Management consultants increasingly recommend that internal R&D be outsourced; however, little is known about the substitution or complementarity between internal and external R&D. Through structural estimation of a flexible innovation production function we provide a deeper understanding of firm‐level drivers of complementarity between these two types of investments. Our analysis is based on a unique panel data set on the R&D and in‐licensing expenditures of pharmaceutical firms. Our results suggest that internal R&D and in‐licensing are neither complements nor substitutes. We find that the degree of complementarity is enhanced for firms with stronger absorptive capacity, economies of scope, and licensing experience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ceccagnoli et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: