Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-22T22:00:37.712Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition and Cooperation: A Comparative Analysis of SEMATECH and the VLSI Research Project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2015

Jon B. Thornberry
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article I present a comparative analysis of two government-funded research and development consortia, Japan's Very Large Scale Integration Research Project (VLSI) and the American consortium Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology (SEMATECH), designed with the VLSI project as a model. An examination of the semiconductor industries in Japan and the United States reveals some important factors influencing the interaction of the consortia's member companies. Three main elements affected interfirm cooperation within the two organizations: first, past government policies influenced industry structure, firm capabilities, and firm behavior; second, the way firms competed had a material impact on how well they were able to cooperate; and third, the social structure and traditions of the semiconductor industries in the two countries mediated the transition from cooperation to competition.

Type
Article
Information
Enterprise & Society , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , December 2002 , pp. 657 - 686
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) (2002). Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Business History Conference. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bibliography of Works Cited

Books

Anchordoguy, Marie. Computers Inc.: Japan’s Challenge to IBM. Cambridge, Mass., 1989.Google Scholar
Borrus, Michael G. Competing for Control: America’s Stake in Microelectronics. Cambridge, Mass., 1988.Google Scholar
Callon, Scott. Divided Sun: MITI and the Breakdown of Japanese High-Tech Industrial Policy, 1975-1993. Stanford, Calif., 1995.Google Scholar
Corey, Raymond E. Technology Fountainheads: The Management Challenge of R&D Consortia. Boston, 1997.Google Scholar
Flamm, Kenneth. Mismanaged Trade: Strategic Trade Policy and the Semiconductor Industry. Washington, D.C., 1996.Google Scholar
Flamm, Kenneth. Targeting the Computer: Government Support and International Competition. Washington, D.C., 1987.Google Scholar
Fransman, Martin. The Market and Beyond: Cooperation and Competition in Information Technology Development in the Japanese System. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1990.Google Scholar
Gerlach, Michael L. Alliance Capitalism: The Social Organization of Japanese Business. Berkeley, Calif., 1992.Google Scholar
Gibson, David V., and Rogers, Everett M.. R&D Collaboration on Trial: The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation. Boston, 1994.Google Scholar
Johnson, Chalmers. MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975. Stanford, Calif., 1982.Google Scholar
Langlois, Richard N., et al. Microelectronics: An Industry in Transition. Boston, 1988.Google Scholar
Mowery, David C., and Nelson, Richard R., eds. Sources of Industrial Leadership: Studies of Seven Industries. New York, 1999.Google Scholar
Saxenian, AnnaLee. Regional Advantage, Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, Mass., 1996.Google Scholar
Sigurdson, Jon. Industry and State Partnership in Japan: The Very Large Scale Integrated Circuits (VLSI) Project. Lund, Sweden, 1986.Google Scholar
Vestal, James E. Planning for Change: Industrial Policy and Japanese Economic Development, 1945-1990. New York, 1993.Google Scholar
Warshofsky, Fred. The Chip War: The Battle for the World of Tomorrow. New York, 1989.Google Scholar
Aldrich, Howard E., and Sasaki, Toshihiro. “R&D Consortia in the United States and Japan.” Research Policy 24 (1995): 301-16.Google Scholar
Beyer, Janice M., and Browning, Larry D.. “Transforming an Industry in Crisis: Charisma, Routinization, and Supportive Cultural Leadership.” Leadership Quarterly 10 (1999): 483–520.Google Scholar
Browning, Larry, Beyer, Janice M., and Shetler, Judy C.. “Building Cooperation in a Competitive Industry: SEMATECH and the Semiconductor Industry.” Academy of Management Journal 38 (1995): 113-51.Google Scholar
Florida, Richard, and Kenney, Martin. “Silicon Valley and Route 128 Won’t Save Us.” California Management Review (Fall 1990), 68–88.Google Scholar
Fong, Glenn R. “State Strength, Industry Structure, and Industrial Policy: American and Japanese Experience in Microelectronics.” Comparative Politics (April 1990), 291.Google Scholar
Grindley, Peter, David C., Mowery, and Silverman, Brian. “SEMATECH and Collaborative Research: Lessons in the Design of High-Technology Consortia.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 13 (Fall 1994): 723-58.Google Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. and Klenow, Peter J. “High-Tech R&D Subsidies: Estimating the Effects of SEMATECH.” Journal of International Economics 40 (1995): 323-44.Google Scholar
