본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

하이테크 산업의 기술적 인수합병의 혁신 성과 연구-탐색과 활용의 접근을 통한 실증 분석-

Analysis on the Innovation Performance in Technological M&A : An Empirical Analysis by Approach of Exploration and Exploitation

안영주|김연배|한정희|주시형
한국중소기업학회|2010.09|중소기업연구|제32권 제3호|pp. 89-108

1

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

혁신M&APerformanceInnovationExploration활용탐색Exploitation기술연관성Technology Relatedness
주제분류경영학

초록

인수합병은 기술의 변화 속도가 빠르고 연구개발 집약도와 복잡성이 높은 하이테크 분야에서 지속적인 성장과 혁신을 위한 외부지식의 확보 측면에서 중요한 역할을 하며, 기업 간 지식기반을 통합을 가능하게 한다. 본 연구에서는 인수합병의 혁신성과를 기존의 단면적 혁신성과가 아닌 March(1991)의 탐색과 활용의 접근을 통한 두 가지 혁신성과로 구분하여, 제약관련산업에 대한 실증분석을 통해, 인수기업과 피인수기업의 지식기반에 있어서의 기술적 관련성(피인수기업의 동일한 분야 및 새로운 분야 지식의 상대적 크기)이 탐색적 혁신성과의 비중에 어떠한 영향을 주는지를 밝히는데 연구의 주목적을 두었다. 실증분석 결과, 기술적 관련성이 인수합병 이후 인수기업의 탐색적 혁신성과 비중의 가장 중요한 결정요인임을 확인 할 수 있었으며, ‘피인수기업의 동일한 분야 지식의 상대적 크기’와 ‘인수합병 이후 인수기업의 탐색적 혁신성과’ 간에는 U형의 관계가, ‘피인수기업의 새로운 분야 지식의 상대적 크기’와 ‘인수합병 이후 인수기업의 탐색적 혁신성과’ 간에는 역-U형의 관계가 있음을 발견하였다. 본 논문에서는 기술연관성을 기술적 공통성과 기술적 새로움의 두 개의 독립적인 하위 차원을 갖고 있는 2차원적 개념으로 상정하여 기술연관성과 탐색적 혁신성과간의 비선형적 관계에 대한 분석을 통해, 기술연관성을 1차원적으로 개념화하여 기업 간의 높은 기술적 공통성을 낮은 기술적 새로움으로, 낮은 기술적 공통성을 높은 기술적 새로움으로 파악하여 기술연관성과 혁신성과 간의 관계를 분석한 기존의 연구 결과들을 통합하여 설명할 수 있는 개념의 틀을 제시하였다.

