New venture technology sourcing: exploring the effect of absorptive capacity, learning attitude and past performance.

(e) Finally, the link between a large span of modes of access and a tendency for 'foreign expansion' can be explained by an underlying sensitivity for international issues that can be found in the entire company. Companies from group # 1 are relying on a large span of modes of access to technology: they are involved in inter-firm alliances and diverse forms of technology acquisition. For example, when companies establish alliances with their customers, as soon as these customers are from different countries, this is at the same time an opportunity for the company to develop business abroad through events like trade shows, contract with universities, etc. It is well known that technology is becoming more and more a global resource. We assume that companies from group # 1 do not rely solely on national collaborations but are probably involved in international technology alliances and acquisitions. This result is in line with Murray (2001) who argues that successful firms use higher level of alliances based global sourcing.

In summary, companies relying on a large span of modes of access outperform in-house R&D focused companies at the R&D stage but also, when it comes to commercialization, and also commercialization in foreign markets. Once again, this shows that some openness to external sources is an underlying corporate value that transcends functional departments.

6.4 Discussion on causal links

Data presented in the previous section demonstrate only concomitance between two phenomena. In this paper, we do not empirically demonstrate the existence of causalities. Yet, some causalities might be argued. We will suggest a causal link between a learning orientation and the range of TAM used. Personal values differ from one manager to another. Some are naturally open to what is happening outside their company while some others tend to reduce their perspective on the external world. This openness is a component of the learning attitude. Our argument is that managers opened to the external world will also naturally tend to try different types of TAM.

By the same token, we will suggest a causal link between the absorptive capacity and the range of TAM used. That is the company which demonstrate an absorptive capacity, i.e. which is able to better absorb than its competitors, is much more confident to increase its range of TAM--because it trusts much more its ability to benefit from its investments into these different modes.

7. IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS

In order to benefit from a full gain of their technology sourcing, this study tends to demonstrate that managers should concomitantly develop both their learning attitude and their absorptive capacity. Even if the performance is not obviously only explained by this behavioural pattern, encouraging the learning of new ideas or being able to combine innovations created by other companies helps in the expansion of technology access modes for the high-tech ventures. As such, managers of high-tech companies should be aware of the fact that expanding their range of technology sourcing may be facilitated if a learning attitude exists throughout the firm and could be more beneficial if the absorptive capacity is developed.

8. LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH

The first limitation concerns the research sample, which consists only of 110 companies belonging to a large range of industries. The size of the sample limits the range of statistical tools that we were able to use to validate our hypotheses. As such, it was not possible to consider 'learning attitude' and 'absorptive capacity' as constructs and we had to work on their underlying measures. Also, based on these first results, we could question the possible mediating effect of the learning attitude on the relation between Technology Access Modes and performance. Further research is definitely needed to validate those assumptions and develop a stronger model of the relationship between technology sourcing, learning, innovation and performance.

9. CONCLUSION

The study provides a test of the role of absorptive capacity on learning from external sources, an area that has not received much attention. It also shows the importance of a new venture's attitude toward learning as a condition for pursuing external technology sources. Researchers have examined the opposite relationship. For managers, the results highlight the importance of building new venture's receptivity to learn new skills. This is evidenced for the results regarding learning attitude and absorptive capacity. Managers can influence both variables, setting the stage to enhance a new venture's ability to acquire new knowledge that can improve its innovation while improving future performance.

Received 30 August 2006 Accepted 4 October 2007

References

Argyris C. and Schon D.A. (1978) Organizational Learning: a theory of action perspective. MA: Addison-Wesley.

Autio E., H.J. Sapienza and J. Almeida. (2000) Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal 43(5): 909-924.

Burgelman R.A., M.A. Maidique and S.C. Wheelwright. (1996) Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation (2nd edn), NY: Irwin.

Buzzell R.D. and T.G. Bradley. (1987) The PIMS Principles--Linking Strategy to Performance. New York: The Free Press.

Calantone R.J, S.T. Cavusgil and Y. Zhao (2002) Learning Orientation, firm innovation capability and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management 31(6): 515-524.

Carayannis E. and J. Alexander. (2000) Revisiting Sematech: profiling public and private sector cooperation. Engineering Management Journal 12(4): 33-42.

Cohen W. and Levinthal D. (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128-152.

Day G. (1994) The capabilities of Market-driven Organizations. Journal of Marketing 58(4): 37-52.

Dodgson M. (1992) The strategic management of R&D collaboration. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 4(3): 227-244.

Easterby-Smith M., R. Snell and S. Gherardi. (1998) Organizational learning: diverging communities of practice? Management Learning 29(3): 259-272.

Friar J. and M. Horwitch. (1984) The current transformation of technology strategy: the attempt to create multiple avenues for innovation within the large corporation. MIT Sloan School, Working paper.

Fulk J. and G. DeSanctis. (1995) Electronic Communication and Changing Organizational Forms. Organization Science 6(4): 337-349.

Fusfeld H.I. and C.S. Haklisch. (1985) Cooperative R&D for competitors. Harvard Business Review 63(6): 60-76.

Garud R. (1996) On the distinction between know-how, know-what and know-why. Unpublished working paper, Stern School of Management, New York University: New York.

George G., S.A. Zahra and D. Robley Wood. (2002) The Effects of Business-University Alliances on Innovative Output and Financial Performance: a Study of Publicly Traded Biotechnology Companies. Journal of Business Venturing 17(6): 577-609.

Grant R.M. (1991) The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation. California Management Review 33(3): 114-135.

Grindley P. and D.C. Mowery. (1994) SEMATECH and collaborative research: Lessons in the design of high-technology consortia. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 13(4): 723.

Hagedoorn J. (1990) Organizational modes of inter-firm co-operation and technology transfer. Technovation 10(1): 17-30.

Hagedoorn J. and J. Schakenraad. (1992) Leading Companies and Networks of Strategic Alliances in Information Technologies. Research Policy 21(2): 163-190.

Hamel G. and C.K. Prahalad. (1990) The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review 68(3): 79-91.

Hamel G. (1991) Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal 12: 83-103.

Humbert M. and D. Jolly. (1997) Evaluating several ways to gain access to technological innovation. Gestion 2000 13(6): 101-117.

Jolly D. and S. Ramani. (1996) Technology creation in the biotechnology sectors: the French connection. International Journal of Technology Management 12(7/8): 830-848.

Jones G.K., A. Lanctot Jr and H.J. Teegen. (2001) Determinants and performance impacts of external technology acquisition. Journal of Business Venturing 16(3): 255-283.

Kessler E.H., P.E. Bierly and S. Gopalakrishnan. (2000) Internal vs. external learning in new product development. R&D Management 30(1): 213-223.

Kogut B. and U. Zander. (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science 3(3): 383-397.

Kumar R. and K.O. Nti. (1998) Differential Learning and Interaction in Alliance Dynamics: A Process and Outcome Discrepancy Model. Organization Science 9(3): 356-367.

Learned E.P., C.R. Christensen, K.R. Andrews and W.D. Guth. (1965) Business Policy, Texts and Cases, Homewood (Ill): Richard D. Irwin.

Lefebvre E., Lefebvre L.A and Prefontaine L. (1996) Technological Learning and Organizational Context: Fit and performance in SMEs. Working Paper 96-32, CIRANO, University of Montreal.

Leonard-Barton D. (1992) Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development. Strategic Management Journal 13: 111-125.

McDougall P.P., Shane S. and Oviatt B. (1994) Explaining the formation of international new ventures: the limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing 9(6): 469-487.