: A Study on the Characteristics of Foreign Licensing Strategy in Korean Firms * ** I. II. III. IV. V. VI. * , , 042-821-5552, younglee @cnu.ac.kr ** , , [email protected] - 105 -
:
A Study on the Characteristics of Foreign Licensing Strategy in
Korean Firms
* **
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
* , , 042-821-5552, younglee @cnu.ac.kr ** , , [email protected]
- 105 -
.
1.
.
1990 22 1,087
2% . ,
.
1990 500
. [ 1] [ 1] 2000
200 0.07 2001 0.23
2008 2,530 45%
.
.
[ 1] (1995~2008)1
1 . (2009).
- 106 -
[ 1] (1995~2008 )
< 1> 1990
0.1 .
2001 2008 0.45
.
.
.
Aulakh, Cabusgil and Sarkar(1998) , Villar(2004), Bessy et al(2000) .
, , ,
.
Contractor(1980), Root & Contractor(1981), Cho(1988) .
, , , ,
.
Farok J. Contractor(1985), Brouthers&Nakos(2004),
Vishwasrao(2006) . ,
, , .
.
. (2004), (2005), (2008)
.
( , 1990).
. 1990 2
- 107 -
.
2.
1990
2 .
2010 , 2
.
.
, ,
.
1 300
.
.
, , ,
.
2
, ,
.
SPSS. 18 , .
II.
1.
(licensing) ,
(proprietary assets)
. 2
. J. K. Contractor3
4.2%
2 (2007) 21 pp. 122-123. 3 F. J. Contractor(1985) Licensing in International Strategy Quorum Books.
- 108 -
6.6%
.
[ 2]
Contractor .
.
( : form of specification, modes, drawings, manuals, layouts )
( : ,start-up, testing, training, recruitment, management development )
.
19.7% .
.
OECD TBP Manual(Proposed
Standard Method of Compiling and Interpreting Technology Balance of Payment Data)
4 .
, ,
F. J. Contractor
.
- 109 -
2.
.
.
1)
.
,
.
Sahay and Aulakh(1996) , ,
R&D
. Contractor(1985)
. , , ,
.
8
.
,
.
2)
Farok J. Contractor(1985)
. U. S. Direct
Investment Abroad(1977)
.
- 110 -
[ 3] 4
60%
29% . .
.
Sharmila Vishwasrao(2006)
FDI Arm s length
. , ,
.
(2000) ( )
FDI ,
Arm s length .
(2001)
FDI .
Brouthers&Nakos(2004) FDI
. (2008)
Arm s length
FDI .
3)
. (Lump-sum fees)
(Running royalties) .
. (1999)5
4 U. S. Direct Investment Abroad(1977) 5 (1990),
(($ millions)
Majority Affiliates 1,996(17%) 4,143(71%)
Minority Affiliates 2,705(23%) 714(12%)
Unaffiliated 7,000(60%) 991(29%)
11,701(100%) 5,848(100%)
- 111 -
, , ,
Aulakha, et al(1998)
, ,
. (2005)
( ), ( ),
. Vishwasrao(2006)
,
, , R&D ,
.
(2007, 2008)
. F. J. Contractor(2005_
.
[ 2 ]
[ 2]
. R .
C ( ), C ( ),
C ( ) C ( ) . T
, , , , ,
. T
- 112 -
. Contractor
T T
.
.
.
[ 3]
, , ,
, ,
.
1.
FDI
Arm s length .
, , .
FDI . (Vishwasrao 2006)
Arm s length
- 113 -
FDI .( 2000, 2001,
2004)
FDI
.( 2004)
Arm s
length .(Brouthers&Nakos 2004)
FDI Arm s length .(Vishwasrao 2006)
2.
,
. , ,
, .
.(Aulakh et al. 1998)
.( 2005)
.( 2008)
.(Flota,
1998; Kogut, 1991)
.(Aulakha et al, 1998; , 2005)
.
.
.( 2007)
.(Lou, 2005)
- 114 -
.
.
.
.
.
1.
2010 1 8 2010 4 6 3 , ,
37 .
2.
1)
(1)
8 29 78%
.
.
.
(2)
, ,
. 81.1%
13.5% 5.4% .
.
(3)
15
12 . 18.9%
81.1% .
- 115 -
8
.
2)
(1)
10 21.6% 10 78%
.
.
FDI
.
(2)
56.8%
,
. ,
.
3)
(1)
51%
48.6% .
(2)
54.1% .
.
(3)
59.5%
.
40.5% .
.
