본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

보완자 상호작용에 기반한 지식재산 생태계 분석 프레임

A Complementer Interaction-based Analytic Framework of Intellectual Property Ecosystems

김봉선|김언수|김민식
한국전략경영학회 (Korean Strategic Management Society)|2024.04|전략경영연구 (Journal of Strategic Management)|제27권 제1호|pp. 45-72|DOI 10.17786/jsm.2024.27.1.003

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

Semiconductor지식재산반도체생태계Ecosystem보완자ComplementerIP (Intellectual Property)
주제분류경영학

초록

지식재산을 중심으로 사업을 영위하는 다양한 산업에서는 개별기업의 단일 제품이나 서비스로 경쟁하는경우 여러 보완적인 관계의 기업들이 생태계를 이루어 내놓은 제품과 서비스를 이길 수 없다. 최근의혁신은 개별기업의 역량보다 생태계를 구성하는 리더기업과 협력기업들의 다양하고 보완적인 자원과역량의 양과 질, 그리고 이러한 요소들을 어떻게 조정하고 관리하는가 의해 좌우된다. 성공적인 생태계를조성한 기업은 보완재에 대한 연결성은 물론, 제품·서비스의 기능과 특징을 협력기업과 공유 및결합함으로써 새로운 가치를 창출하고 있다. 본 연구는 “지식재산을 창출하고 거래하여 가치를 창출하는 기업은 어떻게 생태계를 구성하고관리하는가?“라는 질문에 답하기 위하여, 지식재산 생태계의 리더기업과 제3자 혁신기업 사이의상호작용에 관한 기본적인 이해와 이를 분석할 수 있는 렌즈가 필요함을 제안한다. 이를 위해, 자원과 역량의 보완성과 생태계의 개방성이라는 두 가지 기준으로 생태계 내부의 상호작용을설명하는 이론적인 프레임워크를 구성한다. 그리고, 도출된 이론적인 틀의 현실적인 적용성을 확인하는차원에서 반도체 지식재산(IP) 생태계를 맥락으로 네 가지 리더기업들을 선정하여 분석함으로써, 지식재산생태계의 구성과 관련 기업 간의 상호작용 관리에 대한 시사점을 도출한다. 특히 우리나라 대표적인반도체 리더기업 삼성전자 파운드리 사업에 대한 전략적인 시사점을 논의한다.

Abstract

Nowadays, we witness a phenomenon, in various industries in general and intellectual property (IP) industries in particular, that an individual firm’s product or service alone is no match against an ecosystem. Current innovations rely not upon innovation of individual firms but upon the level and distribution of complementary resources and capabilities of leader firms and cooperating firms composing an ecosystem as well as the transaction costs to access such resources and capabilities. Those firms that successfully build ecosystems create values by sharing and combining the connectivity among complementary resources, functions, and features of products and services. The current study asks a research question “how a firm that creates value through developing and transacting IP composes and manages an ecosystem“, and suggests an analytic lens that will lead us to understand the interaction between the leader firm and the third-party innovation firms in an intellectual property ecosystem. Therefore, we construct a theoretical framework to explain the interactions between the leader firm and the complementary firms based on two axis: complementary resource/capabilities and openness of an ecosystem. Then, we test the applicability of this theoretical framework by analyzing four ecosystem leaders in the IP-intensive semiconductor industry. Based on such analysis, we discuss the implications for the IP ecosystem management and strategic implications for Samsung Electronic’s foundry business.

