The Influence Of Different Information Sources On Innovation Performance: Evidence From France, The Netherlands And Croatia

• Authors: Mirjana Pejić Bach , Andjelko Lojpur , Sanja Peković , Tatjana Stanovčić
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Information sources are considered a catalyst for innovation improvement, and because of this it is particularly important to learn more regarding their impact on innovation performance. Therefore, the goal of this research is to investigate to what extent the usage of different information sources influences internal and external R&D activities in three countries, Croatia, France and the Netherlands, by employing CIS data, which covers the period from 2006 to 2008. These countries were chosen because of the different levels of their country competitiveness (measured by the Global Competitiveness Index), which permits us to investigate if the usage of information sources has varying impact on their innovation performance. Our results reveal that internal sources, customers, suppliers and universities are important information sources for both internal and external R&D activities in all three countries. However, significant differences are also found. Firms from the Netherlands (which has the highest country competitiveness) use information sources differently, relying on competitors as one of their most important sources of innovation. On the other hand, the government did not have any impact on firms in Croatia (which has the lowest country competitiveness), indicating that this may be the reason for similar countries lagging behind.

Keywords

EN

information sources; innovation intensity; Croatia; France; Netherlands; O32; D83

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: South East European Journal of Economics and Business
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 10
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 89-101

Dates

published

2015-12-01

online

2016-01-13

Contributors

author

Mirjana Pejić Bach

• University of Zagreb, Croatia, Faculty of Economics & Business – Zagreb, Department of informatics

