5), 569-582. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.34.5.569
  70. Utterback, J. M. (1971). The process of technological innovation within the firm. Academy of Management Journal, 12, 75-102.
  71. Utterback, J. M. (1974). Innovation in industry and the diffusion of technology. Science, 183(4125), 620-626. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.183.4125.620
  72. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications (Vol. 8). Cambridge University Press.
  73. Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
  74. Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305-317. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00039.x
  75. Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628-652. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393339
  76. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
  77. Zeger, S. L., & Liang, K. Y. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics, 41(1), 121-130. https://doi.org/10.2307/2531248