In our model multiple innovators compete against each other by submitting investment proposals to an investor. The investor chooses the least expensive proposal and the timing of the investment. Innovators privately learn the cost of investing. The investor has to compensate the innovators for their reservation wages, but competition makes screening easier and helps to erode innovators’ informational rents. Consequently, competition leads to faster innovation, because the investor has less need to delay expensive investments. With an endogenous number of innovators investment timing becomes first best

Placing innovative assets in a separate subsidiary creates more autonomy for the unit manager of the innovation than a division, even when the subsidiary is wholly owned and controlled by the parent. The key driver is limited liability: unlike a division, the parent has the option to walk away from the subsidiary’s debt obligations. As a result, the parent invests less in developing internal uses for the innovation. This causes the unit manager to invest more in developing independent uses for the innovation: he must ”sink or swim” on his own effort, and his desired actions are less subject to overrule. Received June 29, 2012; editorial decision June 8, 2016 by Editor Paolo Fulghieri

Is financial innovation necessary for sustaining economic growth? To address this question, we build a Schumpeterian model in which entrepreneurs earn profits by inventing better goods and profit-maximizing financiers arise to screen entrepreneurs. The model has two novel features. First, financiers engage in the costly but potentially profitable process of innovation: they can invent better methods for screening entrepreneurs. Second, every screening process becomes less effective as technology advances. The model predicts that technological innovation and economic growth eventually stop unless financiers innovate. Empirical evidence is consistent with this dynamic, synergistic model of financial and technological innovation

We review the accounting literature on innovation, focusing on the economic attributes of innovation that collectively differentiate innovation from other assets: novelty, nonrivalry, and partial excludability. These attributes help innovation drive economic growth but create unique information-based challenges that accounting information and researchers are well suited to address. We discuss the definition and measurement of innovation and highlight common mistakes researchers make when measuring innovation and when using sources of plausibly exogenous variation. We then review the accounting literatures on the disclosure, management, financial reporting, taxation, and contracting and financing of innovation. For each of these literatures we identify challenges and opportunities for future research

I examine the relation between the presence of governance provisions and corporate innovation for a sample of firms between 1984 and 1997. I find a positive relation between four proxies for innovation and the broad Gompers, Ishii, and Metrick (2003) Index. However, in subsample analyses, I find that only those provisions that officers and directors actively adopt are positively related to innovation; coverage by state-level antitakeover legislation is typically unassociated or negatively associated with innovation. The evidence suggests that it is the visibility of officers and directors' actions rather than the potency of the takeover protection that best explains the observed pattern

This study presents a novel empirical approach to identify financing constraints for innovation based on the concept of an ideal test (Hall, 2008). Firms were offered a hypothetical payment and asked to choose between alternatives of use. If they selected additional innovation projects, they must have had some unexploited investment opportunities that were not profitable using more costly external finance. We attribute constraints for innovation not only to lacking financing, but also to firms' innovative capability. Econometric results show that financial constraints do not depend on the availability of internal funds per se but that they are driven by innovative capability

We examine whether political corruption impedes innovation. Using a comprehensive sample of U.S. firms, we find that corruption has a substantial, negative relation with the quantity and quality of innovation. These results are robust to using various fixed effects, proxies for corruption and innovation, and subsamples. To establish causality, we employ 2 instruments for corruption: local ethnic diversity and the corruption of the state a firm’s founder grew up in. Corruption appears to reduce innovation output both on average and for the most innovative firms. Overall, this evidence is consistent with the notion that corruption reduces social welfare by impeding innovation

In this study, we examine the impact of class action litigation shocks on corporate innovation. Our experimental design is based on an unanticipated court ruling that reduces the risk of shareholder class action lawsuits for firms located within the jurisdiction of the US Ninth Circuit. Innovation output by firms headquartered in this area increased significantly after this decision compared with that of firms elsewhere. This result is consistent with our trading hypothesis, which states that the threat of litigation leads to managerial myopia. The increase in innovation is more pronounced at high-tech firms and firms operating in a competitive environment. Other measures of ex ante litigation risk indicate that firms with the greatest litigation risk experience the greatest increase in innovation after this decision. We conclude that a reduction in the threat of class action litigation leads firms to increase innovation

Acquiring innovation through M&A is subject to information frictions, as assessing the value of innovative targets is a challenging task. We find an inverted U-shaped relation between firm innovation and takeover exposure; equity usage increases with target innovation; and the deal completion rate drops with innovation. We develop and estimate a model of acquiring innovation under information frictions, featuring endogenous merger, innovation, and offer composition decisions. Our estimates suggest that acquirers’ due diligence reveals only 30% of private information possessed by targets. Eliminating information frictions increases capitalized merger gains by 59%, stimulates innovation, and boosts productivity, business dynamism, and social welfare

Glaeser and Lang (2024; GL) reviews the accounting literature on innovation, which has increased substantially in recent years. GL makes an important contribution to accounting research by bringing into the literature the implications of Romer's Nobel Prize winning endogenous growth theory and by explaining how accounting research addresses questions related to innovation. We contribute to accounting research by building on GL's foundation to suggest three main paths forward for future innovation research. First, focus on innovation's three defining attributes: novelty, nonrivalry, and partial excludability. Second, determine the needs of various users of information about a firm's innovation activities and how to meet those needs; we focus on the needs of investors. Third, address questions our discussion highlights as potentially important for future research on financial reporting and innovation, including the crucial question of an innovation's identifiability