참고문헌 (58)

  1. 정부부처 합동, "시스템반도체 비전과 전략", ~ (2019)
  2. Adner, R., "The wide lens: A new strategy for innovation (Vol. 34, No. 9)" (2012), Penguin
  3. Adner, R., "Ecosystem as structure : An actionable construct for strategy", Journal of Management, 43(1), pp.39~58 (2017)
  4. "Arm Approved Design Partners" (2021)[URL]
  5. Arora, A., "The changing technology of technological change : general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour", Research Policy, 23(5), pp.523~532 (1994)
  6. Arora, A., "Ideas for rent : an overview of markets for technology", Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(3), pp.775~803 (2010)
  7. Arora, A., "Markets for technology in the knowledge economy", International Social Science Journal, 54(171), pp.115~128 (2002)
  8. Chesbrough, H. W., "Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology" (2003), Harvard Business Press
  9. Chesbrough, H. W., "Why companies should have open business models", MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(2), pp.22~28 (2012)
  10. Cusumano, M. A., "The business of platforms: Strategy in the age of digital competition, innovation, and power" (2019), Harper Business
  11. Das, T. K., "Managing risks in strategic alliances", Academy of Management Perspectives, 13(4), pp.50~62 (1999)
  12. Dibiaggio, L., "Design complexity, vertical disintegration and knowledge organization in the semiconductor industry", Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(2), pp.239~267 (2007)
  13. "Alphawave completes its RISC-V, chiplet acquisition of OpenFive" (2022)[URL]
  14. Eisenmann, T. R., "Opening platforms : How, when and why", Platforms, Markets and Innovation, 6, pp.131~162 (2009)
  15. Ferdows, K., "How to Turn a Supply Chain Platform into an Innovation Engine", Harvard Business Review, 100(7-8), pp.151~151 (2022)
  16. Gans, J. S., "The product market and the market for"ideas" : Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs", Research Policy, 32(2), pp.333~350 (2003)
  17. Gartner, "Worldwide Semiconductor Intellectual Property: Market Share Rankings, 1999, 2000, 2001", ~
  18. Market Share Analysis: Semiconductor Design Intellectual Property, Worldwide, "Gartner", ~ (2013)
  19. Gartner, "Market Share: Semiconductor Intellectual Property", Worldwide, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, ~
  20. Gawer, A., "Platform dynamics and strategies : from products to services", Platforms, Markets and Innovation, 45, pp.57~ (2009)
  21. Gawer, A., "Platform leadership:How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation (Vol. 5)", pp.29~30 (2002), Harvard Business School Press
  22. Gawer, A., "How companies become platform leaders", MIT Sloan Management Review (2008)
  23. Gawer, A., "Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation", Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), pp.417~433 (2014)
  24. Greenstein, S., "Open platform development and the commercial Internet", Platforms, markets and innovation, pp.219~248 (2009)
  25. Hurtarte, J. S., "Understanding fabless IC technology" (2011), Elsevier
  26. Iansiti, M., "Managing our hub economy", HBR’S, 10, pp.117~ (2017)
  27. Iansiti, M., "Strategy as ecology", Harvard Business Review, 82(3), pp.68~78 (2004)
  28. Iansiti, M., "The keystone advantage" (2004), Harvard Business School Press
  29. "Design IP Revenue Grew 5.2% in 2019" (2020)[URL]
  30. "Design IP Sales Grew 19.4% in 2021,confirm 2016-2021 CAGR of 9.8%" (2022)[URL]
  31. Jacobides, M. G., "In the ecosystem economy, what’s your strategy?", Harvard Business Review, 97(5), pp.128~137 (2019)
  32. Jacobides, M. G., "The co-evolution of capabilities and transaction costs : Explaining the institutional structure of production", Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), pp.395~413 (2005)
  33. Jacobides, M. G., "Towards a theory of ecosystems", Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), pp.2255~2276 (2018)
  34. Jacobides, M. G., "Benefiting from innovation : Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures", Research Policy, 35(8), pp.1200~1221 (2006)
  35. Kim, B., "The impact of the timing of patents on innovation performance", Research Policy, 45, pp.914~928 (2016)
  36. Kretschmer, T., "Platform ecosystems as meta-organizations : Implications for platform strategies", Strategic Management Journal, 43(3), pp.405~424 (2022)
  37. Lee, D., "Licensing strategies of the new intellectual property vendors", The DRUID Tenth Anniversary Summer Conference 2005on Dynamics of Industry and Innovation (2005)
  38. Lee, D., "Licensing Strategies of the New Intellectual Property Vendors", California Management Review, 50(2), pp.6~30 (2008)
  39. Li, Y. R., "The technological roadmap of Cisco's business ecosystem", Technovation, 29(5), pp.379~386 (2009)
  40. Nalebuff, B. J., "Co-opetition" (1996), HarperCollins Business
  41. "What Is Your Business Ecosystem Strategy?" (2022)[URL]
  42. Porter, M. E., "Technology and competitive advantage", Journal of Business Strategy, 5(3), pp.60~78 (1985)
  43. Rietveld, J., "Platform strategy : Managing ecosystem value through selective promotion of complements", Organization Science, 30(6), pp.1232~1251 (2019)
  44. "SAFE" (2020)[URL]
  45. Schilling, M. A., "8. Protecting or diffusing a technology platform : tradeoffs in appropriability, network externalities, and architectural control", Platforms, Markets and Innovation, 192, pp.219~248 (2009)
  46. Schilling, M. A., "Strategic management of technological innovation" (2019), McGraw Hill
  47. Schuh, C., "The Semiconductor Crisis Should Change Your Long-Term Supply Chain Strategy", Harvard Business Review (2022)
  48. Sengupta, S., "Some approaches to complementary product strategy", Journal of Product Innovation Management: An International Publication of the Product Development & Management Association, 15(4), pp.352~367 (1998)
  49. "Ecosystem Partners Community" (2022)[URL]
  50. "Synopsys IP OEM Partners" (2021)[URL]
  51. Teece, D. J., "Profiting from technological innovation : Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy", Research Policy, 15(6), pp.285~305 (1986)
  52. "Open Innovation Platform(OIP)" (2019)[URL]
  53. "A Review of TSMC’s OIP Ecosystem" (2019)[URL]
  54. Van Alstyne, M. W., "Pipelines, platforms, and the new rules of strategy", Harvard Business Review, 94(4), pp.54~62 (2016)
  55. Wessel, M., "The Problem with Legacy Ecosystems", Harvard Business Review, 94(11), pp.68~74 (2016)
  56. Williamson, P. J., "Ecosystem advantage : How to successfully harness the power of partners", California Management Review, 55(1), pp.24~46 (2012)
  57. Wind, J., "Issues and opportunities in new product development : An introduction to the special issue", Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), pp.1~12 (1997)
  58. Yin, R. K., "Case Study Research: Design and Methods" (2018)

