Occasional and Persistent Innovators in Poland : an Empirical Study of Obstacles to Innovation and Their Complementarities

• Autorzy: Anna Wziątek-Kubiak , Marek Pęczkowski , Ewa Balcerowicz

Warianty tytułu

Podobieństwa i różnice w barierach innowacji i ich komplementarności w polskich przedsiębiorstwach wprowadzających innowacje w sposób ciągły i okresowo

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper investigates barriers to innovation perceived by innovating firms and complementarities between such barriers. The study analyses two periods: 2002- -2004 and 2004-2006, covered by two Community Innovation Surveys (CIS): CIS4 and CIS5, respectively. We distinguish two groups of innovating firms - those which introduced innovations in both CIS4 and CIS5, and those which introduced innovation in either CIS4 or CIS5. We label the former group persistent innovators, and the latter - occasional innovators. We use a multivariate (factor and cluster) analysis covering binary correlations, Principal Component Analysis, probit model and correlations of disturbances. Two types of explanatory variables describing firms' characteristics and innovation inputs used are considered. The paper shows that there are considerable differences in sensitivities to the perception of innovation barriers and in complementarities among barriers between persistent and occasional innovators. In the case of occasional innovators, a kind of innovation barrier chain is observed. This has an impact on differences in the frequency of innovation activities between the two groups of innovators and results in diversification of innovators. (original abstract)

W opracowaniu przedstawiono różnice w barierach innowacji między dwoma wyodrębnionymi przez nas grupami polskich przedsiębiorstw innowacyjnych działających w przemyśle przetwórczym. Pierwsza z nich to tzw. permanentni (stali) innowatorzy, czyli takie przedsiębiorstwa, które wprowadziły innowacje zarówno w latach 2002-2004 jak i w latach 2004-2006. Przedsiębiorstwa grupy drugiej, określane przez nas mianem okresowych innowatorów, wprowadziły innowacje tylko w jednych z dwóch wspomnianych okresów: albo w latach 2002- -2004, albo w okresie 2004-2006. Wykorzystując dwie grupy zmiennych, opisujących cechy analizowanych firm i stosowane przez nie czynniki innowacji, w opracowaniu zastosowano analizę czynnikową i skupień (badanie korelacji, analizę głównych składowych, model probitowy oraz korelację reszt). Przeprowadzona analiza ekonometryczna pokazała znaczące różnice w percepcji barier innowacji i w komplementarności tych barier między dwoma grupami przedsiębiorstw innowacyjnych. Wpływały one na różnice w częstotliwości wprowadzania innowacji. W przypadku okresowych innowatorów zaobserwowano także łańcuch barier innowacji, którego istnienie potęgowało różnice w zachowaniach innowacyjnych tych przedsiębiorstw względem permanentnych innowatorów. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Innovativenesss barriers; Enterprise innovation; Stimulate innovations; Innovation policy; Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

PL

Bariery innowacyjności; Innowacyjność przedsiębiorstw; Stymulowanie innowacyjności; Polityka innowacyjna; Analizy głównych komponentów

• Czasopismo: Studia Ekonomiczne / Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Ekonomicznych
• Rocznik: 2011
• Numer: nr 4 (71)
• Strony: 345--380

