Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of technological diversification (TD) on enterprise innovation performance, meanwhile focusing on the moderating effects of various organizational slack (i.e. absorbed and unabsorbed slack) and ownership types (i.e. state-owned or privately-owned) in the context of Chinese listed firms.

This study formulates five hypotheses based on organization and agency theories. Our empirical analysis employs a fixed-effect regression estimator with a unique panel dataset of Chinese-listed manufacturing firms and 13,566 firm-year observations over 9 years from 2012 to 2020.

Our findings show that an inverted U-shaped relationship exists between TD and innovation performance, varying with different types of organizational slack and ownership. In state-owned enterprises (SOEs), unabsorbed slack negatively moderates the inverted U-shaped relationship; however, in privately-owned enterprises (POEs), this relationship is positively moderated. Although absorbed slack has negative moderating effects in both SOEs and POEs, its impact is only significant for POEs.

Our results imply that organizational slack has a contrasting impact on the relationship between TD and innovation performance when the type of ownership varies. Therefore, the managers that intend to achieve optimal innovation performance through TD should understand how organizational slack can be leveraged.

This study contributes to the existing literature by applying the relationship between TD and innovative performance to the transition economy, as well as examining the double-edged sword impact of state ownership on firm innovation performance.

Firms are driven to ride on the digital wave in today’s open innovation ecosystem. This study aims to explore the effect of digital transformation (DT) on knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS) firms’ innovation ambidexterity, namely, radical versus incremental innovation, respectively. Meanwhile, the authors evaluated the moderating role of the complexity of R&D collaboration portfolio (i.e. organizational diversity and geographic diversity) in the above relationships.

Using a panel data set of 171 Chinese listed firms in the information and communications technology services industry from 2010 to 2018, the proposed hypotheses were empirically attested.

It is found that DT has a positive relationship with radical innovation and an inverted U-shaped relationship with incremental innovation. In terms of the R&D collaboration portfolio, organizational diversity positively moderates the relationships between DT and innovation ambidexterity, respectively. The geographic diversity weakens the inverted U-shaped effect of DT on incremental innovation; however, its moderating role in the link between DT and radical innovation is not empirically verified.

Extant scholars mainly addressed the interplay between KIBS firms and their manufacturing clients, while this study reveals the different consequences of DT on KIBS firms’ innovation ambidexterity to highlight the role of KIBS firms is an independent and essential innovator in a knowledge-driven economy. Notably, the findings contribute to knowledge management (KM) and R&D literature by confirming the diversity of the R&D collaboration portfolio is a critical KM strategy for KIBS firms to develop and promote external knowledge resources.

The main purpose of this paper is to explore whether the nature of innovation is accumulative or radical and to what extent past year accumulation of technology stock can predict future innovation. More importantly, the authors are concerned with whether a change of policy regime or a variance in the quality of technology will moderate the nature of innovation.

The authors examined a dataset of 3.6 million Chinese patents during 1985–2015 and constructed more than 5 million citation pairs across 8 sections and 128 classes to track knowledge spillover across technology fields. The authors used this citation dataset to calculate the technology innovation network. The authors constructed a measure of upstream invention, interacting the pre-existing technology innovation network with historical patent growth in each technology field, and estimated measure's impact on future innovation since 2005. The authors also constructed three sets of metrics – technology dependence, centrality and scientific value – to identify innovation quality and a policy dummy to consider the impact of policy on innovation.

Innovation growth is built upon past year accumulation and technology spillover. Innovation grows faster for technologies that are more central and grows more slowly for more valuable technologies. A pro-innovation and pro-intellectual property right (IPR) policy plays a positive and significant role in driving technical progress. The authors also found that for technologies that have faster access to new information or larger power to control knowledge flow, the upstream and downstream innovation linkage is stronger. However, this linkage is weaker for technologies that are more novel or general. On most occasions, the nature of innovation was less responsive to policy shock.

This paper contributes to the debate on the nature of innovation by determining whether upstream innovation has strong predictive power on future innovation. The authors develop the assumption used in the technology spillover literature by considering a time-variant, directional and asymmetric matrix to model technology diffusion. For the first time, the authors answer how the nature of innovation will vary depending on the technology network configurations and policy environment. In addition to contributing to the academic debate, the authors' study has important implications for economic growth and industrial or innovation management policies.

The relationship between industrial policy and exploratory innovation is imperfect.

The authors use Chinese high-tech enterprise identification policy (HTEP) as a natural experimental group to test policy impacts, spillover effects and mechanisms of action.

