NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - A new study suggests that spending more on research and development does not translate into better financial results for the company doing the spending, according to a published report.

The Wall Street Journal reports that a study expected to be released Tuesday by consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton found that once a minimum level of research and development spending is achieved, better oversight and culture are more reliable for producing financial results than additional R&D spending.

The newspaper said the study analyzed six years of financial results by 1,000 publicly traded companies responsible for the bulk of R&D spending globally.

It found "no statistically significant difference" when comparing the financial results of middle-of-the-pack companies with those in the top 10 percent of their industry in R&D spending Booz Allen's vice president of Global Technology Practice Barry Jaruzelski told the newspaper. He said the result was the same within each of the 10 industry groups examined as well as across all industries evaluated.

The study did find that companies that ranked among the bottom 10 percent of R&D spending performed worse than average, though, suggesting some minimum level of R&D is necessary.

The newspaper said some questioned the study's finding.

Allan C. Eberhart, a professor of finance at Georgetown University, told the newspaper the six-year period examined is too short to catch companies whose results might have benefited from past R&D spending.

Eberhart co-authored a paper that looked at R&D spending by 8,000 companies over a 50-year period. He found 1 to 2 percent increases in operating profit at companies that increased R&D spending by 5 percent or more in a single year.

____________________

For a look at how columnist Michael Sivy thinks how investors should look at R&D spending, click here.