Abstract

Exploration embraces search, variation, risk taking, experimentation, play, flexibility, discovery and innovation, while exploitation embraces choice, production, efficiency, selection, implementation and execution. Exploration takes long-term effects, and the effects of exploration are usually uncertain and sometimes negative. To the contrary, exploitation takes short-term effect, and the effects of exploitation are generally predictable and positive. Both exploration and exploitation are crucial for firms’ sustainable growth and ultimate survival, although it is believed that there is trade-off between exploration and exploitation. Acquiring external knowledge is important for the firms' explorative learning as well as exploitative learning in high-tech industries, which are characterized by accelerated rate of technological change, high R&D intensity, and technological complexity. M&A (Merger and Acquisition) is one of the measures through which the firms acquire external knowledge. In addition, a better level of knowledge integration between internal knowledge and external knowledge could be achieved through M&A than through other measures, such as inter-firm technology alliance or contractual research. Acquisition of external knowledge through M&A can have positive effects on the innovative performance of the acquirer by two mechanisms–economy of scale and knowledge spillover. The acquiring firm can increase R&D productivity by (1) reducing overlapping R&D input on the common technological areas on which both the acquiring firm and the acquired firm invest and (2) achieving more innovative output by internalizing knowledge spillover between its existing knowledge base and the knowledge base of the acquired firm. However, M&A can also have negative effects on innovative performance. A low level of knowledge integration between the acquiring firm and the acquired firm, which is usually caused by a low strategic fit between the two firms, drives out the acquiring firm from innovative activities. The depletion of the acquiring firm’s financial resource caused by M&A makes the acquiring firm myopic; hence it prohibits the acquiring firm to invest in innovative activities which focus on long-term performance. Although the impact of M&A on the innovative performance of the acquiring firm is still controversial, the technological relatedness between the acquiring firm and the acquired firm is regarded as one of the major determinants of innovative performance. Technological relatedness plays an important role in facilitating integration of two firms’ knowledge base, and enhancing absorptive capacity, which promotes the acquiring firm’s utilization of the acquired firm’s knowledge. In this paper, we analyze the effects of the two sub-dimensions of technological relatedness–commonality and novelty–between the acquiring firm and the acquired firm on the explorative innovative performance share of the acquiring firm after M&A. For the 62 acquiring firms and their acquired targets in the pharmaceutical industry, the empirical analysis focused on examining the effects of ‘the size of the acquired firm’s common knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ and ‘the size of the acquired firm’s new knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ on the ‘explorative innovation share of the acquiring firm after M&A’. The results showed that (1) the technological relatedness between the acquiring firm and the acquired firm is the major determinant of explorative innovation share of the acquiring firm after M&A, (2) ‘the size of the acquired firm’s common knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ is curvilinearly (U shape) related to ‘explorative innovation share of the acquiring firm after M&A’, and (3) ‘the size of the acquired firm’s new knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ is curvilinearly (inverted U shape) related to ‘explorative innovation share of the acquiring firm after M&A’. On one hand, the increase in ‘the size of the acquired firm’s common knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ makes the acquiring firm reinforce their existing knowledge base firm after M&A, by promoting the definition, interpretation, and assimilation of knowledge between the acquiring firm and the acquired firm, and impeding inter-organizational learning between the two firms. On the other hand, it enables the acquiring firm to take risk and conduct experimentation activities, because such M&A drives out a strong rival from the technology market, which finally results in quasi-rent for the acquiring firm. The U-shaped relationship between ‘the size of the acquired firm’s common knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ and ‘explorative innovation share of the acquiring firm after M&A’ shows that the effects of the former outweigh the latter up to a certain point of ‘the size of the acquired firm’s common knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’, however the latter outweigh the former after that point. In parallel, the increase in ‘the size of the acquired firm’s new knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ enlarges the acquiring firm’s explorative capability by enlarging its own knowledge base and intensifying routes to the external innovative. However, it makes the acquiring firm to be conservative and defensive on R&D by developing stress and unrest for the researchers. The inverted U-shaped relationship between ‘the size of the acquired firm’s new knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’ and ‘explorative innovation share of the acquiring firm after M&A’ shows that the effects of the former outweigh the latter up to a certain point of ‘the size of the acquired firm’s new knowledge relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge’, however the latter outweigh the former after that point. The results show that (1) the size of the acquired firm’s common and/or new knowledge base “relative to the size of the acquiring firm’s knowledge” is major determinant of the size of acquired firm’s new knowledge relative to the size of acquiring firm’s knowledge, and (2) the two sub-dimensions of technological relatedness are “curvilinearly” related , gives an important implication, especially for the small and medium sized innovative firms, which generally have small knowledge base. Because the relative size of acquired firm’s knowledge base compared to their own knowledge base is usually small for large firms, which generally have large knowledge base, the effect of commonality on the share of explorative innovation is negative and that of novelty is generally positive. However, contrary to large firms, the effects can be opposite for small- and medium- sized innovative firms, because the relative size of the acquired firm’s knowledge base is greater for them. The major contribution of the paper is it conceptualized and operationalized the technological relatedness as a two-dimensional concept, which is consisted with two independent sub-dimensions (commonality and novelty), while previous researches regarded technological relatedness as a one-dimensional concept–high commonality of acquired firm’s knowledge base means low novelty. With the two-dimensional conceptualization of technological relatedness, the paper presents an integrative framework and provides supportive evidences on the effects of technological relatedness of M&A on the post M&A acquirer’s innovation, which can explain the inconsistent effects of technological relatedness identified by the previous researches.

