Technological, Marketing and Complementary Competencies Driving Innovative Performance of Slovenian Manufacturing Firms

• Authors: Tanja Rajkovič , Janez Prašnikar
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper discusses innovative performance of firms and underlying competencies, namely technological, marketing and complementary. Competencies are regarded as networks of various capabilities and other firm assets and can be used for cross-industry comparisons. The study is based on a survey carried out among 50 established Slovenian manufacturing companies addressing competencies which they employ in their 65 distinct product lines. Three distinct segments of firms are established based on innovative performance indicators. Used are techniques of multivariate statistics, including cluster analysis and analysis of variance. The results imply that the most innovative firms simultaneously develop technological, marketing and complementary competencies. The implications of our findings are valuable to the firms aligning their competencies with their strategy, as well as to policy makers in technology following countries.

Keywords

EN

Technological; marketing and complementary competencies; innovative performance; technology leaders and followers; innovation policy

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Organizacija
• Year: 2009
• Volume: 42
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 77-86

Dates

published

2009-05-01

online

2009-06-10

Contributors

author

Tanja Rajkovič

• Faculty of Economics, University of Ljubljana, Kardeljeva ploščad 17, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

author

Janez Prašnikar

• Faculty of Economics, University of Ljubljana, Kardeljeva ploščad 17, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

