Seminar  |  22.01.2020, 16:00

TIME Kolloquium

Dennis Byrski (Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb), Georg Windisch (TUM) (auf Einladung)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum E10


Fire and Mice: The Effect of Supply Shocks on Basic Science
Stefano Baruffaldi, Dennis Byrski, Fabian Gaessler
Referent: Dennis Byrski

We study how a negative supply shock to research-related assets affects the production of scientific knowledge. In particular, we exploit the 1989 Morrell Park fire that destroyed a considerable share of the world’s largest mice breeding facility, the Jackson Laboratory, and killed approximately 400,000 mice. This fire led to an unforeseen and substantial supply shortage in mice for the North American biomedical research community, which we can isolate at the strain and scientist level based on proprietary archival data. Using difference-in-differences estimations, we find that the scientific productivity of affected scientists decreases when measured in simple publication counts, but much less so when we adjust for the publications’ quality. Moreover, affected researchers are more likely to initiate research that is unrelated to their previous work. This indicates that affected scientists switched research trajectories but maintained their scientific impact. In the aggregate, the temporary supply shortage of particular mice strains led to a permanent decrease in their usage among U.S. scientists. These results highlight the important role of supply chains in basic science.


Strategy Development in Project-Based Organizations
Referent: Georg Windisch (TUM)

Research has established that learning at and across different level is of utmost importance for project-based organizations (PBOs) to identify and develop new strategies. At the same time, pbo’s face inherent weaknesses in exactly these areas: organizational learning and firm-level strategizing. Literature to date has created a large body of knowledge on learning and capability building in support or in consequence of pursuing new strategies, that is a new strategy is already defined and firms improve on executing it through vanguard (also called “innovative”) projects. Yet, apart from few conceptual attempts, a profound empirical analysis of learning mechanisms that lead to the identification and development of new strategies – as prerequisite to initiate innovative projects - is missing so far. Consequently, the question this study aims to answer is the following: How does learning in project-based organizations lead to the development of new strategies? We put particular emphasis on which learning mechanisms occur throughout strategy development and which obstacles might lead to the difficulties on organizational learning, as identified by previous research. To answer this question, the author conducted a 16-month ethnographic case study on a pbo in the rail transport industry that faced a fundamental change in its business environment and, over a period of almost two decades and with the extensive help of internal consultants, managed to successfully identify and develop a new strategy to adapt to its new competitive landscape. Building on this, we put forward the concept of a self-locking cycle, which hindered the firm to conduct strategy development by their own efforts. Further we identified three learning mechanisms conducted by the internal consultants that allowed to overcome this self-locking cycle in our focal firm and finally enabled successful strategy development: project-oriented, business environment-oriented, and organization-oriented learning.

Seminar  |  14.01.2020 | 18:00  –  19:30

Institutsseminar: Fairness als Rechtsprinzip

Stefan Scheuerer (auf Einladung)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, Raum E 10


Moderation: Ansgar Kaiser

Seminar  |  18.12.2019 | 12:00  –  13:30

Brown Bag-Seminar: Do Patent Continuations Increase Litigation?

Cesare Righi (Boston University)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313


I study the relationship between the use of continuations and patent litigation in the United States. Continuations are applications that delay claim issuance, thereby providing another chance to obtain rejected claims, draft new claims and modify the scope of protection of issued patents. I show that patents from continuations are litigated more often and earlier than ordinary patents, even after controlling for patent and invention characteristics. Moreover, I exploit patent-family linkages and the relationship between the timing of continuation issuance and litigation to show that continuations likely lead to more litigation related to an invention.


Ansprechpartner: Michael E. Rose

Workshop  |  16.12.2019, 09:00  –  17.12.2019, 16:00

RISE - 2nd Research on Innovation, Science and Entrepreneurship Workshop

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb

Keynote: Pierre Azoulay (MIT & NBER)

On 16/17 December 2019, the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition will host the 2nd Research on Innovation, Science and Entrepreneurship Workshop, an annual workshop for Ph.D. students and Junior Post-docs in Economics and Management.


The goal of the RISE2 Workshop is to stimulate an in-depth discussion of a select number of empirical research papers. It offers Ph.D. students and Junior Post-docs an opportunity to present their work and to receive feedback.


Keynote speaker of the RISE2 Workshop is Pierre Azoulay (MIT & NBER).


Get the program here.
See RISE Workshop.