참고문헌 (95)

  1. 곽수일, "중소기업의 기술네트워킹과 혁신성과에 관한 실증연구", 중소기업연구, 20(2), pp.51~71 (1998)
  2. 김선영, "출연연 기술협력과 고몰입 HRM 시스템이 중소기업의 기술혁신성과에 미치는 영향", 중소기업연구, 31(3), pp.93~111 (2009), 한국중소기업학회
  3. 송미진, "항공 정비 근로자의 직무 스트레스에 관한 연구", 대한인간공학회 학술대회논문집, pp.528~532 (2007)
  4. 안영주, "하이테크 산업의 기술적 인수합병의 혁신 성과 연구 : 탐색과 활용의 접근을 통한 실증 분석", 석사, pp.2010
  5. 이장우, "대-중소기업간 협력이 기술혁신 성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 탐색적 연구", 중소기업연구, 28(3), pp.243~268 (2006), 한국중소기업학회
  6. 홍장표, "기술협력이 지역 중소기업의 혁신성과에 미치는 영향", 중소기업연구, 27(3), pp.3~30 (2005), 한국중소기업학회
  7. Ahuja, G, "Technological Acquisitions and the Innovation Performance of Acquiring Firms : A Longitudinal Study", Strategic Management Journal, 22, pp.197~220 (2001)
  8. Andrade, G, "New Evidence on Mergers", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, pp.103~120 (2001)
  9. Argyris, C, "Organizational Learning" (1978), Addison-Wesley
  10. Arrow, K. J, "Economic welfare and the allocation of resources of invention. in: The rate and direction of inventive activity : Economic and social factors", pp.609~625 (1962), Princeton University Press
  11. Arrow, K. J, "The limits of organization" (1974), Norton
  12. Arthur, W. B, "Competing Technologies and Economic Prediction", IL4SA Options, 2, pp.10~13 (1984)
  13. Autio, E, "Knowledge Relatedness, Learning, and Growth of Industrial Spin-Offs", Journal of Business Venturing, 19(6), pp.809~829 (2004)
  14. Barney, J. B, "Returns to Bidding Firms in Mergers and Acquisitions : Reconsidering the Relatedness Hypothesis", Strategic Management, 9, pp.71~78 (1988)
  15. Baysinger, B. D, "Diversification Strategy and R&D Intensity in Multiproduct Firms", Academy of Management Journal, 34, pp.205~214 (1989)
  16. Acquisitions, Divestitures and Innovation Performance in the Netherlands, "Van Beers, C", ~, pp.EMI Discussion Paper Series, #2009-02 (2009)
  17. Belderbos, R, "Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of firms : Exploitation and exploration within and between firms", The Journal of Product Innovation Management
  18. Bertrand, O, "Effects of Foreign Acquisitions on R&D Activity : Evidence from Firm-Level Data for France", Research Policy, 38(6), pp.1021~1031 (2009)
  19. Bertrand, O, "R&D and M&A : Are Cross-Border M&a Different- an Investigation on Oecd Countries", International Journal of Industrial Organization, 24(2), pp.401~423 (2006)
  20. Burgelman, R, "Managing corporate entrepreneurship : New structures for implementing technological innovation", Technology in Society, 7, pp.91~103 (1985)
  21. Cassiman, B, "The Impact of M&a on the R&D Process, An Empirical Analysis of the Role of Technological and Market Relatedness", Research Policy, 34, pp.195~220 (2005)
  22. Caves, R. E, "Mergers, Takeovers, and Economic Efficiency", International Journal of Industrial Organization, 7, pp.151~174 (1989)
  23. Chakrabarti, A, "Does It Pay to Acquire Technological Firms", R&D Management, 24(1), pp.47~56 (1994)
  24. Chakrabarti, A. K, "Technological Characteristics of Mergers and Acquisitions in the 1970's in Manufacturing Industries in the US", Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, 23, pp.81~90 (1983)
  25. Chandler, A. D, "Scale and Scope : The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism" (1990), Harvard University Press
  26. Chatman, J. A, "Improving Interactional Organizational Research : A Model of Person-Organization Fit", Academy of Management Review, 14(3), pp.333~349 (1989)
  27. Cohen, W, "Innovation and Learning : The Two Faces of R&D", Economic Journal, 99, pp.569~596 (1989)
  28. Cohen, W, "Absorptive Capacity : A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation", Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, pp.128~152 (1990)
  29. Conner, K. R, "A Resourced-Based Theory of the Firm : Knowledge Versus Opportunism", Organization Science, 7(5), pp.477~501 (1996)
  30. Cosh, A. D, "Institutional Investment, Mergers and the Market for Corporate Control", International Journal for Industrial Organization, 7, pp.73~101 (1989)
  31. Datta, D. K, "Organizational Fit and Acquisition Performance : Effects of Post-Acquisition Integration", Strategic Management Journal, 12, pp.281~297 (1991)
  32. David, P. A, "Clio and the Economics of Qwerty", American Economic Review, 75, pp.332~337 (1985)
  33. David, P. A, "The Hero and the Herd in Technological History : Reflections on Thomas Edision and the Battle of the Systems. in: Economic Development Past and Present: Opportunities and Constraints" (1990), Harvard University Press
  34. Dodgson, M, "Organizational Learning : A Review of Some Literatures", Organization Studies, 14, pp.375~394 (1993)
  35. Dosi, G, "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation", Journal of Economic Literature, 26, pp.1120~1171 (1988)
  36. Ernst, H, "The Influence of Corporate Acquisitions on the Behavior of Key Inventors", R&D Management, 30, pp.105~119 (2000)
  37. Recombinant uncertainty in technological search, "Fleming, L", Harvard Business School, ~ (1999)
  38. Folta, T. B, "Governance and uncertainty : The tradeoff between administrative control and commitment", Strategic Management Journal, 19(11), pp.1007~1028 (1998)
  39. Franko, L., G, "Glohal Corporate Competition: Who's Winning, Who's Losing, and the R&D Factor as One Reason Why", Strategic Management Journal, 10, pp.449~474 (1989)
  40. Freeman, C, "The Economics of Industrial Innovation" (1997), MIT Press
  41. Geroski, P, "The Profitability of Innovating Firms", Journal of Economics, 24, pp.198~211 (1993)
  42. Gerpott, T, "Successful Integration of R&D Functions after Acquisitions : An Exploratory Empirical Study", R&D Management, 25(2), pp.161~178 (1995)
  43. Gilfillan, S. C, "The Sociology of Invention" (1935), Follett
  44. Granstrand, O, "External Technology Acquisitions in Large Multi-Technology Corporations", R&D Management, 22(2), pp.111~133 (1992)
  45. Granstrand, O, "The Acquisition of Technology and Small Firms by Large Firms", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 13(3), pp.367~386 (1990)
  46. Grant, R. M, "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments : Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration", Organization Science, 7(4), pp.375~387 (1996)
  47. Griliches, Z, "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators : A Survey", Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), pp.1661~1707 (1990)
  48. Hagedoorn, J, "The Effect of Mergers and Acquisitions on the Technological Performance of Companies in a High-Tech Environment", Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 14(1), pp.67~85 (2000)
  49. Hagedoorn, J, "Learning in Dynamic Inter-Firm Networks : The Efficacy of Multiple Contacts", Organization Studies, 23(4), pp.525~548 (2002)
  50. Hall, B. H, "The Impact of Corporate Restructuring on Industrial Research and Development", Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, pp.85~135 (1990)
  51. Hall, B. H, "Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag?", International Economic Review, 27(2), pp.265~283 (1986)
  52. Haspeslagh, P. C, "Managing Acquisitions : Creating Value through Corporate Renewal" (1991), Free Press
  53. He, Z. L, "Exploration Vs. Exploitation : An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hyopothesis", Organization Science, 15, pp.481~494 (2004)
  54. Henderson, R, "Measuring Competence : Exploring Firm-Effects in Pharmaceutical Research", Strategic Management Journal, 15, pp.63~84 (1994)
  55. Henderson, R, "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers : The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery", RAND Journal of Economics, 27(1), pp.32~59 (1996)
  56. Herriott, S. R, "Learning from Experience in Organizations", American Economic Review, 75, pp.298~302 (1985)
  57. Hopkins, H. D, "Long-Term Acquisition Strategies in the U. S. Economy", Journal of Management, 31, pp.557~572 (1987)
  58. Hitt, M. A, "Effects of Acquisitions on R&D Inputs and Outputs", Academy of Management Journal, 34, pp.693~706 (1991)
  59. Hitt, M. A, "The Market for Corporate Control and Firm Innovation", Academy of Management Journal, 39, pp.1084~1119 (1996)
  60. Hoskisson R. A, "The effects of acquisitions and restructuring(strategic refocusing) strategies on innovation. in: The Management of Corporate Acquisitions : International Perspectives", pp.144~169 (1994), Macmillan
  61. Hoskisson, R. E, "Strategic Control Systems and Relative R&D Investment in Large Multiproduct Firms", Strategic Management Journal, 9, pp.605~621 (1988)
