战略适应表现为战略行动，受到技术资源的制约，对基于科学的新创企业（New science-based firms，NSBFs）的生存和发展有着重要的影响。本文采用184个于2016年以前在新三板挂牌的成长期医药制造新创企业作为实证研究样本，用技术深度和技术宽度来衡量企业的技术资源结构，战略行动的多样性和频次来衡量战略适应能力，探讨前因变量技术深度和技术宽度对战略适应的影响。实证结果表明：NSBFs技术深度对战略行动频次有负向作用，技术深度深，战略行动频次低，此类企业战略目标是窄细分市场，战略行动聚焦于生产产品和提供服务，以满足特定的竞争性细分市场的需求；技术宽度对战略行动多样性有正向影响，技术宽度宽，战略行动多样性多，此类企业战略目标是宽细分市场，通过开发新生产和分销方法，研发新产品或服务等战略行动来拓展市场，以整个行业为基础，为顾客提供可接受的、独特的产品或服务。此外，基于技术宽度与技术深度的差异对企业进行分类，明确了NSBFs初创期技术资源与成长期战略适应的匹配关系。拓展和丰富了基于科学的新创企业战略研究，对新创企业发展实践提供了借鉴。
Abstract
The historic convergence of the technological revolution and industrial revolution has promoted the development of science-based industries. New science-based firms (NSBFs) face high risks in terms of technological development and high uncertainty in the area of market competition. Firms with a high environmental adaptability can gain competitive advantages and a strong corporate performance in uncertain environments. Much research has focused on the strategic adaptation of enterprises. Scholars have explored the positive impact of antecedent variables, such as the senior management team, strategic opportunities, and human resources, on the strategic adaptability of enterprises from the perspectives of the organization, behavior, and resources. However, research for the NSBFs which has technical advantages on strategic adaptation，the role of NSBFs′ core or unique technical resources cannot be ignored. Scholars have made a great deal of research on the matching relationship between technology and enterprise strategic. With regard to the study of technical resources, the scholars proposed two dimensions of technological depth and technological width. Most of the empirical research on the influence of technological depth and technological width on the innovation, however the effect of the technical resources on the enterprise strategic adaptation from two dimensions of the technological depth and the technological width is rarely studied.
Strategic adaptation is a series of strategic actions related to the selection, commitment, implementation, and revision of a plan, which is constrained by technological resources. It has an important impact on the survival and development of NSBFs. We used 184 new pharmaceutical manufacturing start-ups listed on the new OTC market before 2016 as empirical research samples. The technological resource structure of enterprises was measured by the technological depth and breadth. The technological depth of a technology is measured by the extent to which patents are used, and the technological width is measured by the range of new technologies (IPC code) included in the patent. The strategic adaptation was measured by the diversity and frequency of the strategic actions. The diversity of strategic action is calculated by Herfindahl Index to measure the concentration of strategic action. The frequency of strategic action is the number of times each strategic action occurs.
This research focused on the effect of the technological depth and breadth as the antecedent variables on strategic adaptation. The empirical results showed that the technological depth of the NSBFs had a negative impact on the frequency of strategic action: as the technological depth became deeper, the frequency of strategic action became lower. The technological breadth had a negative impact on the diversity of strategic action, because the diversity of the strategic action was the reverse index. When the technological breadth became wider, the diversity of strategic action became greater. Enterprises were divided into 4 categories according to the different structures of the NSBFs′ technology resources (shown in the quadrantal diagram).
In Quadrant I of the diagram, the technology depth of the NSBFs is deep and the technological breadth is narrow. During the growth period, enterprises mainly carry out product research and development, testing, and production, which focuses on the product′s technological depth in regards to research and development. When there are sufficient external resources, the enterprises give priority to a product′s technological depth research and development. The strategic goal is the narrow-segment market, which focuses on the strategic action of the product′s production and services. Enterprises meet the needs of a specific competitive-segment market, and therefore take less strategic action. The S curve model, proposed by Foster, shows that there is a slow growth stage at the beginning of the development of a new technology, that is, the budding stage. After this stage, the cumulative utility growth rate begins to increase, and the technology begins to develop rapidly. The enterprises in Quadrant I are in the budding stage of technological research and development, and so they tend to develop the technological depth in the initial stage. The technology accumulation of a certain product makes these enterprises develop rapidly, and they may become the technological leaders in their respective fields in the future. Through the technological depth research and development, enterprises survive and develop.
In the second quadrant, the technological depth and technology breadth of the NSBFs are deep and wide. In the growth period, the technological depth and technological breadth have great advantages, the technology strategy is broadly developed, and the enterprise resource advantage is at its best. Enterprises pay attention to technological depth research and development, which maintains the technological advantages of these enterprises. These enterprises explore the direction of their strategic development through the use of a variety of strategic actions. By exploring a variety of strategic actions, enterprises extend their product lines and expand their market share to achieve profitability. In the market competition, these enterprises maintain their technological advantage and enjoy steady development in the changing environment.
In the third quadrant, the development of the technological depth and technological breadth of the NSBFs is low, and the strategic actions are less diverse and occur with a higher frequency. The technological strategic direction is not clear. The enterprises are looking for opportunities and markets by taking frequent actions to survive and develop.