Seminar  |  12.12.2019 | 13:15  –  14:45

Brown Bag-Seminar: The Social Returns to Innovation

Ben Jones (Kellogg School of Management)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313


This paper estimates the social returns to investments in innovation. The spillovers associated with innovation, including imitation, business stealing, and intertemporal spillovers, have made calculations of the social returns difficult.  Here we deploy the core ideas of economic growth to provide an economy-wide, average estimate that nets out the many spillover margins.  We further assess the role of diffusion delays, capital investment, productivity mismeasurement, health outcomes, and international spillovers in assessing the average social returns. Overall, our estimates suggest that the social returns are very large.  Even under conservative assumptions, $1 invested in innovation efforts produces at least $5 of benefits on average.


Ansprechpartner: Rainer Widmann

Workshop  |  11.12.2019, 19:00  –  13.12.2019, 15:30

Workshop on Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb

The Workshop on Entrepreneurship and Innovation is supported by the Collaborative Research Center Transregio “Rationality and Competition” (CRC), the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU Munich) and the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition.


In case of any questions, please contact Marina Chugunova.


See Program

Seminar  |  11.12.2019 | 12:00  –  13:30

Brown Bag-Seminar: Free Access to Scientific Knowledge: Sci-Hub As A Natural Experiment

Edoardo Ferrucci (LUISS Business School)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313


In this paper we investigate the effect of an unexpected increase in the availability of scientific articles on the follow-on scientific usage of the knowledge incorporated. We focus on the launch of Sci-Hub, a Kazakhstan-based website that provides free access to scientific literature, gathering data from the first three months of activity of the website (from September to December 2011). Then we link downloaded scientific articles to their corresponding bibliographical information retrieved from Web of Science. Finally we reconstruct the entire flow of citations pertaining to these scientific articles to measure the effects of a reduction in their access costs on their rate of usage within the scientific community. Our main hypothesis is that reducing the cost of accessing scientific knowledge lead to higher rates of knowledge usage by the scientific community. The introduction of Sci-Hub induced a large increase in citations to downloaded articles coming from scholars located in developing countries. This effect is persistent across article cohorts. As expected, the effect is absent when we consider citations whose scholars are located either in European developed countries or in the United States.


Ansprechpartner: Michael E. Rose

Seminar  |  10.12.2019 | 18:00  –  19:30

Institutsseminar: A Political Economy Approach Towards Innovation Law

Lodewijk Van Dycke (auf Einladung)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, Raum 313

Tagung  |  09.12.2019, 09:00  –  10.12.2019, 15:00

TRIPS Flexibilities and Public Health

Global Forum on Intellectual Property, Access to Medicines and Innovation

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb

Weitere Informationen finden Sie hier:

https://www.southcentre.int/call-for-papers-september-2019/

Seminar  |  04.12.2019 | 12:00  –  13:30

Brown Bag-Seminar: Effort and Selection Effects of Performance Pay in Knowledge Creation

Erina Ytsma (Carnegie Mellon University)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313


It is by now well-documented that performance pay has positive effort and selection effects in routine, easy to measure tasks, but its effect in knowledge creation is much less understood. This paper studies the effect of performance pay on knowledge creation through effort and selection effects using the introduction of performance pay in German academia as a natural experiment. To this end, I consolidated information from various, unstructured data sources to construct a data set that encompasses the affiliation history and publication records of the universe of academics in Germany. The performance pay reform introduced attraction and retention bonuses, as well as relatively weaker on-the-job performance bonuses that take effect at a later point in time. I estimate the pure effort effect of these performance pay incentives in a difference-in-differences framework, comparing changes in research productivity of a treated cohort of academics, who receive performance pay because they started their first tenured position after the reform, with a control cohort that receives flat wages because they started their first tenured position just before the reform. I find a positive effort effect of performance pay that is economically large; amounting to a 12 to 16% average increase in research productivity. This increase manifests itself most robustly as an increase in research quantity and persists for a number of years. The effort response is strongest and most robust for less productive academics, with increases in pure quantity as well as quality-adjusted research output, while the average impact of the work of top quartile academics decreases. Performing textual analysis on paper abstracts to construct novelty and impact metrics, I find that the novelty of the work of top quartile academics declines. This work however does find more follow-on research in subsequent papers in the same field and is thus more impactful. I estimate the selection effect by analyzing the rate at which academics of different productivity levels switch to the performance pay scheme. I use the fact that the old and new wage schemes compare differently for academics at different ages, which gives rise to selection incentives that are inversely related to age. Exploiting this variation in a difference-in-differences framework, I find that more productive academics are more likely to select into performance pay. Hence, performance pay increases research output in academia through both effort and selection effects. However, because the effort effect is strongest for relatively less productive academics, while relatively more productive academics select into performance pay, the selection effect partially counteracts the impact of the effort effect.


Ansprechpartner: Marina Chugunova