  62. Huber, G, "Organizational Learning : The Contributing Processes and a Review of the Literatures", Organization Science, 2(1), pp.88~117 (1991)
  63. Jemison, D. B, "Corporate Acquisitions : A Process Perspective", Academy of Management Review, 11(1), pp.145~163 (1986)
  64. Karim, S, "Business Unit Reorganization and Innovation in New Product Markets", Management Science, 55(7), pp.1237~1254 (2009)
  65. Katila, R, "Something Old, Somehing New : A Longitudinal Study of Search Behavior and New Product Introduction", Academy of Management Journal, 45, pp.1183~1194 (2002)
  66. Kogut, B, "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology", Organization Science, 3(3), pp.383~397 (1992)
  67. Kusewitt, J. B, "An Exploratory Study of Strategic Acquisition Factors Relating to Performance", Strategic Management Journal, 6, pp.151~169 (1985)
  68. Leten, B, "Directions and success of technology exploration activities : Technological opportunities, relatedness and concentration", 28th Strategic Management Conference (2008)
  69. Levitt, B, "Organizational Learning", Annual Review of Sociology, 14, pp.319~340 (1988)
  70. Levintal, D. A, "The Myopia of Learning", Strategic Management Journal, 14, pp.95~112 (1993)
  71. Liang, I, "Exploration and Exploitation in Three Value Creating Configurations : A Meta Analysis", Proceedings for the Northeast Region Decision Sciences Institute(NEDSI), pp.126~131 (2008)
  72. Link, A, "Acquisitions as Sources of Technological Innovation", Mergers and Acquisitions, 23, pp.36~39 (1988)
  73. Lubatkin, M, "Mergers and the Performance of the Acquiring Firm", Academy of Management Review, 8(2), pp.218~225 (1983)
  74. MacDonald, J. M, "R&D and the Directions of Diversification", Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, pp.583~590 (1985)
  75. March, J. G, "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning", Organization Science, 2(1), pp.71~87 (1991)
  76. Markides, C. C, "Consequences of Corporate Refocusing : Ex-Ante Evidence", Academy of Management Journal, 35, pp.398~412 (1992)
  77. Exploration and Exploitation Straegies, What Kind of Analytical Models?, Technical Report Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques, "Jacoby, N", ~ (2005)
  78. Moen, J, "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?", NBER Working Paper, 7834 (2000)
  79. Nelson, R, "An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change" (1982), Harvard University Press
  80. Nooteboom, B, "The Combination of Exploitation and Exploration : How Does It Work?", EGOS Colloquium (1999), Knowledge and Organization Track
  81. Oster, S. M, "Modern Competitive Analysis" (1994), Oxford University Press
  82. Porter, M. E, "From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy", Harvard Business Review, 65(3), pp.43~59 (1987)
  83. Pritchett, P, "Managing People Problems in Deals That Don't Close", Journal of Buyouts and Acquisitions, 3(7), pp.35~38 (1985)
  84. The Inter-Temporal Tradeoff in Technology Grafting Acquisitions, "Puranam, P", London Business School, ~ (2002)
  85. Ranft, A, "Acquiring new technologies and capabilities : A grounded model of acquisition implementation", Organization Science, 13, pp.420~441 (2002)
  86. Ravenscraft, D, "Life after Takeover", Journal of Industrial Economics, 36, pp.147~157 (1987)
  87. Roller, L-H, "Efficiency gains from mergers", European Economy, (5), pp.31~128 (2001)
  88. Schildt, H. A, "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures", Entrepreneurship : Theory and Practice, 29(4), pp.493~515 (2005)
  89. Schumpeter, J, "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy" (1942), Harper Torchbooks
  90. Shenkar, O, "Knowledge Search in International Cooperative Ventures", Organization Science, 10(2), pp.134~143 (1999)
  91. Singh, H, "Corporate Acquisition Strategies and Economic Performance", Strategic Management Journal, 8(4), pp.377~386 (1987)
  92. Thompson, J, "Organizations in Action" (1967), McGraw -Hill
  93. Tobin, J, "Estimation of Relationships for Limited Dependent Variables", Econometrica, 26(1), pp.24~36 (1958)
  94. Wysocki Jr., B, "Why an acquisition? Often, it's the people", Wall Street Journal, 10(6) (1997)
  95. Wysocki Jr., B, "Many Mergers Driven by Search for Fresh Talent", Chicago Tribune, 28, pp.67~ (1997)