In Quadrant IV, the NSBFs′ technology depth is shallow, and the technology breadth is wide. In the growth period, the enterprises tend to develop their technology breadth, and the strategic goal is the wide-segment market. Enterprises use the development of new production and distribution methods to research and develop new products or services. The goal of these strategic actions is to expand the enterprise′s market share (which is based on the whole industry) to provide customers with acceptable products or services with certain characteristics. By taking diversified and frequent strategic actions under the condition of rich technical resources, the enterprises give priority to taking positive strategic actions through the market, product, technology, and expected operation scale. These enterprises create a product research and development platform, which helps them develop a variety of products and broadens the path of enterprise growth.
The management significance of this paper is as follows. First, from the perspective of strategic adaptation, we discussed the survival and development of NSBFs, which provides new ideas for future research and enriched the theory of strategic management. Second, this work expands the research on the antecedent variables of enterprise strategy adaptation and provided a theoretical basis for enterprises to choose a strategy and strategic actions based on technological advantages. Finally, the structure of technology resources was divided into technological depth and technological breadth. These categories explain the difference in the strategic actions taken by enterprises. This paper therefore helps NSBFs in the growth period make the correct strategic choice in regard to market competition, enhances their competitive advantage, and improves their chances of survival and development.
关键词
战略适应 /
技术深度 /
技术宽度 /
新创企业 /
基于科学的新创企业
Key words
strategic adaptation /
technological depth /
technological breadth /
new venture /
new science-based firm
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] Lubik, S. & Garnsey, E. .Early business model evolution in science-based ventures: The case of advanced materials.[J].Long Range Planning, 2016, 49(3):393-408
[2] Andreea N. Kiss and Pamela S. Barr.. New Venture Strategic Adaptation: The Interplay of Belief Structures and Industry Context.[J].Strategic Management Journal, 2015, 0(36):1245-1263
[3] Pekka Stenholm, Maija Renko.Passionate bricoleurs and new venture survival.[J].Journal of Business Venturing, 2016, 0(31):595-611
[4]Robinson, K.C.,& Phillips McDougall,PEntry barriers and new venture performance: a comparison of universal and contingency approaches[J].Strategic Management Journal, 2001, 22(6‐7):659-685
[5] Bhide A.The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses[M]. Oxford University Press: New York. 2000.
[6] Carroll GR.A stochastic model of organizational mortality: review and reanalysis.[J].Social Science Research, 1983, 0(12):309-329
[7]Freeman J, Carroll GR, Hannan MT.The liability of newness: age dependence in organizational death rates[J].American Sociological Review, 1983, 48(5):692-710
[8] Stinchcombe AL.Social structure and organizations.[J].In Handbook of Organization, 1965, 0(0):142-193
[9]Teece, D.J. Dynamic capabilities: routines versus entrepreneurial action[J].Journal of Management Studies, 2012, 49(8):1395-1401
[10]Barney, J.B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage[J].Journal of Management, 1991, 17(1):99-120
[11] Murray, F.The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life.[J].Res. Policy, 2004, 0(33):643-659
[12]Knockaert, M.Ucbasaran,D,Wright,M.,Clarysse,B. The relationship between knowledge transfer,top management team composition,and performance: the case of science-based entrepreneurial firms[J].Entrepreneurship Theory Pract., 2011, 35(4):777-803
[13]Rasmussen, E.Mosey,S,Wright,M. The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: a longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence[J].Manage. Stud., 2011, 48(6):1316-1342
[14]Cooper AC, Gimeno-Gascon FJ, Woo CY.Initial human and ?nancial capital as predictors of new venture performance[J].Bus. Venturing, 1994, 9(5):371-395
[15]Box TM, White MA, Barr SH.A contingency model of new manufacturing performance[J].Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, 1993, 18(2):31-45
[16]Cooper AC, Gimeno-Gascon FJ, Woo CY.Initial human and ?nancial capital as predictors of new venture performance[J].Bus. Venturing, 1994, 9(5):371-395
[17]Cardinal L B, Alessandri T M, Turner S F.Knowledge codifiability,resources,and science- based innovation[J].Journal of knowledge management, 2001, 5(2):195-204
[18]Katila, R.and GAhuja. Something old,something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction[J].Academy of Management Journal, 2002, 45(6):1183-1194
[19]George, G.R. Kotha and Y[J].Zheng. Entry into insular domains: a longitudinal study of knowledge structuration and innovation in biotechnology firms. Journal of Management Studies, 2008, 45(8):1448-1474
[20]Hughes, A.and MKitson. Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: new evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development[J].Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2012, 36(3):723-750
