Article ID: | iaor201524778 |
Volume: | 23 |
Issue: | 8 |
Start Page Number: | 1370 |
End Page Number: | 1386 |
Publication Date: | Aug 2014 |
Journal: | Production and Operations Management |
Authors: | Scholtes Stefan, Savva Nicos |
Keywords: | simulation, investment |
We study three contractual arrangements–co‐development, licensing, and co‐development with opt‐out options–for the joint development of new products between a small and financially constrained innovator firm and a large technology company, as in the case of a biotech innovator and a major pharma company. We formulate our arguments in the context of a two‐stage model, characterized by technical risk and stochastically changing cost and revenue projections. The model captures the main disadvantages of traditional co‐development and licensing arrangements: in co‐development the small firm runs a risk of running out of capital as future costs rise, while licensing for milestone and royalty (M&R) payments, which eliminates the latter risk, introduces inefficiency, as profitable projects might be abandoned. Counter to intuition we show that the biotech's payoff in a licensing contract is not monotonically increasing in the M&R terms. We also show that an option clause in a co‐development contract that gives the small firm the right but not the obligation to opt out of co‐development and into a pre‐agreed licensing arrangement avoids the problems associated with fully committed co‐development or licensing: the probability that the small firm will run out of capital is greatly reduced or completely eliminated and profitable projects are never abandoned.