관련 논문AI추천

역동적 시장환경에 대한 탐색 메커니즘으로서의 인수합병에 대한 연구김남운, 이종국한국상품학회 · 상품학연구2019 · 제37권 제6호인수 기업의 제품 및 지리적 시장 다양성이 인수 후 기술혁신성과에 미치는 영향오유진, 이종국한국상품학회 · 상품학연구2014 · 제32권 제1호양손잡이 제휴(Ambidextrous Alliance)가 기업 성과에 미치는 영향곽주영, 정도범기술경영경제학회 · 기술혁신연구2012 · 제20권 제1호기술집약적산업에서 기술제휴성과의 결정요인에 관한 연구조동혁, 최성호한국IT정책경영학회 · 한국IT정책경영학회 논문지2019 · 제11권 제4호탐험과 활용활동이 기술혁신역량과 혁신성과에 미치는 영향 : 흡수역량과 혁신강도에 따른 매개효과박은미, 서정해중소기업융합학회 · 융합정보논문지2021 · 제11권 제8호기술협력 파트너 다양성과 혁신성과에 대한 연구: 흡수역량 및 전유성의 조절효과를 중심으로김현창, 배영임기술경영경제학회 · 기술혁신연구2017 · 제25권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)

중소기업의 녹색경영 평가관리모형 연구 : G-BSC 접근법장희복, 오준환pp. 1-22연구개발투자와 특허경영의 인과구조최강화, 김수욱, 유연우pp. 23-42팀협상에서 시간압력인지와 팀원들의 팀과업몰입이 협상성과와 시간에 미치는 영향김영훈, 권성우, 박경도pp. 43-64환경 불확실성, 조직여유, 가부장주의가 조직 앙트라프러뉴십과 기업성과에 미치는 영향강태헌, 장수덕pp. 65-87창업기업의 성과에 미치는 영향요인 분석 :매출액과 종업원수 증가요인을 중심으로김종호, 박종복, 양현봉pp. 109-128
원문 보기