First, HTEP promotes exploratory innovation. In addition, HTEP has a greater impact on non-exploratory innovation. Second, HTEP has spillover effects in two phases: HTEP (2008) and the 2016 policy reform. HTEP affects exploratory innovation in nearby non-high-tech firms, and the policy effect decreases monotonically with increasing distance from the treatment group. Third, HTEP affects innovation capacity through financing constraints, technical personnel flow and knowledge flow, which explains not only policy effects but also spillover effects. Fourth, the analysis of policy heterogeneity shows that the 2016 policy reforms reinforce the positive effect of HTEP (2008). By deducting the effects of other policies, the HTEP effect is found to be less volatile. In terms of the continuity of policy identification, continuous uninterrupted identification has a crucial impact on the improvement of firms’ innovation capacity compared to repeated certification and certification expiration. Finally, HTEP has a crowding-out effect in state-owned enterprises and large firms’ innovation.

This paper contributes to the existing literature in several ways. First, the authors enrich the literature on industrial policy through exploratory innovation research. While previous studies have focused on R&D investment and patents (Dai and Wang, 2019), exploratory innovation helps firms break away from the inherent knowledge mindset and achieve sustainable innovation. Second, few studies have explored the characteristics of industrial policies. In this paper, the authors subdivide the sample into repeated certification, continuous certification and certification expiration according to high-tech enterprise identification. In addition, the authors compare the differences in policy implementation effects between the 2016 policy reform and the 2008 policy to provide new directions for business managers and policy makers. Third, innovation factors guided by industrial policies may cluster in specific regions, which in turn manifest externalities. This is when the policy spillover effect is worth considering. This paper fills a gap in the industrial policy literature by examining the spillover effects. Finally, this paper also explores the mechanisms of policy effects from three perspectives: financing constraints, technician mobility and knowledge mobility, which can affect not only the innovation of beneficiary firms directly but also indirectly the innovation of neighboring non-beneficiary firms.

This study investigates the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on corporate innovation. We selected the listed nonfinancial firms of South Asian Economies. The sample of the study comprised a total of 426 listed manufacturing firms of South Asian Countries for period spans 10 years from 2012 to 2021. In this study, descriptive statistics, multicollinearity diagnostic tests, correlation analysis and two-step dynamic panel system generalized method of moments (GMM) were applied to analyze the data. CSR measured with three proxies' social indicators, environmental indicators, and CSR composite index of social and environmental indicators. However, corporate innovation is captured with number of citations received in a year and number of patents filed in the year. Overall, findings of the study using all measures of CSR shows that CSR significantly and positively related with corporate innovation. Our results find support for CSR-innovation view with all measures of CSR. The findings suggest that the current study is helpful for managers, regulators, policymakers, and researchers. For managers, the study helps them to make the CSR and innovation decision. The policymakers should take appropriate innovative decision while considering factors such as CSR. This study can also be extended by considering this study for developed and emerging economies sample.

Open innovation (OI), by now one of the major concepts for the analysis of innovation, is seen as a methodology for collaboratively designing and implementing solutions by engaging stakeholders in an iterative and inclusive service design process. This paper aims to empirically investigate OI capacities, defined as a cooperative, knowledge-sharing innovation ecosystem, and to explore how it can lead to improved performance of firms in Central and Eastern European (CEE) and Southeastern European (SEE) countries.

The study builds on the World Bank/European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD’s) Business Environment Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS) dataset for 2009, 2013 and 2019. Primarily, the research model was estimated using log-transformed ordinary least squares (OLS). Taking into consideration that this method might produce substantial bias, yielding misleading inferences, this study is fitting Poisson pseudo maximum likelihood estimators with robust standard errors and instrumental variable/generalized method of moments estimation (IV/GMM) approach for comparative results. Secondarily, the research model was tested using structural equation modelling (SEM) to investigate the relationship between five OI capacities and firm performance.

The findings indicate that there is a significant positive relationship between most OI capacities and firm performance, except for innovation, which did not show a statistically significant relationship with firm performance. Specifically, research and development (R&D), knowledge and coopetition are statistically significant and positively associated with firm performance, whereas transformation is statistically significant but negatively associated with firm performance. The IV/GMM estimations’ findings support the view that the firm performance is significantly affected by OI capacities, together with some control variables such as size, age, foreign ownership and year dummy to have a significant impact on firm performance.

This paper fills an identified gap in the literature by investigating the impact of OI on firm performance executed in the specific CEE and SEE country context.

