Veranstaltungen

Abstract:

This paper studies the implications of internal social comparisons – benchmarking business units against each other – for organizational adaptation and performance. While extant research has mainly focused on the effects of internal social comparisons on the volume of organizational effort, we build on behavioral theory on organizational adaptation and aspiration-driven search to suggest that such comparisons may also affect the direction of effort. Using a computational model, we show how internal social comparisons can effectively regulate organizational search processes through two mechanisms:

1. a classification effect whereby the organization is guaranteed to contain both exploring and exploiting units, and
2. a sampling effect whereby social comparisons protect against premature switching from exploitation to exploration.

We explore important boundary conditions on the viability of internal social comparisons, including environmental dynamics, resource munificence, and the comparability of business units. We also demonstrate how the performance of internal social comparisons is boosted in the presence of complementarities between business units. Thus, under appropriate circumstances, internal social comparisons can affect firm performance in beneficial ways, suggesting why many executives actively encourage such comparisons. The study has implications for work on intra-organizational competition, aspirations-driven search, the adaptation of multi-unit firms, and balancing exploration and exploitation.

See paper attached.

Abstract:

The underrepresentation of women at the top of hierarchies is often explained by gender differences in preferences. We find support for this claim by analyzing a large dataset from an online card game community, a stylized yet natural setting characterized by self-selection into an uncertain, competitive and male-dominated environment. We observe gender differences in playing behavior consistent with women being more averse towards risk and competition. Moreover, we demonstrate how “shying away” makes female players less successful: despite no gender gap in playing skills, women accumulate lower scores than men due to their relative avoidance of risky and competitive situations.

Abstract:

Studies on moderators of the innovation performance relationship in entrepreneurship research are scarce. Thus in this paper we use a dataset consisting of 416 entrepreneurs from the German federal state of Thuringia in order to examine the moderating effect of the Big Five personality traits extraversion, openness and conscientiousness on the relationship between entrepreneurial innovation and exit by failure in highly innovative industries. Correspondingly, we identify exit by failure with the help of bankruptcy information and self-reports. In order to account for self-selection into innovative entrepreneurship, stratification on the propensity score is utilized to overcome self-selection bias. After accounting for self-selection into innovation, we find that personality moderates the innovation failure relationship. Extraversion strengthens the negative effect of innovation on exit by failure. In contrast, openness and conscientiousness weaken the negative effect of innovation on entrepreneurial failure.

Abstract:

Compulsory licenses in competition law have been criticized primarily for their detrimental effect on incentives to innovate. As dynamic efficiency including innovation leads to more economic welfare than static efficiency, it should be the preferred policy choice. However, innovation is a complex process that goes beyond merely creating incentives for the private sector. This paper by relying on the Sectorial Systems of Innovation (SSI) approach investigates the Brazilian and Indian pharmaceutical sector and demonstrates the differences in innovative capability in these two jurisdictions. Whereas, the Indian pharmaceutical industry has moved up the R&D value chain, its Brazilian counterpart, by and large, is still in the phase of imitation. The paper uses this difference to draw a prescription for compulsory licenses under competition law in Brazil and India.

Why do individuals become entrepreneurs? When do they succeed? We develop a model in which individuals use pedigree (e.g., educational qualifications) as a signal to convince employers of their unobserved ability. However, this signal is imperfect, and individuals who correctly believe their ability is greater than their pedigree conveys to employers, choose entrepreneurship. Since ability, not pedigree, matters for productivity, entrepreneurs earn more than employees of the same pedigree. Our empirical analysis of two separate nationally representative longitudinal samples of individuals residing in the US and the UK supports the model’s predictions that (A) Entrepreneurs have higher ability than employees of the same pedigree, (B) Employees have better pedigree than entrepreneurs of the same ability, and (C) Entrepreneurs earn more, on average, than employees of the same pedigree, and their earnings display higher variance. We discuss the implications of our findings for entrepreneurship, education, and public policy.

The most recent version of the paper can be accessed at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2596846

Francisco Beneke wird zum Thema "Entry Analysis in Latin American Competition Law Enforcement - Why Development Matters" sprechen. Luc Desaunettes wird moderieren. 
 

Luc Desaunettes will talk about Justification for a legal protection of trade secrets. Andrea Bauer will moderate.

Abstract:

Research which explores unchartered waters has a high potential for major impact but also carries a high uncertainty of having minimal impact. Such explorative research is often described as taking a novel approach.

This study examines the complex relationship between pursuing a novel approach and impact. We measure novelty by examining the extent to which a published paper makes first time ever combinations of referenced journals, taking into account the difficulty of making such combinations. We apply this newly developed measure of novelty to a set of one million research articles across all scientific disciplines. We find that highly novel papers, defined to be those that make more (distinct) new combinations, have more than a triple probability of being a top 1% highly cited paper when using a sufficiently long citation time window to assess impact.

Moreover, follow-on papers that cite highly novel research are themselves more likely to be highly cited. However, novel research is also risky as it has a higher variance in the citation performance. These findings are consistent with the “high risk/high gain” characteristic of novel research.

We also find that novel papers are typically published in journals with a lower than expected Impact Factor and are less cited when using a short time window. Our findings suggest that science policy, in particular funding decisions which are over reliant on traditional bibliometric indicators based on short-term direct citation counts and Journal Impact Factors, may be biased against novelty. (Authors: Jian Wang/Reinhilde Veugelers/Paula Stephan)

Please drop us a line if you plan to attend.

Extended Abstract

Abstract:

Patent offices around the world face massive backlogs of applications, which threatens to slow down the pace of technological progress. However, economists lack analytical tools to address the issue. This paper provides a model of patent backlog inspired from the traffic congestion literature.

Inventors in the cohort are heterogeneous with respect to desired patent pendency duration and react in anticipation of the waiting time resulting from the backlog. They can accelerate or slow down pendency duration by adapting their filing strategy. We find that the backlog impedes patent examination progress by providing incentives to strategically manipulate pendency.

We discuss three policy responses: increasing examination capacity; introducing a penalty fee; and altering the value of pending applications.