Search results

Competitively multipolar international system demands bilateral and multilateral partnerships. Joint innovation signals close partnerships. Regional proximity of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) to the European Union (EU) defines its research and development objectives. These objectives are additionally subjected to the USA’s geopolitical strategy in this geographical area. Hence, CEE’s limited resources require limited resources make international innovation cooperation. This paper aims to analyse whether and how CEE countries make international innovation cooperation decisions.

This paper used Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) database of total patent applications filed to the patent cooperation treaty (PCT) with co-applicants from abroad, where co-patents with at least one foreign inventor present a measure of international innovation partnership. A vector autoregression analysis and impulse response function were used to analyse international innovation partnership choices of eight CEE OECD countries for the period 1990–2018.

Innovation with the EU is of collaborative nature, commonly displaying complementary properties with the rest of the examined innovation partners, while co-patenting with the Russia and China act as substitutes or complements. Co-patenting with Russia is the most versatile, displaying both properties of collaboration and competition. Some countries exhibit complementarity in co-patenting activities with multiple partners. The significance levels of these relationships vary, indicating varying degrees of impact. Overall, these findings highlight the complex dynamics of co-patenting activities and the influence of different partners on countries’ collaborative innovation strategies.

In addition to significant relationships, insignificant relationships as well as those that could bring about greater synergy are flagged in the paper. Those relationships portray possible direction into which national funds could be channelled to incite cooperation between different sectors and countries, especially as innovation partnerships are not always successful and require a long time period to materialise.

By examining bilateral innovation partnerships, this study provides an insight into the strategic political and economic spheres of influence in the CEE region.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the ways in which the geographical distance between headquarters and subsidiaries moderates the relationship between cultural intelligence and the knowledge transfer process.

A sample of 103 senior expatriate managers working in Croatia from several European and non-European countries was used to test the hypotheses. Data were collected using questionnaires, while the methodology employed to test the relationship between the variables was partial least square. Furthermore, interaction-moderation effect was utilized to test the impact of geographical distance and, for testing control variables, partial least square multigroup analysis was used.

Cultural intelligence plays a significant role in the knowledge transfer process performance. However, geographical distance has the power to moderate this relationship based on the direction of knowledge transfer. In conventional knowledge transfer, geographical distance has no significant impact. On the contrary, data have shown that, in reverse knowledge transfer, geographical distance has a moderately relevant effect. The authors supposed that these findings could be connected to the specific location of the knowledge produced by subsidiaries.

Multinational companies should take into consideration that the further away a subsidiary is from the headquarters, and the varying difference between cultures, cannot be completely mitigated by the ability of the manager to deal with cultural differences, namely cultural intelligence. Thus, multinational companies need to allocate resources to facilitate the knowledge transfer between subsidiaries.

The present study stresses the importance of cultural intelligence in the knowledge transfer process, opening up a new stream of research inside these two areas of research.

The purpose of this paper is to take the emergence of the knowledge mobilization as an opportunity to develop an understanding of needs for catching up appropriate knowledge application in SMEs in the Republic of Croatia, Poland and the UK. It draws upon the “frame mobilization” literature, which illuminates the role that acts as interpretation play in instigating, promoting and legitimating collective action with aim to provide “quality entrepreneurial education”.

A questionnaire survey based on a literature review built by Stimulating Learning for Ideas to Market (SLIM) project partner was employed to test the given perspective. A total of 380 businesses completed the survey from 12 to 20, November 2013. Participants have different profiles, act in diverse roles and industrial sectors. Identification of appropriate types of support, education, training and advice was made to recognize what small businesses need and can use to improve their operations.

Empirical research evidence conducted among entrepreneurs, 213 were from Croatia, 100 were from Poland and 67 were from the UK, respectively. Results identified the nature of management education according SMEs’ needs to increase innovative activities and intellectual property adapting a more business-like approach, scanning the horizon and identifying new markets and opportunities for growth. It discussed the impacts of formal and informal ways of intellectual property protection in sales and exports market (SLIM) project partner was employed to test the given perspective.

Main limitation lay in unequal sample response among countries. However, results proofed very similar response in all questions among three countries even size, entrepreneurial development, GDP or historical background are highly different.

Therefore, the original contribution of the paper lies in the authors’ empirical investigations into the current thinking and practice of existing entrepreneurs by suggesting some implications of this point, which should be of interest to all stakeholders who design courses in IP and who engage in social mobilization.

There are important organizational culture barriers with this target group, such as the emphasis on the need to publish and an unstable/unavailable IP budget. The integration of IP tools into curricula is an important step to improving the use of IP tools by future researchers. There is an indisputable case for integrating IP as an R & D output and increasing the valuation of IP for academic promotion.

This paper illustrates the current challenges on SMEs’ educational needs and intellectual property rights carried out in among 380 entrepreneurs across the Republic of Croatia, the Republic of Poland and the UK. Most intriguing suggestion, perhaps, is that the role knowledge cooperation with universities may play as a breaking point to fully exploit SMEs’ innovative potential. Surprisingly, needs for establishing a classification of diverse IP-management and collaboration-management tools useful in university-enterprise collaborations, within a general context of IP and open innovation has not been recognized.