관련 논문AI추천

지식생태계의 조직화: 플랫폼 리더의 조직역량이 지식창출을 위한 기업간 협력의 확장에 미치는 영향김보경, 박상찬, 정동일한국지식경영학회 · 지식경영연구2015 · 제16권 제2호생태계기반 대중소기업 상생협력방안 -삼성전자의 사례를 중심으로-김지성, 박광태한국로지스틱스학회 · 로지스틱스연구2018 · 제26권 제1호한국의 혁신 생태계: 진화 과정과 차세대 모델에 대한 탐색이정원, 임채성기술경영경제학회 · 기술혁신연구2023 · 제31권 제3호기업생태계관점에서의 연구개발 전략과 플랫폼 리더십 : 대․중소기업 상생협력과 R&D에의 시사김기찬한국중소기업학회 · 중소기업연구2009 · 제31권 제2호기업 생태계와 지속가능한 성과에 관한 연구 및 시사점- 첨단기술 기반 기업 사례 중심으로 -김보람, 김희선, 정진섭산업경영연구소 · 산업과 경영2025 · 제38권 제2호기업전략차원에서의 특허활용과 기술혁신 협력 간 관계에 관한 연구박규호한국지식재산연구원 · 지식재산연구2013 · 제8권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (2건)

미디어 노출과 기업의 기부: 여유자원과 인적자원의 조절효과를 중심으로임미희pp. 1-16ESG의 효율성을 높이는 4가지 전략: CSR을 CSO로 전환문휘창, 윤문연pp. 17-43
원문 보기