[go: up one dir, main page]

IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/25183.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Firm Scope and Spillovers from New Product Innovation: Evidence from Medical Devices

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Grennan
  • Charu Gupta
  • Mara Lederman
Abstract
When firms span related product categories, spillovers across categories become central to firm strategy and industrial policy, due to their potential to foreclose competition and affect innovation incentives. We exploit major new product innovations in one medical device category, and detailed sales data across related categories, to develop a causal research design for spillovers at the customer level. We find evidence of spillovers, primarily associated with complementarities in usage. These spillovers imply large benefits to multi- vs. single-category firms, accounting for nearly one quarter of sales in the complimentary category (equivalent to four percent of revenue in the focal category).

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Grennan & Charu Gupta & Mara Lederman, 2018. "Firm Scope and Spillovers from New Product Innovation: Evidence from Medical Devices," NBER Working Papers 25183, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25183
    Note: EH IO PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25183.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    3. Richard Schmalensee, 1978. "Entry Deterrence in the Ready-to-Eat Breakfast Cereal Industry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 305-327, Autumn.
    4. Severin Borenstein, 1991. "The Dominant-Firm Advantage in Multiproduct Industries: Evidence from the U. S. Airlines," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1237-1266.
    5. Alberto Galasso & Hong Luo, 2017. "Tort Reform and Innovation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(3), pages 385-412.
    6. Katherine Ho & Justin Ho & Julie Holland Mortimer, 2012. "The Use of Full-Line Forcing Contracts in the Video Rental Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 686-719, April.
    7. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    8. Matthew Grennan, 2013. "Price Discrimination and Bargaining: Empirical Evidence from Medical Devices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 145-177, February.
    9. Luis M.B. Cabral, 2000. "Stretching Firm and Brand Reputation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 658-673, Winter.
    10. David J. Teece, 2003. "Towards an Economic Theory of the Multiproduct Firm," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Essays In Technology Management And Policy Selected Papers of David J Teece, chapter 15, pages 419-446, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Galasso, Alberto & Luo, Hong, 2018. "How does product liability risk affect innovation? Evidence from medical implants," CEPR Discussion Papers 13036, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    13. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira R. Fabrizio, 2016. "Does the market for ideas influence the rate and direction of innovative activity? Evidence from the medical device industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 447-465, March.
    14. Cynthia A. Montgomery & Birger Wernerfelt, 1988. "Diversification, Ricardian Rents, and Tobin's q," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(4), pages 623-632, Winter.
    15. Barry Nalebuff, 2004. "Bundling as an Entry Barrier," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 159-187.
    16. Ken Hendricks & Alan Sorensen, 2009. "Information and the Skewness of Music Sales," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(2), pages 324-369, April.
    17. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
    18. Stern, Ariel Dora, 2017. "Innovation under regulatory uncertainty: Evidence from medical technology," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 181-200.
    19. Bailey, Elizabeth E & Friedlaender, Ann F, 1982. "Market Structure and Multiproduct Industries," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(3), pages 1024-1048, September.
    20. Mara Lederman, 2007. "Do enhancements to loyalty programs affect demand? The impact of international frequent flyer partnerships on domestic airline demand," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 1134-1158, December.
    21. Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Why Focus? A Study Of Intra‐Industry Focus Effects," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 121-150, June.
    22. Matthew Grennan, 2014. "Bargaining Ability and Competitive Advantage: Empirical Evidence from Medical Devices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 3011-3025, December.
    23. Barry Nalebuff, 2000. "Competing Against Bundles," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm157, Yale School of Management.
    24. Peter S. Burton, 1994. "Product Portfolios and the Introduction of New Products: An Example from the Insecticide Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(1), pages 128-140, Spring.
    25. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    26. Mara Lederman, 2008. "Are Frequent‐Flyer Programs a Cause of the “Hub Premium”?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 35-66, March.
    27. Hammond, Peter & Myles, Gareth (ed.), 2000. "Incentives, Organization, and Public Economics: Papers in Honour of Sir James Mirrlees," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199242290.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    2. Miller, David A., 2008. "Invention under uncertainty and the threat of ex post entry," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 387-412, April.
    3. Jidong Zhou, 2017. "Competitive Bundling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 145-172, January.
    4. Alessandro Gavazza, 2011. "Demand spillovers and market outcomes in the mutual fund industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(4), pages 776-804, December.
    5. Andrea Mantovani, 2013. "The Strategic Effect of Bundling: A New Perspective," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(1), pages 25-43, February.
    6. Bet, Germán, 2021. "Product specification under a threat of entry: Evidence from Airlines’ departure times," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Zhou, Jidong, 2011. "Multiproduct search," MPRA Paper 37139, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Etro, Federico, 2016. "Research in economics and industrial organization," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 511-517.
    9. Dennis W. Carlton & Robert H. Gertner, 2003. "Intellectual Property, Antitrust, and Strategic Behavior," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 3, pages 29-60, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Shuai, Jie & Yang, Huanxing & Zhang, Lan, 2022. "Dominant firm and competitive bundling in oligopoly markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 421-447.
    11. Joon Mahn Lee & Rahul Kapoor, 2017. "Complementarities and Coordination: Implications for Governance Mode and Performance of Multiproduct Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 931-946, October.
    12. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
    13. Andrea Greppi & Domenico Menicucci, 2021. "On Bundling and Entry Deterrence," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(4), pages 561-581, June.
    14. Davide Vannoni, 2000. "The diversifield firm: non formal theories versus formal models," ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2000(106).
    15. Gastón Llanes & Andrea Mantovani & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2019. "Entry into Complementary Good Markets with Network Effects," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 262-282, December.
    16. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Beerkens, B.E. & Duysters, G.M., 2003. "Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks," Working Papers 03.22, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    17. Ahn Illtae & Yoon Kiho, 2012. "Competitive Mixed Bundling of Vertically Differentiated Products," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-54, November.
    18. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cagé & Michael Sinkinson, 2024. "Media Competition and News Diets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 62-102, May.
    19. Sang‐Hyun Kim & Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2022. "On the profitability of interfirm bundling in oligopolies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 657-673, August.
    20. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • L38 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Policy
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies
    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • M2 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics
    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics
    • O25 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Industrial Policy
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.