Collaboration for innovation in small CEE countries

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorProkop, Viktor
dc.contributor.authorStejskal, Jan
dc.contributor.authorHudec, Oto
dc.contributor.otherEkonomická fakultacs
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-15
dc.date.available2019-03-15
dc.date.issued2019-03-15
dc.description.abstractThe innovative environment and its elements are crucial determinants of the innovation activity of enterprises in developed economies. Also public authorities also focus on innovation environment development, which are being implemented with financial support from public budgets. In developed countries, these incentives are geared to promoting cooperation, as it is a key element of any innovative environment. In Western economies, a certain Western innovation model is being implemented. However, its application in the CEE countries is significantly limited due to the specific characteristics of these economies. Therefore, the main focus of the paper is to examine the impact of cooperation with different types of innovation partners on product innovation performance of manufacturing companies in small CEE countries. In the first phase of the research, CIS data (from Eurostat) and its own regression models identify the types of co-operating partners (private and public) that have the most significant impact on product innovation (researched separately in selected CEE countries). In the second part, the model is constructed so as to identify the predictors, the variables having a significant impact on product innovations across countries (using a merged dataset from all analysed CEE countries). To expand knowledge about innovation and business performance, three variables were added to the model as control variables: market orientation, company ownership, and public funding. The combined dataset of the five CEE countries was again used to examine the impact of different types of co-operating partners on product innovation through a binary logistic regression model. Findings of logistic regression are encouraging; pointing out that the transition to a market economy with a delay has also encouraged the establishment of relationships between firms and private institutions in favour of boosting innovation performance. In doing so, CEE countries are gradually approaching the behaviour of firms in Western European countries.en
dc.formattext
dc.format.extent15 strancs
dc.identifier.doi10.15240/tul/001/2019-1-009
dc.identifier.eissn2336-5604
dc.identifier.issn1212-3609
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-6313-395X Prokop, Viktor
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-3015-8274 Stejskal, Jan
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-8877-8647 Hudec, Oto
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/151426
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTechnická Univerzita v Libercics
dc.publisherTechnical university of Liberec, Czech Republicen
dc.publisher.abbreviationTUL
dc.relation.isbasedonBeers, C., & Zand, F. (2014). R&D cooperation, partner diversity, and innovation performance: an empirical analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 292-312. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12096.
dc.relation.isbasedonBoardman, P. C. (2009). Government centrality to university–industry interactions: University research centers and the industry involvement of academic researchers. Research Policy, 38(10), 1505-1516. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.008.
dc.relation.isbasedonBock, A. J., Opsahl, T., George, G., & Gann, D. M. (2012). The effects of culture and structure on strategic flexibility during business model innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 49(2), 279-305. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01030.x.
dc.relation.isbasedonBogers, M., Zobel, A. K., Afuah, A., Almirall, E., Brunswicker, S., Dahlander, L., ... Hagedoorn, J. (2017). The open innovation research landscape: Established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis. Industry and Innovation, 24(1), 8-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1240068.
dc.relation.isbasedonBrito, L. A. L., Brito, E. P. Z., & Hashiba, L. H. (2014). What type of cooperation with suppliers and customers leads to superior performance? Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 952-959. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.07.015.
dc.relation.isbasedonBronzini, R., & Piselli, P. (2016). The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), 442-457. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.008.
dc.relation.isbasedonChen, Y., Wang, Y., Nevo, S., Benitez-Amado, J., & Kou, G. (2015). IT capabilities and product innovation performance: The roles of corporate entrepreneurship and competitive intensity. Information & Management, 52(6), 643-657. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.05.003.
dc.relation.isbasedonCoad, A., & Rao, R. (2008). Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research policy, 37(4), 633-648. https://dx.doi.org//10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.003.
dc.relation.isbasedonCogan, J. F., Cwik, T., Taylor, J. B., & Wieland, V. (2010). New Keynesian versus old Keynesian government spending multipliers. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 34(3), 281-295. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2010.01.010.
dc.relation.isbasedonCollins, C. J., & Clark, K. D. (2003). Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 740-751. https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/30040665.
dc.relation.isbasedonCooke, P. (2016). The virtues of variety in regional innovation systems and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2(1), 13. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40852-016-0036-x.
dc.relation.isbasedonCvijanović, D., Mihailović, B., Čavlin, M., & Čavlin, G. (2015). Impact of Marketing Consulting on Performances of Agrarian Clusters in Serbia. Sustainability, 7(2), 1099-1115. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su7021099.
dc.relation.isbasedonDachs, B., & Peters, B. (2014). Innovation, employment growth, and foreign ownership of firms: A European perspective. Research Policy, 43(1), 214-232. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonDella Peruta, M. R., Del Giudice, M., Lombardi, R., & Soto-Acosta, P. (2018). Open innovation, product development, and inter-company relationships within regional knowledge clusters. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 9(2), 680-693. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13132-016-0356-x.