Link, A. N. and Finan, W. F.. “Quantifying the Private Returns to Collaborative Research: The Case of SEMATECH.” International Journal of Technology Management 13 (1997): 695–706.Google Scholar
Macher, Jeffrey T., Mowery, David C., and Hodges, David A.. “Semiconductors.” In U.S. Industry in 2000: Studies in Competitive Performance, ed. Mowery, David C.. Washington, D.C., 1999, pp. 245–85.Google Scholar
Steinmueller, W. Edward. “Industry Structure and Government Policies in the U.S. and Japanese Integrated-Circuit Industries.” In Government Pol-icyTowards Industryin the United States and Japan, ed. Shoven, John B.. New York, 1988, pp. 319-54.Google Scholar
Usselman, Steven W. “Fostering a Capacity for Compromise: Business, Government, and the Stages of Innovation in American Computing.” IEEEAn-nals of the History of Computing 18 (1996): 30–39.Google Scholar
Alper, Alan. “IBM, AT&T Chip in; Firms to Share Techniques with SEMATECH.” Computer World (1 Feb. 1988), 63.Google Scholar
Auerbach, Stuart. “Chip Makers Seek funds for Proving Ground: Unified Plan to Regain New Technology Edge.” Washington Post, 4 Jan. 1987, H1.Google Scholar
Auerbach, Stuart. “Semiconductor Consortium Names Chip Pioneer as Its New Chief.” Washington Post, 28 July 1988, E1.Google Scholar
Clark, Don. “Chip Group Hit by Defection.” San Francisco Chronicle. 7 Jan. 1992, B1.Google Scholar
Corcoran, Elizabeth. “ATT Veteran to Head SEMATECH.” Washington Post, 26 Nov. 1996, D-02.Google Scholar
DeLamarter, Richard Thomas. “Blame IBM for Sorry State of U.S. Chip Manufacturers.” Los Angeles Times, 14 Dec. 1986, pt. 4, p. 3.Google Scholar
Dodsworth, Terry, and Thomas, David. “Japanese Link Crucial to Motorola. Financial Times (London), 16 Nov. 1987, I16.Google Scholar
Hayes, Thomas C. “Texas Instruments vs. Japan.” New York Times, 1 July 1987, D1.Google Scholar
“IBM Said to Be Pillar of Venture.” New York Times, 6 Jan. 1987, D7.Google Scholar
Oswald, Johnston. “U.S. Semiconductor Firms Plan R&D Pool.” Los Angeles Times, 5March 1987, pt. 4, p. 1.Google Scholar
Lammers, David. “Diverging Priorities Could Cause Exit from Research Group in 2001—Motorola Warns It May Quit SEMATECH.” Electronic Engineering Times 20 (Sept. 1999).Google Scholar
Lazzareschi, Carla. “IBM’s Industrial Policy; Competitiveness: Big Blue is Extending a Helping Hand to the Nation’s Besieged Semiconductor Industry.” Los Angeles Times, 1 April 1990, D1.Google Scholar
Lerner, Eric J. “The Foreign Chip Threat.” Aerospace America (July 1988), 58.Google Scholar
Pollack, Andrew. “Chip Pioneer to Head Consortium.” New York Times, 28 July 1988, D1.Google Scholar
Pollack, Andrew. “In the Trenches of the Chip Wars.” New York Times, 2 July 1989, pt. 3, p. 1.Google Scholar
Pollack, Andrew. “LSI Is Leaving Sematech,” New York Times, 7 Jan. 1992, D1.Google Scholar
Pollack, Andrew. “SEMATECH’s Weary Hunt for a Chief.” New York Times, 31 March 1988, D1.Google Scholar
Pollack, Andrew. ”A Sober Silicon Valley Is Changed Forever!” New York Times, 5 Oct. 1986, pt. 4, p. 22.Google Scholar
Pollack, Andrew. “U.S. Chip Makers Plan Consortium.” New York Times, 5 Jan. 1987, D1.Google Scholar
Richards, Evelyn. “Consortia and Competitiveness: Reviews Mixed.” Washington Post, 15 Dec. 1991, H1.Google Scholar
Rifkin, Charles. “On beyond Silicon: A Look at New Semiconductor Technologies.” Computer World (14 April 1986), 49.Google Scholar
Robertson, Jack. “Will Chip Industry Stand by SEMATECH?” Electronic Buyer’s News (19 Aug. 1996).Google Scholar
Sanger, David E. “A Compromise Expected on Chip Consortium.” New York Times, 3 March 1987, D1.Google Scholar
Sanger, David E. “IBM Offering Chips to Rivals Outside Japan.” New York Times, 14 April 1988, A1.Google Scholar
Sanger, David E. ”A Peek at IBM’s Trump Card.” New York Times. 8 March 1987, pt. 3, p. 1.Google Scholar
Smith, Lee. “Can Consortiums Defeat Japan?” Fortune (5 June 1989), 245.Google Scholar
Weber, Jonathan. “Chip Making Partnership Suffering Growing Pains.” Los Angeles Times, 26 Oct. 1991, A1.Google Scholar
Wilder, Clinton. “IBM May Cut Stake in Intel; Debt Offering Would Reduce IBM’s 20% Partnership Role Stake in Intel.” Computer World (3 Feb. 1986), 122.Google Scholar

Government Document

Defense Science Board. Report of the DSB Task Force on Defense Semiconductor Dependency. Washington, D.C., 1987.Google Scholar
Aldrich, Howard E., and Sasaki, Toshihiro. “Governance Structure and Technology Transfer Management in R&D Consortia in the United States and Japan.” Paper presented at the Japan Technology Management Conference, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1993.Google Scholar
Hall, Bronwyn H., and Ham, Rose Marie. “The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no. 7062.1999.Google Scholar