[21]Alexy, O.G. George and AJ. Salter. Cui Bono? The selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity[J].Academy of Management Review, 2013, 38(2):270-291
[22]Choi Y, Shepherd DA.Entrepreneurs’ decisions to exploit opportunities[J].Journal of Management, 2004, 30(3):377-395
[23]Foss NJ, Lyngsie J, Zahra SA.The role of external knowledge sources and organizational design in the process of opportunity exploitation[J].Strategic Management Journal, 2013, 34(12):1453-1471
[24]March J.Exploitation and exploration in organizational learning[J].Organization Science, 1991, 2(1):71-87
[25]McMullen JS, Shepherd DA.Entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in the theory of the entrepreneur[J].Academy of Management Review, 2006, 31(1):132-152
[26] John and Parnell, Donald L. Leaster and Michael L. Menefee. .Strategy as a Response to Organizational Uncertainty: An Alternative Perspective on the Strategy-performance Relationship.[J].Management Decision, 2000, 38(8):0-0
[27] Andreea N. Kiss and Pamela S. Barr. .New Venture Strategic Adaptation: The Interplay of Belief Structures and Industry Context[J].Strategic Management Journal,, 2015, 0(36):1245-1263
[28]陈劲，黄建樟，童亮.复杂产品系统的技术开发模式[J].研究与发展管理, 2004, 16(5):65-70
[29]B.W. Lin & CH.Wu. How Does Knowledge Depth Moderate the Performance of Internal and External Knowledge Sourcing Strategies?[J].Technovation, 2010, 30(11-12):582-589
[30]I.Dierickx & KCool. Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of competitive Advantage[J].Management Science, 1989, 35(12):1504-1511
[31]Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM.The art of continuous change: linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations[J].Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42(1):1-34
[32] Chrisman JJ.，Bauerschmidt A，Hofer C W．.The determinants of new venture performance: an extended model．[J].Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 1998, 0(3):5-29
[33] Zahra S.Technology strategy and new venture performance: a study of corporate-sponsored and independent biotechnology ventures. [J].Journal of Business Venturing, 1996, 11(4):289-321
[34]Box TM, White MA, Barr SH.A contingency model of new manufacturing performance[J].Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, 1993, 18(2):31-45
[35]Gilbert BA, McDougall PP, Audretsch DB.Clusters,knowledge spill over sand new venture performance: an empirical examination[J].Journal of Business Venturing, 2008, 23(4):405-422
[36] Agrawal, A.University-to-industry knowledge transfer: literature review and unanswered questions.[J].Int. J. Manag. Rev., 2001, 0(3):285-302
[37] Board, N.S. Science and Engineering Indicators 2014, In: Foundation, N.S. (Ed.), Arlington VA.[S].
[38]Gibbons M, Johnston R.The roles of science in technological innovation[J].Research Policy, 1974, 3(3):220-242
[39] Hobday M.Product complexity, innovation and industrial organization [J].Research Policy, 1998, 0(26):689-710
[40] Ozman M.Breadth and Depth of Main Technology Fields: An Empirical Investigation Using Patent Data[J].Middle East Technical University Working Paper, 2007, 0(0):0-0
[41] Wang, Q, Tunzelmann V.. Complexity and the Functions of the Firm: Breadth and Depth. [J].Research Policy, 2000, 0(29):805-818
[42] Schmoch U．.Concept of a Technology Classification for Country Comparisons．[J].Report to the World Intellectual Property Organization ( WIPO), 2008, 0(0):0-0
[43]Lerner, J.Venture capitalists and the decision to go public[J].Journal of Financial Economics, 1994, 35(3):293-316
[44] Tijssen R. J. W.. Universities and industrially relevant science: towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation . , 2006, (35): 1569-1585．[J].Research Policy, 2006, 0(35):1569-1585
[45] Suman Lodh and Maria Rosa Battaggion.Technological breadth and depth of knowledge in innovation: the role of mergers and acquisitions in biotech [J].Industrial and Corporate Change, 2014, 24(2):383-415
[46] Sandip Basu, Corey Phelps, Suresh Kotha.Towards understanding who makes corporate venture capital investments and why[J].Journal of Business Venturing, 2011, 0(26):153-171
[47] Gans J S, Stern S.The product market and the market for “ideas”: commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. [J].Research Policy, 2003, 0(32):333-350
[48]Allen Jeffrey W, Gordon M.P Corporate equity ownership,strategic alliances，product market relationships[J].Journal of Finance, 2000, 55(6):2791-2815
[49]Schmidt, T.Absorptive capacity—one size fits all? A firm-level analysis of absorptive capacity for different kinds of knowledge[J].Managerial and Decision Economics, 2010, 31(1):1-18
[50]Hmieleski KM, Baron RA.Regulatory focus and new venture performance: a study of entrepreneurial opportunity exploitation under condition so frisk versus uncertainty[J].Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2008, 2(4):285-301
[51]Keats BW, Hitt MA.A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions,macro organizational characteristics,and performance[J].Academy of Management Journal, 1988, 31(3):570-598
[52]Mishina Y, Pollock TG, Porac JF.Are more resources always better for growth? Resource stickiness in market and product expansion[J].Strategic Management Journal, 2004, 25(12):1179-1197
[53] Foster R. N.. Assessing technological threats[J].Research Management, 1986, 0(7-8):17-20
基金
重庆市技术预见与制度创新项目：“高技术商业化的学术创业支持体系与制度创新”（cstc2018jsyj-jsyjX0020，2018.07—2019.08）。
PDF(502 KB)