References

• Bassanini, A. & Scarpetta, S. (2001). The driving forces of economic growth: Panel data evidence for the OECD countries. OECD Economic Studies, 33. Retrieved November 18, 2008, from
• Calantone, R., Garcia, R. & Dröge, C. (2003). The effects of environmental turbulence on new product development strategy planning, The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20 (2), 90-103. DOI: 10.1111/1540-5885.2002003.[Crossref]
• Chang, T. (1996). Cultivating global experience curve advantage on technology and marketing capabilities. International Marketing Review, 13, 22-42. DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000004460.[Crossref]
• Clark, K. B. & Fujimoto, T. (1991). Product development performance. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
• Commission of the EC (2005). Working together for growth and jobs: A new start for the Lisbon strategy. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from
• Day, G. S. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58,(4), 37-52.[Crossref]
• Dumaine, B. (1989). How managers can succeed through speed. Fortune, 13, 54-59.
• Economist, The (2008). A gathering storm? The Economist, 2008, November 22-28, 67-68.
• Ferligoj, A. (1989). Razvrščanje v skupine. Metodološki zvezki, 4. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za sociologijo, politične vede in novinarstvo.
• Fisher, R.J. & Maltz, E. (1997). Enhancing communication between marketing and engineering: The moderating role of relative. Journal of Marketing, 61,(3), 54-70.[Crossref]
• Fowler, S., King, A. W., Marsh, S. J., & Victor, B. (2000). Beyond products: new strategic imperatives for developing competencies in dynamic environments. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17, 357-377. DOI: 10.1016/S0923-4748(00)00029-1.[Crossref]
• Grant, R. M. (2001). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. In Zack, M. H. (ed.), Knowledge and Strategy. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 3-24.
• Griffith, R., Redding, S., & Van Reenen, J. (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, (4), 883-895. DOI: 10.1162/0034653043125194.[Crossref]
• Guellec, D. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2001). OECD economic studies, ( 33). Retrieved October 12, 2008, from
• Hafeez, K., Malak N. & Zhang, Y. B. (2007). Outsourcing noncore assets and competences of a firm using analytic hierarchy process. Computers & Operations Research, 34 (12), 3592-3608. DOI: 10.1016/j.cor.2006.01.004.[Crossref][WoS]
• Hagedoorn, J. & Cloodt, M. (2003). Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Research Policy, 32, 1365-1379. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00137-3.[Crossref]
• Hall, B.H. (1999). Innovation and market value. NBER Working Paper Series, w6984. Retrieved November 7, 2008, from
• Hamel, G. & Heene, A. (eds.) (1994). Competence-based competition. Chichester: John Wiley.
• Khurana, A. & Rosenthal, S. R. (1997). Integrating the fuzzy front end of new product development. MIT Sloan Management Review, 38 (2), 103-120.
• Kim, J.Y., Wong, V. & Eng, T.Y. (2005). Product variety strategy for improving new product development proficiencies. Technovation, 25, 1001-1015. DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2004.02.011.[Crossref]
• Kirner, E., Kinkel, S., & Jaeger, A. (2008). Innovation paths and the innovation performance of low-technology firms - An empirical analysis of German industry. Research Policy, 38 (3), 447-458. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.011.[Crossref]
• Kok, W. (2004). Facing the challenge: The Lisbon strategy for growth and employment. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• Koufteros, X. & Marcoulides, G.A. (2006). Product development practices and performance: A structural equation modeling-based multi-group analysis. International Journal of Production Economics, 103, 286-307. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.08.004.[Crossref]
• Lokshin, B., Van Gils, A. & Bauer, E. (2009). Crafting firm competencies to improve innovative performance. European Management Journal, 27 (3), 187-196. DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2008.08.005.[WoS][Crossref]
• McEvily, S. K., Eisenhardt, K. M. & Prescott, J. E. (2004). The global acquisition, leverage, and protection of technological competencies. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 713-722. DOI: 10.1002/smj.425.[Crossref]
• OECD. (1997). Revision of high technology sector and product classification. STI Working Papers 1997/2. Paris: OECD.
• Paul, J. V. & Peter, J. W. (1994). Core competencies, competitive advantage and market analysis: forging the links. In Hamel, G. & Heene, A. (eds.), Competence-based Competition (77–110). New York: Wiley.
• Prahalad, C. K. & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68, 79-91.
• Prajogo, D. I., McDermott, P. & Goh, M. (2008). Impact of value chain activities on quality and innovation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 28 (7), 615-635. DOI: 10.1108/01443570810881785.[WoS][Crossref]
• Prašnikar, J. (2006). From Lisbon to "Lisbon". In Prašnikar, J. (ed.), Competitiveness, social responsibility and economic growth (2–18). Hauppague: Nova Science.
• Prašnikar, J., Lisjak, M., Buhovac, Rejc A. & Štembergar M. (2008). Identifying and exploiting the inter relationships between technological and marketing capabilities. Long Range Planning, 41 (5), 530-554. DOI: 10.1016/j.lrp.2008.06.005.[Crossref][WoS]
• Ravald, A. & Grönroos. C. (1996). The value concept and relationship marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 30 (2), 19-30. DOI: 10.1108/03090569610106626.[WoS][Crossref]
• Rothaermel, F. T. (2001). Research note: Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 687-699. DOI: 10.1002/smj.180.[Crossref]
• Sanchez, R. (2004). Understanding competence-based management: Identifying and managing five modes of competence. Journal of Business research, 57, 518-532. DOI: 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00318-1.[Crossref]
• Schmalensee, R. (1985). Do markets differ much? American Economics Review, 75 (3), 341-351.
• Song, M., Droge C., Hanvanich S. & Catalone R. (2005). Marketing and technology resource complementarity: An analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 259-276. DOI: 10.1002/smj.450.[Crossref]
• Stanovnik, P. & Kos, M. (2005). Technology foresight in Slovenia. Ljubljana: Institute for Economic Research.
• Swink, M. & Song, M. (2007). Effects of marketing-manufacturing integration on new product development time and competitive advantage. Journal of Operations Management, 25, 203-217. DOI: 10.1016/j.jom.2006.03.001.[Crossref]
• Tether, B. S. (2002). Who co-operates for innovation, and why - An empirical analysis. Research Policy, 31, 947-967. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00172-X.[Crossref]
• Tidd, J. & Bodley, K. (2002). The influence of project novelty on the new product development process. R&D Management, 32 (2), 127-138.
• Treacy, M. & Wiersima, F. (1993). Customer intimacy and other value disciplines. Harvard Business Review, 71 (1), 84-93.
• Vorhies, D. W. (1998). An investigation of the factors leading to the development of marketing capabilities and organizational effectiveness. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6, 3-23.
• Vorhies, D. W. & Harker, M. (2000). The capabilities and performance advantages of market-driven firms: An empirical investigation. Australian Journal of Management, 25 (2), 145-172.[Crossref]
• Wang, Y., Lo, H. P. & Yang, Y. (2004). The constituents of core competencies and firm performance: Evidence from high-technology firms in China. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21, 249-280. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeng-tecman.2004.09.001.[Crossref]

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10051-009-0005-2