Search results

The purpose of this paper is to observe how to invest in upper-middle income countries via an innovation perspective following global innovation index (GII) by multicriteria decision aid (MCDA) approach, once MCDA was designed to support subjective decisions.

Pearson’s correlation was the milestone for understanding innovation indicators at upper-middle income countries profiles. In a MCDA first step, the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) was applied to obtain the criteria weight. In this step, the judgments or evaluations inputted in AHP were collected from a sample composed by five experts in GII. After getting the criteria weights compose to GII, Borda and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluations (PROMÉTHÉE) methods were applied to obtain an MCDA-based GII. The inputs for this second step were: the weights come from AHP output; and the countries performance came from GII data.

As a result, it was found out the upper-middle countries’ rank to invest and groups with countries acting like “hubs” or “bridges” for economic sectors in near countries; when they are grouped according to their maximum and minimum scores profiles, observing not only a particular region but also similar profiles at diverse world areas.

Pearson-AHP-PROMÉTHÉE works as a supportive decision tool for several and complex investment perspectives from criteria and alternatives analysis regarding innovation indicators for upper-middle income countries. This combination also demonstrates grouping possibilities, aligning profiles and not only ranking countries for investment and eliminating others but also grouping countries with similar profiles via innovation indicators MCDA combined application.

The measure of companies' Innovation Performance is fundamental for enhancing the value and decision-making processes of firms. The purpose of this paper is to present a new measure of Innovation Performance, called Innovation Patent Index (IPI), which makes it possible to quantitatively summarize different aspects of firms' innovation.

In order to define the IPI, a secondary source, i.e. patent data, has been used. The five dimensions of IPI, i.e. efficiency, time, diversification, quality and internationalization have been defined both analyzing the literature and applying three different machine learning algorithms (regularized least squares, deep neural networks and decision trees), considering patent forward citations as a proxy of the innovation performance.

Results show that the IPI index is a very useful tool, simple to use and very promptly. In fact, it is possible to get important results without making time consuming analysis with primary sources. It is a tool that can be used by managers, businessmen, policymakers, organizations, patent experts and financiers to evaluate and plan future activities, to enhance the innovation capability, to find financing and to support and improve innovation.

Patent data are not widely used in all the sectors. Moreover, the pure number of forward citations is not the only forward looking indicator suggested by the literature.

The demand for a useable Innovation Performance tool, as well as the lack of tools able to grasp different aspects of the innovation, highlight the need to develop new instruments. In fact, although previous studies provide several measures of Innovation Performance, these are often difficult for managers to use, do not appreciate different aspects of the innovation and are not forward looking.

The purpose of this paper is to show that the wide acknowledgement of the association between innovation and economic and social development and of the importance of innovation policies has formed a kind of “misty consensus” hardly contested in Brazil. However, the innovation policies adopted in the country lack an institutional framework to support their implementation, marking what is called in this paper a “messy dissensus”.

It is argued that the reasons why the science, technology and innovation (ST&I) policies have failed to contribute more effectively increasing Brazilian technological efforts have less to do with the policies themselves and more to do with their detachment from the institutional framework used to implement them.

It is shown that this institutional framework: (i) is barely adherent to the perception of the systemic nature of the innovation process; (ii) does not create enough incentives for bureaucrats in public institutions to allocate resources in the industrial sector; (iii) encourages the pulverization of resources and the consequent loss of focus, which may reduce the efficiency of the adopted policies; (iv) encourages the replication of models and priorities usually adopted in contexts that fail to match the Brazilian reality.

In this paper, the focus is on the obstacles that undermine the potential of ST&I policies to contribute more effectively to the improvement of the Brazilian innovation indicators. It is argued that these obstacles have less to do with the innovation policies themselves and more to do with their detachment from the institutional framework used to implement them. This institutional framework includes not only the formal and legal rules but also informal social norms that govern individual behavior and structure social interactions.

This study aims to establish the position of the European Union (EU-28) countries in the dynamics of international trade openness linkages and the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) in correlation with the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, research and development (R&D) expenditures, innovation capability and information and communication technology (ICT) adoption.

In the panel data set, comparative analyses were applied to scatter diagrams, correlation and regression analyses and structural equation models using Eurostat and World Economic Forum (WEF) data for the EU-28 countries in the period 2008–2019.

The empirical results did not confirm the hypotheses that a positive correlation exists between GCI and trade openness indicators and between GDP per capita and GCI. The ICT adoption and innovation capability increase GCI, which affects GDP per capita.

The empirical results provide a better understanding of the importance of trade policies, particularly in terms of trade openness and trade shares of the EU-28 countries, as it could contribute to increasing the GCI of the EU-28 countries. Furthermore, the results of this study underline the importance of ICT adoption and innovation capability and the need for appropriate government policies that improve global competitiveness.

This study, through empirical analysis, demonstrates the existence of correlations between trade openness (exports as % of GDP, imports as % of GDP and export market shares as % of world trade), R&D expenditures, innovation capability, ICT adoption, GDP per capita and the GCI in the EU-28 countries. In addition, this study contributes managerial and policy-based implications on driving forces of global competitiveness.