Twórcy

autor

Anna Wziątek-Kubiak

• Instytut Nauk Ekonomicznych PAN, Warszawa

autor

Marek Pęczkowski

• Uniwersytet Warszawski

autor

Ewa Balcerowicz

• Centrum Analiz Społeczno-Ekonomicznych

Bibliografia

• Arundel A. (1997), Enterprise Strategies and Barriers to Innovation, in: A. Arundel and R.Garrelfs (eds.), "Innovation Measurement and Policies", Vol. 50, EIMS Publication European Commission, pp. 101-108.
• Athey S., Stern S. (1998), An Empirical Framework for Testing Theories about Complementarity in Organizational Design, NBER Working Paper.
• Baldwin J., Lin Z. (2002), Impediments to Advanced Technology Adoption for Canadian Manufacturers, "Research Policy" 31, pp. 1-18.
• Blanchard P., Huiban J.-P., Musolesi A., Sevestre P. (2010), Where There is a Will, There is a Way? Assessing the Impact of Obstacles to Innovation MICRO-DYN, "Working Paper", No. 04/10.
• Canijels M.C.J., Verspagen, B. (2001), Barriers to Knowledge Spillovers and Regional Convergence in an Evolutionary Model, "Journal of Evolutionary Economics", No. 11, pp. 307-329.
• Cassiman B., Veugelers R. (2002), Complementarity in the Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D. External Technology Acquisition and Cooperation in R&D, http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=303562
• Clausen T., Verspagen B. (2008), Quantitative Analyses of Innovation Strategies in European Firms: Guidelines and Preliminary Results from Selected Countries, MICRODYN project, Deliverable D22.
• Damanpour F., Wischnevsky D.J. (2006), Research on Innovation in Organizations: Distinguishing Innovation-generating from Innovation-adopting Organizations, "Journal of Engineering and Technology Management", No. 23, pp. 269-291.
• Daniel E.M., Grimshaw D.J. (2002), The Exploratory Comparison of Electronic Commerce Adoption in Large and Small Enterprises, "Journal of Information Technology", 17, pp. 133-147.
• D'Este P., Iammarino S., Savona M., von Tunzelmann N. (2009), Revealed versus Deterring Barriers to Innovation. Evidence from the 4th Community Innovation Survey (CIS4), DIUS Research Report 09-09.
• D'Este P., Iammarino S., Savona M., von Tunzelmann N. (2008), What Hamper Innovation? Evidence from the UK CIS4, SPRU Electronic Working Paper Series, No. 168.
• Fabrizio K.R. (2009), Absorptive Capacity and the Search for Innovation, "Research Policy", 38, pp. 255-267.
• Dosi G. (1988), Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation, "Journal of Economic Literature", 36, pp. 1126-1171.
• Galia F., Legros D. (2004), Complementarities between Barriers to Innovation: Evidence from France, "Research Policy", 33, pp.1185-1199.
• Hadjimanolis A. (1999), Barriers to Innovation for SME in a Small Less Developed Country (Cyprus), "Technovation", 19, pp. 561-570.
• Hall B.H. (2002), The Financing of Research and Development, "Oxford Review of Economic Policy", 18, pp. 35-51.
• Hyytinen A., Toivanen O. (2005), Do Financial Constraints Hold back Innovation and Growth? Evidence on the Role of Public Policy, "Research Policy", 34, pp. 1385-1403.
• Iammarino S., Sanna-Randaccio F., Savona M. (2007), The Perception of Barriers to Innovation. Multinational and Domestic Firms in Italy, BETA. Document de travail, no. 2007-12.
• Jensen M.B., Johnson R., Lorenz E., Lundvall B.A. (2007), Forms of Knowledge and Modes of Innovation, "Research Policy", 36, pp. 680-693.
• Jong de J.P.J., Marsili O. (2006), The Fruit Flies of Innovations: A Taxonomy of Innovative Small Firms, "Research Policy", 35, pp. 213-229.
• Kramer S.M.S. (2009), Drivers of National Innovation in Transition: Evidence from a Panel of Eastern European Countries, "Research Policy", 38, pp. 845-860.
• Leitao S.M., Mario J.R. (2007), Barriers to Innovation Faced by Manufacturing Firms in Portugal: How to Overcome it? MPRA Paper, No. 5408. November, Munich.
• Llerene P., Oltra V. (2002), Diversity of Innovative Strategy as a Source of Technological Performance, "Structural Change and Economic Dynamics", 13, pp. 179-201.
• Love J.H., Roper S. (2009), Organizing Innovation: Complementarities between Cross-functional Teams, "Technovation", 29, pp. 192-203.
• Manfield E. (1968), Industrial Research and Technology Innovation, W.W. Norton, New York.
• Mazzanti M., Mancinelli S. (2007), SME Performance. Innovation and Networking Evidence on Complementarities for a Local Economic System, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, "Working Papers", No. 79.
• Mohnen P., Rosa J. (1999), Barriers to Innovation in Services Industries in Canada. Cat. No. 88F001-MIE99007, Statistics Canada, Ottawa.
• Mohnen P., Roller L.-H., (2005), Complementarities in Innovation Policy, "European Economic Review", 49, pp. 1431-1450.
• Mohnen P., Palm F.C., Schim van der Loeff S., Tirawi A. (2008), Financial Constraints and Other Barriers: Are They a Threat to Innovation Activity? CESifo Working Paper, No. 2204.
• OECD (2005), Oslo Manual, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/61/2367580.pdf
• Piech K., Radosevic S. (eds.), (2006), The Knowledge-Based Economy in Central and East European Countries and Industries in a Process of Change, Palgrave Macmillan.
• Pihkala T., Ylinenpaa H., Vesalainen J., (2002), Innovation Barriers Among Clusters of European SME, "International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management", 2 (6), pp. 520-536.
• Polder M., van Leeuwen G., Mohnen P., Raymond W. (2010), Product. Process and Organization Innovation: Drivers. Complementarity and Productivity Effects, UNU-MERIT. UN University. Working Paper Series. 2010-035.
• Roper S., Du J., Love J.H. (2008), Modelling the Innovation Value Chain, "Research Policy", 37, pp. 961-977.
• Rothwell. R. (1989), Small Firms. Innovation and Industrial Change, "Small Business Economics", 6, pp. 327-247.
• Schmiedeberg C. (2008), Complementarities of Innovation Activities: An Empirical Analysis of the German Manufacturing Sector, "Research Policy", 37, pp. 1492-1503.
• Silva M.J., Leitão J., Raposo M. (2008), Barriers to Innovation faced by Manufacturing firms in Portugal: How to Overcome it for Fostering Business Excellence? "International Journal of Business Excellence", 1 (1/2).
• Savignac F. (2007), The Impact of Financial Constraints on Innovation: What Can be Learned from a Direct Measure? Notes D'etudes et Recherche, NER - E