dc.relation.isbasedonDesouza, K. C., Awazu, Y., Jha, S., Dombrowski, C., Papagari, S., Baloh, P., & Kim, J. Y. (2008). Customer-driven innovation. Research-Technology Management, 51(3), 35-44. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2008.11657503.
dc.relation.isbasedonFigueiredo, P. N., & Piana, J. (2018). Innovative capability building and learning linkages in knowledge-intensive service SMEs in Brazil's mining industry. Resources Policy, 58, 21-33. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.10.012.
dc.relation.isbasedonFossas-Olalla, M., Lopez-Sanchez, J. I., & Minguela-Rata, B. (2010). Cooperation with suppliers as a source of innovation. African Journal of Business Management, 4(16), 3491-3499.
dc.relation.isbasedonFriedman, Y., & Carmeli, A. (2018). The influence of decision comprehensiveness on innovative behaviors in small entrepreneurial firms: the power of connectivity. Innovation, 20(1), 61-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2017.1369141.
dc.relation.isbasedonGërguri‐Rashiti, S., Ramadani, V., Abazi‐Alili, H., Dana, L. P., & Ratten, V. (2017). ICT, innovation and firm performance: the transition economies context. Thunderbird International Business Review, 59(1), 93-102. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tie.21772.
dc.relation.isbasedonGuisado-González, M., González-Blanco, J., Coca-Pérez, J. L., & Guisado-Tato, M. (2018). Assessing the relationship between R&D subsidy, R&D cooperation and absorptive capacity: An investigation on the manufacturing Spanish case. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(6), 1647-1666. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9579-7.
dc.relation.isbasedonHashi, I., & Stojčić, N. (2013). The impact of innovation activities on firm performance using a multi-stage model: Evidence from the Community Innovation Survey 4. Research Policy, 42(2), 353-366. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.011.
dc.relation.isbasedonHudec, O. (2015). Visegrad countries and regions: Innovation performance and efficiency. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 19(2), 55-72. https://dx.doi.org/10.12776/qip.v19i2.593.
dc.relation.isbasedonHudec, O., & Prochádzková, M. (2018). The Evolution of Innovation Networks in Slovakia: Disintegration and Slow Recovery. In J. Stejskal, P. Hajek, & O. Hudec (Eds.), Knowledge Spillovers in Regional Innovation Systems (pp. 133-161). Cham: Springer, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67029-4_5.
dc.relation.isbasedonHudec, O., et al. (2007). Štatistické metódy v ekonomických vedách. Košice: Technická univerzita v Košiciach.
dc.relation.isbasedonKetata, I., Sofka, W., & Grimpe, C. (2015). The role of internal capabilities and firms' environment for sustainable innovation: evidence for Germany. R&D Management, 45(1), 60-75. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/radm.12052.
dc.relation.isbasedonKlomp, L., & Van Leeuwen, G. (2001). Linking innovation and firm performance: a new approach. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 8(3), 343-364. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13571510110079612.
dc.relation.isbasedonLööf, H., & Heshmati, A. (2006). On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15(4-5), 317-344. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10438590500512810.
dc.relation.isbasedonLööf, H., Heshmati, A., Asplund, R., & Nåås, S. O. (2001). Innovation and performance in manufacturing industries: A comparison of the Nordic countries [SSE/EFI working paper series in economics and finance. No. 457].
dc.relation.isbasedonMaietta, O. W. (2015). Determinants of university–firm R&D collaboration and its impact on innovation: A perspective from a low-tech industry. Research Policy, 44(7), 1341-1359. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.03.006.
dc.relation.isbasedonMateut, S. (2018). Subsidies, financial constraints and firm innovative activities in emerging economies. Small Business Economics, 50(1), 131-162. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9877-3.
dc.relation.isbasedonMinguela-Rata, B., Fernández-Menéndez, J., & Fossas-Olalla, M. (2014). Cooperation with suppliers, firm size and product innovation. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(3), 438-455. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2013-0357.
dc.relation.isbasedonNieves, J., Quintana, A., & Osorio, J. (2016). Organizational knowledge and collaborative human resource practices as determinants of innovation. Knowledge management research & practice, 14(3), 237-245. https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2014.26.
dc.relation.isbasedonOjala, A. (2015). Geographic, cultural, and psychic distance to foreign markets in the context of small and new ventures. International Business Review, 24(5), 825-835. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2015.02.007.
dc.relation.isbasedonOzkaya, H. E., Droge, C., Hult, G. T. M., Calantone, R., & Ozkaya, E. (2015). Market orientation, knowledge competence, and innovation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(3), 309-318. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2014.10.004.