This paper evaluates the effects of tax incentives on business innovation in Brazil that were established by Law 11,196/05 (the “Fiscal Incentives Law”) to test whether they have had a positive impact on beneficiary firms' innovation input and output and on their performance.

The policy impacts are estimated using microdata on 13,706 firms available in the 2008 and 2011 editions of the Brazilian Innovation Survey (PINTEC) and by applying propensity score matching with difference-in-differences.

The results suggest a positive and statistically significant impact of the policy on research and development (R&D) expenditures (average of approximately US$ 264,000 in 2011), the number of research staff (average of five researchers) and total employment (approximately 5% of the beneficiary firms' mean size). However, no impact was found on the overall spending on innovative activities, the percentage of sales and exports from new products, net revenue or net revenue per employee.

The findings provide empirical support in favor of tax incentives as a policy tool to boost business innovation in the country. However, the absence of significant effects on innovative activities expenditures and on most indicators of innovation output and firms' performance reveals shortcomings of the policy that need to be addressed.

The study complements and advances the findings of previous studies by assessing policy impact on total innovative activities expenditures and on innovation output and firm performance.

This study aims to identify the countries’ innovation factors that are determinant for them to achieve higher levels of development. In addition, the research identified which of these factors should be prioritized so the countries can move up in the rank of the most competitive.

The study used the indicators of innovation and the stage of development of 137 countries proposed by the Global Competitiveness Report published by the World Economic Forum and techniques of multivariate data analysis.

The results indicated that all the factors tested are determinant to lead the countries throughout their stages of development. The research highlights that the factors “Quality of scientific research institutions” and “Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) patent applications” should be equally prioritized for the countries’ development.

The results suggested that the factors Capacity for Innovation, Quality of Scientific Research Institutions, Company Spending on Research and Development (R&D), University–Industry Collaboration in R&D, Government Procurement of Advanced Technology Products, Availability of Scientists and Engineers and PCT Patent Applications are decisive for positioning countries in terms of their stage of development and should be part of their public policy and enterprises’ strategic planning.

The findings show that countries should prioritize the factors Quality of Scientific Research Institutions and PCT Patent Applications, as these factors, when acting together, predict the evolution to higher stages of development.

This paper examines the innovation behavior of family-owned firms versus non-family-owned firms. The role of internal family governance and the influence of external stimuli (competition) on innovation are also considered.

The data of 20,995 family and non-family firms across 38 countries are derived from the World Bank Enterprise Survey during the period 2019–2020. Probit models are used to examine the impact of family ownership, family governance, and competition on innovation outcomes.

Family firms are more likely to make R&D investments, acquire external knowledge, engage in product innovation (including innovations that are new to the market) and process innovation, relative to non-family firms. However, a high propensity of family member involvement in top management positions can reduce innovation. Competition has a negative impact on innovation outcomes for both family and non-family firms, but it has a positive moderating effect on the innovation activities of family firms where a higher level of family member involvement in management is present.

This paper provides novel insights into family firm innovation dynamics by identifying family firms as more innovative than non-family firms for all types of indicators, debunking the idea that family firms are conservative, reluctant to change, and averse to the risks in innovation activities. However, too much family involvement in decision making may stifle some innovation activities in family firms, except in cases where the operating environment is highly competitive; this provides new insights into the ownership-management dynamic of family firms.

The TARGET approach aims at establishing a reflexive gender equality policy in research performing and research funding organisations. Monitoring has enormous potential to support reflexivity at both the institutional and the individual levels in the gender equality plan (GEP) development and implementation context. To exploit this potential, the monitoring system has to consist of meaningful indicators, which adequately represent the complex construct of gender equality and refer to the concrete objectives and policies of the GEP. To achieve this, we propose an approach to indicator development that refers to a theory of change for the GEP and its policies. Indicator development thus becomes a reflexive endeavour and monitoring a living tool. This requires constant reflection on data gaps, validity of indicators and the further development of indicators. Furthermore, we recommend the creation of space for reflexivity to discuss monitoring results with the community of practice.

Collaborating with consumers during new product development can provide companies with significant benefits and competitive advantages. Although several studies have been conducted on the design of co-innovation platforms, there is still a need for a more comprehensive understanding of the co-innovation phenomenon. To address this gap, this research aims to identify the critical success factors of co-innovation platforms and provide an extensive analysis of the variables that determine their effectiveness.

This study presents a systematic literature review of co-innovation platforms based on an analysis of 89 articles published in 50 scholarly journals in the disciplines of information systems, marketing and business, covering the years from 2006 to 2022.

The review synthesizes the current state of scientific knowledge and groups prior studies thematically as critical success factors of co-innovation platforms. As a result, eight success factors have been identified in terms of quantity and quality of contributions. These factors include product involvement, perceived fairness, sense of community, interactive environment, employee involvement, participant diversity, assessment structure and task design.

The study consolidates existing research about the critical success of co-innovation platforms. It also provides a research framework that incorporates a diverse set of variables that can be used to assess co-innovation performance in future studies.