Lia Sheer, Ph.D.
I am an Assistant Professor of Strategy (Senior Lecturer, Tenure-Track) at the Coller School of Management of Tel-Aviv University, Israel. My research focuses on organizing scientific discovery for innovation inside R&D firms. More specifically, my research examines the interplay between corporate science, innovation, markets for technology, knowledge spillovers, as well as their aggregated effect on firm-level outcomes. As part of my research initiatives, I compile open-source large-scale firm-level datasets. My research has been featured in top academic journals, including American Economic Review, and Research Policy. I received my PhD in Business Administration (Strategy) from Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business. I was the 2020-2021 recipient of Fuqua's School of Business Best Dissertation Award. I earned an MBA from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and a B.A. in Economics from Tel-Aviv University. Prior to academia, I worked in the Banking Industry and was an Economic Consultant in the Ministry of Defense Budget Department, Israel. I am a co-founder of Fuqua-STAGE (Society to Advance Gender Equality in Business Academia) and an advocate for women in STEM.
- “Knowledge spillovers and corporate investment in scientific research” (w/ A. Arora & S. Belenzon), American Economic Review, 111(3): 871-898, March 2021
- “Matching patents to Compustat firms, 1980-2015: Dynamic reassignment, name changes, and ownership structures” (w/ A. Arora & S. Belenzon), Research Policy, 50(5):10421, 2021
- Dataset: DISCERN: Duke Innovation & SCientific Enterprises Research Network (w/ A. Arora & S. Belenzon). Zenodo: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4320782, December 2020
Applying a within-firm perspective to the topic of the division of innovative labor, I explore how the organization of scientific discovery at the firm level– specialized or integrated with invention- conditions the firm’s outcomes. Using data on inventors and authors related to U.S. publicly traded scientific firms for the period 1980-2015, I show that integration, which supports the connectedness of scientific and invention practices within the firm, is related to a tradeoff between short-term applied R&D and long-term fundamental R&D. While integration is beneficial for invention, it has adverse effects on its scientific output, which decrease invention in the long run. I find that the negative relationship between integration and publication reduces the direct increase in patents due to integration by approximately 60%. I further show consistent implications in terms of market value. Finally, I present three main determinants that condition this tradeoff: reliance on science, stage of technology, and market for technology. The paper deepens our understanding of the determinants and tradeoffs associated with the strategic choice of scientific discovery organization.
DISCERN: Duke Innovation & SCientific Enterprises Research Network
The dataset traces more than 4,000 U.S. publicly traded R&D firms' investment in innovation and scientific discovery for 35 years. It includes patents, scientific articles, and NPL citations matched to Compustat firms over the period 1980-2015. It introduces a major extension and improvement to the historical NBER patent data (Hall, Jaffe, & Trajtenberg, 2001). In extending the match to Compustat up to 2015, we address two major challenges: name changes and ownership changes. The data including an historical firm name list with dynamic reassignment, are publicly available. First presented at the NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research) Innovation Information Initiative meeting in December 2019.
Download the data at: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4320782
When using the data, please cite both papers below:
Arora, A., Belenzon, S. and Sheer, L., 2021. Knowledge spillovers and corporate investment in scientific research. American Economic Review, 111(3), pp.871-98.
Arora, A., Belenzon, S. and Sheer, L., 2021. Matching patents to Compustat firms, 1980–2015: Dynamic reassignment, name changes, and ownership structures. Research Policy, 50(5), p.104217.