Accounting research lacks the reliable evidence to accurately value various types of R&D activity. Increasingly widespread practices such as concurrent engineering, cross-functional project teams and design for manufacturability point to the importance of coordinating and integrating both process and product R&D. This study addresses the performance consequence of alignment between R&D-type strategy and contextual factors. Evidence from a pooling data from Taiwan's electronics industry for the period 2001-2003 demonstrates that most innovation firms (61%) employ R&D hybrid strategy (invest in both process and product R&D), while 28% invest only in product R&D and the remaining only invest in process R&D. These findings suggest that R&D cooperation, foreign technology licensing, in-house R&D activities, firm size, age and financial risk are all significant factors in motivating firms to adopt product R&D strategy vs. process R&D strategy, while experience of external technology contract, trademarks and growth demand are all significant factors in motivating firms to pursue process R&D strategy vs. product R&D strategy. Moreover, firms with intensified export and growth demands would be more likely to adopt process R&D strategy, rather than pursue R&D hybrid strategy. More importantly, this study shows that firms adopting an R&D-type strategy that is consistent with an empirical benchmark derived from contextual factors are more likely to gain better performance, in terms of innovation output and market-based measures, than those using an inconsistent R&D-type strategy.