dc.relation.isbasedonProkop, V., & Stejskal, J. (2017). Different approaches to managing innovation activities: An analysis of strong, moderate, and modest innovators. Engineering Economics, 28(1), 47-55. https://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.28.1.16111.
dc.relation.isbasedonRajalo, S., & Vadi, M. (2017). University-industry innovation collaboration: Reconceptualization. Technovation, 62, 42-54. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.04.003.
dc.relation.isbasedonRamadani, V., Abazi-Alili, H., Dana, L. P., Rexhepi, G., & Ibraimi, S. (2017). The impact of knowledge spillovers and innovation on firm-performance: findings from the Balkans countries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(1), 299-325. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11365-016-0393-8.
dc.relation.isbasedonRetherford, R. D., & Choe, M. K. (2011). Statistical Models for Causal Analysis. New York: John Wiley.
dc.relation.isbasedonRitala, P., Husted, K., Olander, H., & Michailova, S. (2018). External knowledge sharing and radical innovation: the downsides of uncontrolled openness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(5), 1104-1123. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JKM-05-2017-0172.
dc.relation.isbasedonRitala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S., & Husted, K. (2015). Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking and relative innovation performance: An empirical study. Technovation, 35, 22-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.07.011.
dc.relation.isbasedonRomer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), Part 2, S71-S102. https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/261725.
dc.relation.isbasedonSánchez-González, G., González-Álvarez, N., & Nieto, M. (2009). Sticky information and heterogeneous needs as determining factors of R&D cooperation with customers. Research Policy, 38(10), 1590-1603. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.012.
dc.relation.isbasedonSchneider, S., & Spieth, P. (2013). Business model innovation: Towards an integrated future research agenda. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(1). https://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S136391961340001X.
dc.relation.isbasedonShankar, B. (2018). Customer Innovation Bias. In Nuanced Account Management (pp. 171-183). Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
dc.relation.isbasedonTavassoli, S. (2018). The role of product innovation on export behavior of firms: Is it innovation input or innovation output that matters? European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(2), 294-314. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-12-2016-0124.
dc.relation.isbasedonTavassoli, S., & Karlsson, C. (2016). Innovation strategies and firm performance: Simple or complex strategies? Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 25(7), 631-650. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2015.1108109.
dc.relation.isbasedonTether, B. S. (2002). Who co-operates for innovation, and why: an empirical analysis. Research Policy, 31(6), 947-967. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00172-X.
dc.relation.isbasedonTrippl, M., & Bergman, E. M. (2014). Clusters, Local Districts, and Innovative Milieux. In Handbook of Regional Science (pp. 439-456). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
dc.relation.isbasedonVarblane, U., Dyker, D., Tamm, D., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2007). Can the national innovation systems of the new EU member states be improved? Post-Communist Economies, 19(4), 399-416. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14631370701680048.
dc.relation.isbasedonWang, C., Rodan, S., Fruin, M., & Xu, X. (2014). Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 484-514. https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0917.
dc.relation.isbasedonWright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., & Allen, M. R. (2005). The relationship between HR practices and firm performance: Examining causal order. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 409-446. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00487.x.
dc.relation.isbasedonWu, J. (2014). Cooperation with competitors and product innovation: Moderating effects of technological capability and alliances with universities. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 199-209. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.11.002.
dc.relation.isbasedonXiang, D., Chen, J., Tripe, D., & Zhang, N. (2018). Family firms, sustainable innovation and financing cost: Evidence from Chinese hi-tech small and medium-sized enterprises. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.02.021.
dc.relation.isbasedonZúñiga‐Vicente, J. Á., Alonso‐Borrego, C., Forcadell, F. J., & Galán, J. I. (2014). Assessing the effect of public subsidies on firm R&D investment: a survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 28(1), 36-67. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2012.00738.x
dc.relation.ispartofEkonomie a Managementcs
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics and Managementen
dc.relation.isrefereedtrue
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjectinnovationen
dc.subjectinnovation activity and absorptionen
dc.subjectCEE countriesen
dc.subjectdeterminanten
dc.subject.classificationO38
dc.subject.classificationO47
dc.subject.classificationH50
dc.subject.classificationC33
dc.titleCollaboration for innovation in small CEE countriesen
dc.typeArticleen
local.accessopen
local.citation.epage144
local.citation.spage130
local.facultyFaculty of Economics
local.filenameEM_1_2019_09
local.fulltextyes
local.relation.abbreviationE+Mcs
local.relation.abbreviationE&Men
local.relation.issue1
local.relation.volume22
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EM_1_2019_09.pdf
Size:
1.15 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
článek
Download
Collections
Číslo 1