author

Andjelko Lojpur

• University of Montenegro, Faculty of Economics

author

Sanja Peković

• University of Montenegro, Faculty of Tourism and Hotel Management

author

Tatjana Stanovčić

• University of Montenegro, Faculty of Tourism and Hotel Management

References

• Amara, N., & Landry, R. 2005. Sources of information as determinants of novelty of innovation in manufacturing firms: evidence from the 1999 Statistics Canada innovation survey. Technovation, 25 (3): 245-259.
• Pejić Bach, M. Zoroja, J., & Vukšić, V. B. (2013). Review of corporate digital divide research: A decadal analysis (2003-2012). International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 1(4): 41-55.
• Bathelt, H., & Schuldt, N. (2008). Between luminaires and meat grinders: International trade fairs as temporary clusters. Regional Studies, 42(6): 853-868.
• Bruce, M., Leverick, F., Littler, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Success factors for collaborative product development: a study of suppliers of information and communication technology. R&D Management, 25(1): 33-44.
• Burt, R.S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
• Chesbrough, H. 2003. Open Innovation: How Companies Actually Do It. Harvard Business Review, 81(7):12-14
• Chesbrough, H. 2006. Open innovation: a new paradigm for understanding indus-trial innovation. In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J. (Eds.), OpenInnovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1–12.
• Cohen, J., & Levinthal, D.A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 554–571.
• Crepon, B., Duguet, E., & Mairesse, J. 1998. Research, innovation and productivity: an econometric analysis at the firm level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 7(2):115–158.
• Day, G.S., & Wensle, R. 1988. Assessing advantage: A framework for diagnosing competitive superiority. Journal of Marketing, 52(2): 1–20.
• de Reuver, M., Bouwman, H., & Maclnnes, I. 2009. Business model dynamics: a case survey. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 4(1): 1-11.
• Dickson, P.R. 1992. Toward a general theory of competitive rationality. Journal of Marketing, 56(1): 69–83.
• Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nightingale, P. 2012. Introduction: The heterogeneity of innovation- evidence from the Community Innovation Surveys. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5): 1175-1180.
• Frenz, M., & Ietto-Gillies, G. (2009). The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey. Research Policy, 38(7): 1125-1135.
• Greene, W.H. 2003. Econometric Analysis, 5th Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prenctice Hall.
• Griffith, R., Huergo, E., Mairesse, J., & Peters, B. 2006. Innovation and productivity across four European countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(4): 483-498.
• Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R.I. 1997. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4): 716-749.
• Harris, R. & Trainor, M. 2011. A matching analysis of why some firms in peripheral regions undertake R&D where-as others do not. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(4): 367-385.
• Hashi, I., & Stojcic, N. (2013a). Knowledge spillovers, innovation activities, and competitiveness of industries in EU member and candidate countries. Economic annals, 58(198): 7-34.
• Hashi, I., & Stojčić, N. (2013b). 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.
• Herstad, S. J., Aslesen, H. W., & Ebersberger, B. 2014. On industrial knowledge bases, commercial opportunities and global innovation network linkages. Research Policy, 43(3): 495-504.
• Iwasa, T., & Odagiri, H. 2004. Overseas R&D, Knowledge Sourcing, and Patenting: An Empirical Study of Japanese R&D investment in the US. Research Policy, 33(5): 807–828.
• Janeiro, P., Proença, I., & da Conceição Gonçalves, V. (2013). Open innovation: Factors explaining universities as service firm innovation sources. Journal of Business Research, 66(10): 2017-2023.
• Kleinknecht, A., & Mohnen, P. 2002. Innovation and Firm Performance: Econometric Explorations of Survey Data. Palgrave, Hampshire and New York.
• Krotov, V., & Junglas, I. 2008. RFID as a Disruptive Innovation. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 3(2): 44-59.
• Lawson, B., & Samson, D. 2001. Developing Innovation Capability in Organizations: A Dynamic Capabilities Approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(3): 377-400.
• Leiponen, A., & Helfat, C. E. 2011. Location, decentralization, and knowledge sources for innovation. Organization Science, 22(3): 641-658.
• Leonard, A., & van Zyl, D. (2014). Social relationships in IT project teams: its role, complexity and the management thereof. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 2(1): 21-39.
• Lojpur, A., Pejic-Bach, M., & Pekovic, S. 2015. Determinants of Innovation Intensity in Developed and in Developing Economies: The case of France and Croatia, International Journal of Innovation Management. Available at:
• Maskell, P., Bathelt, H., & Malmberg, A. 2004. Temporary clusters and knowledge creation: The effects of international trade fairs, conventions and other professional gatherings. SPACES, 4: 1–34.
• Pejić Bach, M. (2014). Exploring Information and Communications Technology Adoption in Enterprises and its Impact on Innovation Performance of European Countries. Ekonomický časopis, 2014(4): 335-362.
• Porter M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Macmillan, London.
• Roblek, V., Pejic Bach, M., Meško, M., & Bertoncelj, A. (2013). The impact of social media to value added in knowledge-based industries. Kybernetes, 42(4): 554-568.
• Romijn, H., & Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research policy, 31(7): 1053-1067.
• Rothwell, R. 1994. Towards the fifth-generation innovation process. International Marketing Review, 11(7): 7-31.
• Schwab, K. & Porter, M.E. (2010). Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009. Available at:
• Segarra-Blasco, A., & Arauzo-Carod, J. M. 2008. Sources of innovation and industry–university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms. Research Policy, 37(8): 1283-1295
• Tether, B. 2001. Identifying innovation, innovators and innovative behaviours: a critical assessment of the Community Innovation Survey (CIS). Manchester: Centre for Research on Innovation and Competition, University of Manchester.
• Tether, B. S., & Tajar, A. (2008). Beyond industry–university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organisations and the public science-base. Research Policy, 37(6): 1079-1095.
• Teubal, M., Yinnon, T., & Zuscovitch, E. (1991). Networks and market creation. Research Policy, 20(5): 381-392.
• Varajão, J., Trigo, A., & Barroso, J. (2009). Motivations and trends for it/is adoption: insights from Portuguese companies. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), 5(4): 34-52.
• Varis, M., & Littunen, H. 2010. Types of innovation, sources of information and performance in entrepreneurial SMEs. European Journal of Innovation Management, 13(2): 128-154.
• West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: a review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4): 814-831.
• Yam, R., Lo, W., Tang, E. P., & Lau, A. K. 2011. Analysis of sources of innovation, technological innovation capabilities, and performance: An empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing industries. Research Policy, 40 (3): 391-402.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/jeb-2015-0012