Are ideas being fished out?, Research Policy, 2023

This paper examines whether declining research productivity can be explained by fishing out—is the production of new knowledge decreasing in the level of existing knowledge? We estimate the knowledge production function for US firms and find instead that knowledge production is increasing in the knowledge stock. This is reinforced by the observations that maximum research productivity across firms is increasing over time, and that research productivity year effects continue to exhibit decline after modeling contributions from knowledge and research labor. Given that fishing out appears unable to explain the decline in research productivity, we offer preliminary evidence of contingent factors that might contribute to the decline.

The role of transaction costs on vertical integration and innovation: A general equilibrium approach, Academy of Management Proceedings, 2021

Acquiring information from outside firms is crucial for a firms’ innovation output. According to the transaction cost perspective, firms can increase the information flow between them by integrating. This view, however, usually considers only pairs of firms. This paper applies a general equilibrium approach to transaction costs to assess how vertical integration impacts a dyad’s ability to get information from other firms in the market. The model shows that, in general, we need to understand the transaction costs between all agents in the economy. Additionally, this paper breaks down the innovation process into three stages (information sharing, R&D investment, and innovation adoption) and shows the situations in which the inability to write contracts in each stage will impede an innovation to arrive in the market.

The Deep Historical Roots of Organization and Strategy: Traumatic Shocks, Culture, and Institutions (with Lamar Pierce and Jason A. Snyder), Organization Science, 2017

We argue that organizations have deep roots in traumatic societal shocks that long preceded their founding. Drawing on literatures from strategic management and the social sciences, we explain how traumatic shocks such as conflict, disease, and natural disaster can alter the institutional and cultural paths that determine future business environments. Historical shocks can help clarify the origin of cultural and institutional differences and help provide causal inference about why these differences are correlated with organizational structure and strategy. We explain specific cultural and institutional mechanisms through which historical traumatic shocks persist as well as specific organizational factors influenced by these mechanisms. We also provide guidance on key approaches for empirically linking traumatic shocks with modern firms as well as common identification problems in these methods. Our approach clarifies a path for clarifying theory on how culture and institutions shape firms, and how management scholars might anticipate the evolution of market development following emerging traumatic shocks.

Working Papers

How Vertical Integration Affects Supplier’s Knowledge Flows (with Kannan Srikanth) - draft available

This study investigates the informational consequences of vertical integration (VI) through a comprehensive analysis of 502 vertical acquisitions. By using patent citations as proxies for knowledge transfer, we reveal that VI enhances internal knowledge flows between integrated producer and supplier units, as indicated by reduced citation time lag. However, VI's impact on external knowledge flows is more nuanced: it diminishes both the likelihood and speed of knowledge transfer from geographically and technologically close competitors, suggesting a shift towards internal reliance. Conversely, while VI increases the likelihood of knowledge flows from distant competitors, it also prolongs the citation time lag, reflecting competitive tensions. Our findings underscore VI’s dual role in innovation—facilitating internal knowledge transfer while isolating the firm from external sources—highlighting the strategic need for careful knowledge management post-integration. This research provides new insights into how VI shapes innovation ecosystems and explains the coexistence of diverse organizational forms in competitive markets.

Do Outside CEOs Change Firm Strategy More (or Less) Than Inside CEOs? The Case of Tech Redeployment (with Jay Anand and Patel Gbedjemaiho) – Preparing draft

This paper explores the strategic influence of outside CEOs on firm innovation, specifically focusing on their impact on R&D intensity and direction. Contrary to the assumption that outside CEOs drive significant strategic changes, our analysis shows that they do not markedly alter R&D intensity and are less effective at shifting innovation direction compared to internal CEOs, particularly when lacking technological expertise or authority within the firm. Using robust matching techniques to address endogeneity, we find that the negative effects of outside CEOs are amplified when their industry experience diverges from the firm’s core operations. This study provides a nuanced understanding of the strategic role of outside CEOs in innovation management, highlighting the critical importance of domain-specific knowledge and organizational power in driving effective R&D strategies.

The Secret is Out: What US Census Surveys Tell Us About When & Why Firms Care About Trade Secrets (with Trey Cummings) – Preparing draft

This research examines the strategic use of trade secrets as a form of intellectual property protection, leveraging restricted access survey data from the US Census Bureau. We investigate which firm characteristics drive the strategic importance of trade secrets over other IP forms, such as patents. Our findings reveal that firm size influences the emphasis on trade secrets, especially for firms with low R&D spending. For larger firms, factors such as process innovation, activity in the technology market, and the balance between research and development play a pivotal role. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of IP strategy, offering insights into why firms prioritize trade secrets and how they navigate their IP choices in competitive markets.

Long-Term Incentives to Innovate: Top Down or Bottom Up? (with Trey Cummings) – Preparing draft

This paper explores the impact of long-term compensation incentives on innovation at various organizational levels, using restricted US Census firm-level innovation survey data. Contrary to the prevailing focus on executive incentives, our analysis finds that long-term incentives within R&D teams have a more substantial effect on innovation outcomes than CEO or executive incentives. Key organizational attributes—such as size, dispersion, and resource slack—further enhance the significance of long-term incentives in R&D. Our findings challenge conventional governance models that prioritize executive compensation as a driver of innovation, suggesting that fostering innovation may require a broader incentive strategy that reaches deeper into the organization.