Protection of intellectual property (IP) is important to leverage its commercial potential. This study aims to examine and comprehend the level of understanding of intellectual property rights (IPR) among Indian academics. The study covers three main aspects – awareness level of IP among Indian academics, comprehending if the current state of knowledge about IP is useful for commercialization and whether the current knowledge of IP activities among Indian academics is sufficient to support their professional career and generate revenues from their inventions.

A structured methodology was contemplated and applied. A cross-sectional study with a convenience sampling method was adopted. The duration of the study was six months from March to August 2021. A total of 500 Indian academics were approached, of which 116 responded with a response rate of 23.4%. A structured questionnaire was administered to the participants to understand their level of knowledge about IP. Furthermore, the data analysis was performed based on descriptive analysis.

The study findings revealed that the awareness among the participants about IP was minimal. The underlying reasons could be academics did not focus on generating IP through novel research, awareness of basic knowledge about IP was considerably low and inadequate to support their professional career, primary focus was on which publications are considered as one of the important criteria for performance management, national policies do not encourage collaborative research between university and industry that may lead to potential IP generation and the Indian academic set-up expects multitasking by its faculty members.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is an original contribution, based on the study carried out by the authors to understand the awareness of IP activities among Indian academics.

In recent years, environmental issues and resource depletion have posed significant challenges to firms and society. To address these environmental challenges, firms seek to build strategic alliances of green supply chain management (GSCM) with their supply chain partner. As the largest developing country in the Asia–Pacific region, China needs to take more responsibility for environmental protection, which requires more Chinese firms to participate in GSCM. Therefore, focusing on the issue of GSCM and innovation persistence in the context of an increasingly harsh ecological environment is essential.

To test the hypothesis, the authors perform an empirical analysis on a sample of 124 listed firms in China from 2014 to 2019. The results are robust to a battery of robustness analyses the authors performed to take care of endogeneity.

Empirical results indicate that GSCM can promote innovation persistence and both market environment turbulence and technology environment turbulence have a positive moderating effect on the relationship between the two. Mechanism tests show that GSCM can improve innovation efficiency, ensure innovation quality and alleviate financing constraints, thus promoting the innovation persistence of firms.

This study can provide a theoretical basis for the country to promote GSCM orientation, raise firms' awareness of the value of GSCM, convey the significance of GSCM to investors, influence firms' investment decisions and give experience to other developing countries.

Why is it that, despite repeated claims that digital-content firms and internet-based businesses can internationalize everywhere almost instantly, many seem unable to profitably expand outside their home markets? Why have emerging market firms (EMNEs) caught up with established developed-country multinationals (DMNEs) so much faster than expected? In this chapter, the author argues that the clue to these two puzzles lies in the realization that, contrary to the dominant view in the international business (IB) literature that focuses only on the intangibles exploited by DMNEs and assumes that these firms are free to unilaterally decide on their mode of entry and operation, doing business in a foreign country is only possible if intangibles are bundled with complementary local resources, usually held by local firms. Taking into account these complementary local resources and their owners makes it clear that DMNEs are not always free to choose their entry mode but must enlist the cooperation of local resource owners. The need of digital-content and internet-based firms for local complementary resources also explains why they sometimes experience problems when expanding abroad. Lastly, control of complementary local resources provides EMNEs with a home advantage against DMNEs competing with them in their home market. The author shows how EMNEs can capitalize on this advantage to obtain the intangibles they lack and need. The fact that these advantages are available on efficient global markets, while complementary local resources are not, explains the surprising speed of EMNE catch-up.

This study considers the “technology creation” characteristic of technical knowledge-intensive business services (T-KIBS) and examines how human capital and intellectual property rights (IPR) protection affect the location choice of foreign direct investment (FDI) in China for two types of T-KIBS: (1) information transmission, software and information technology (ICT) services and (2) scientific research and technology (SCI) services.

Our empirical analysis is based on panel data on 22 Chinese provinces from 2009 to 2017. We use the generalized method of moments estimation for the regression analysis.

FDI in ICT services prefers regions with high human capital, while FDI in SCI services favors regions with good IPR protection.

Future research could use more comprehensive data and qualitative interviews to enhance the findings.

These findings provide a foundation for China’s future policy on attracting FDI into T-KIBS, especially in areas related to human capital and IPR protection.

This study bridges the research gap on the FDI location choice of T-KIBS in China by clarifying the influences of human capital and IPR protection and providing theoretical support for the location choice of T-KIBS FDI.