- 116 -
4)
(1)
32.4% 67.6%
.
13.5%
27.0% 16.2% .
(2)
40.5% .
.
5)
.
[ 4]
((100%) ((5 ))
54.1 3.85
45.9 3.82
67.6 4.04
64.9 3.54
86.5 4.19
51.4 3.69
45.9 3.7
62.2 4.08
86.5% , ,
.
45.9% 51.4% .
5 (1 : ~ 5 : )
,
.
- 117 -
6)
FDI
Arm s length . 70.3%
. 29.7%
Arm s length
FDI .
7)
(2004)
4 .
A. Initial payment:
B. Lump-sum royalty:
C. Running royalty:
D. Others:
3 .
LS base: Lump-sum royalty, Initial payment + Lump-sum royalty
RR base: Running royalty, Initial payment + Running royalty
LS+RR base: Lump-sum royalty + Running royalty,
Initial payment + Lump-sum royalty + Running royalty
RR base
56.8% .
LS+RR base 27%
LS+RR
base . LS base
16.2% 70.3%
FDI
.
[ 5]
Arm s length 11 29.7 29.7 29.7
FDI 26 70.3 70.3 100.0
37 100.0 100.0
- 118 -
8)
.
[ 7]
LS BASE RR BASE LS+RR BASE
Arm s
length
FDI
% 9.1% 63.6% 27.3% 100.0%
% 16.7% 33.3% 30.0% 29.7%
% 2.7% 18.9% 8.1% 29.7%
% 19.2% 53.8% 26.9% 100.0%
% 83.3% 66.7% 70.0% 70.3%
% 13.5% 37.8% 18.9% 70.3%
% 16.2% 56.8% 27.0% 100.0%
% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% 16.2% 56.8% 27.0% 100.0%
Arm s length
LS BASE 9.1% RR BASE 63.6% LS+RR BASE
27.3% . FDI LS BASE
19.2% RR BASE 53.8% LS+RR BASE 26.9% .
Arm s length FDI
. Arm s length
. FDI Arm s length
[ 6]
LS BASE 6 16.2 16.2 16.2
RR BASE 21 56.8 56.8 73.0
LS+RR BASE 10 27.0 27.0 100.0
37 100.0 100.0
- 119 -
. FDI 53.8% RR BASE
LS+RR BASE LS BASE
.
.
1.
. 78.4%
. FDI
70.3% FDI
. 10
78.4% FDI
.
51.4% 48.6%
32.4% 67.6% .
.
.
.
.
,
, , , ,
, ,
70.3%
RR base
. Arm s length
FDI LS BASE
. Arm s length
FDI LS BASE
FDI
.
- 120 -
2.
.
. 37
.
. .
, ,
.
1 .
2
.
. Aulakh, et
al(1998) Vishwasrao(2006)
.
.
( , )
.
.
.
- 121 -
..
(2005), , , Vol 30, No.1.
, (2001), -
, , 12 2 .
(2008), pp ,
, 118 .
(2004),
A Journal of Technology Innovation , Vol 12, No.2.
(2002), : ,
, 22 2 .
, (2000), , ,
11 2 .
(2007),
, .
(2008), ,
,Vol 33, No.1.
, (2008), , ,
Vol 19, No. 2.
(1990), ,
.
itutional Environment and the Cost of
The Economics of Institutions in The New Millennium ,
Tubingen, Germany, September 22-24 .
Technology licensing Agreements
Bhart N. A and T , The
Journal of Industrial Economics Vol. XL , March.
Farok J of Technology Licensing by U.S
Multinationals: A framework for Analysis and an Empirical JIBS , Vol. 11, No.2.
F. J.
JIBS , Vol . 12, No.3.
Farok J ernational Technology Transfer: Major Issue and Policy
Responses JIBs fall, pp113-135.
-
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 1007-1028.
Kang Management
- 122 -
International Review , Vol. 28, No.2, pp.70-79.
Baylor University.
pp.19-33.
in International Licensing Agreements.
Journal of International Business Studies, Vol.36, pp.209-230.
Macho- f
25, 1996, pp.43-57.
-429.
Preet
JIBs , Vol. 29, No.2, pp409-420.
Journal of Economics& Management Strategy , Vol14, No.2.
Vishwasrao Sharmila ies vs. Fees: How do firms pay for foreign technology?, International
Journal of Industrial Organization Vol.25 pp.741-759.
Choice of Exchange Structure Strategic Management Journal , Vol.15 No.4.
Villar, M. C.(2004) .
- 123 -