Fostering Czech firms' innovation performance through efficient cooperation

• Authors: Viktor Prokop , Michaela Kotkova Striteska , Jan Stejskal

Abstracts

EN

Research background: The business climate development and the stage of innovation systems' transformation are very similar in many Central and Eastern European countries, making it necessary to study these specific economies. These economies are at a different level of transformation, and their governments are trying to support the development of a knowledge-based economy, the creation of innovation systems, and collaboration among different types of entities. These governments need feedback in the form of research into the impacts of public funding on innovation activities through the influence of basic research and cooperation-based resources in individual countries. Purpose of the article: This paper focuses on the examination of (i) the influence of national and European subsidies on innovation performance in manufacturing firms in the Czech Republic and (ii) impacts of knowledge- and cooperation-based resources on innovation activities in Czech manufacturing. Methods: The latest available data from the Community Innovation Survey was used for analyses realized by different regression models. The proposed research models were gradually created to verify the influence of pro-innovation factors (expenditures on in-house and external R&D and on the acquisition of external tangible and intangible sources, cooperation with different partners and innovation) and public (national and/or European) funding of firms' innovation performance within the Czech manufacturing industry. Findings and value added: The results have showed that there is a need to focus on direct and indirect effects of selected innovation determinants; we have also identified the crucial role of cooperation (specifically with government, public, or private research institutes) as a mediating variable within innovation processes. The results have also evidenced that public funding affects the efficiency of knowledge- and cooperation-based resources and amplifies the impact on firms' innovation performance differently. Whereas subsidies from national budgets do not significantly influence the innovation performance of Czech manufacturing firms, European subsidies, on the other hand, significantly increase firms' innovation performance. A long-term contribution of this paper is the significant completion of the theory of policy implications that may be applicable in a broad international context beyond the borders of the Czech Republic. This study significantly contributes to the ongoing discussion about (i) the significance of public financial subsidies from both national and European funds and (ii) the effects of cooperation and R&D on firms? innovation performance within "catching-up" in Central and Eastern Europe. 

Keywords

EN

public support of innovation; cooperation; national and European subsidies; manufacturing; R&D; regression models; Czech Republic

• Publisher: Instytut Badań Gospodarczych
• Journal: Oeconomia Copernicana
• Year: 2021
• Volume: 12
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 671-700

Dates

published

2021

Contributors

author

Viktor Prokop

• University of Pardubice

• https://orcid.org/000000016313395X

author

Michaela Kotkova Striteska

• University of Pardubice

• https://orcid.org/0000000267303335

author

Jan Stejskal

• University of Pardubice

• https://orcid.org/0000000330158274

References

• Abubakar, A. M., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M. A., & Elc?i, A. (2019). Knowledge management, decision-making style and organizational performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(2), 104?114. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2017.07.003.
• Appleyard, M. M., & Chesbrough, H. W. (2017). The dynamics of open strategy: from adoption to reversion. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 310?321. doi: 10.101 6/j.lrp.2016.07.004.
• Asheim, B. T., Boschma, R., & Cooke, P. (2011). Constructing regional advantage: platform policies based on related variety and differentiated knowledge bases. Regional Studies, 45(7), 893?904. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2010.543126.
• Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2020). The role of R&D and knowledge spillovers in innovation and productivity. European Economic Review, 123, 103391. doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103391.
• Barbieri, L., Bragoli, D., Cortelezzi, F., & Marseguerra, G. (2020). Public funding and innovation strategies. Evidence from Italian SMEs. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 27(1), 111?134. doi: 10.1080/13571516.2019 .1664834.
• Becker, W., & Dietz, J. (2004). R&D cooperation and innovation activities of firms?evidence for the German manufacturing industry. Research Policy, 33(2), 209?223.
• Berchicci, L. (2013). Towards an open R&D system: internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance. Research Policy, 42(1), 117?127. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.017.
• Bigliardi, B., Dormio, A. I., Nosella, A., & Petroni, G. (2006). Assessing science parks' performances: directions from selected Italian case studies. Technovation, 26(4), 489?505. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2005.01.002.
• Blažek, J., & Uhlíř, D. (2007). Regional innovation policies in the Czech Republic and the case of Prague: an emerging role of a regional level? European Planning Studies, 15(7), 871?888. doi: 10.1080/09654310701356175.
• Booltink, L. W., & Saka-Helmhout, A. (2018). The effects of R&D intensity and internationalization on the performance of non-high-tech SMEs. International Small Business Journal, 36(1), 81?103. doi: 10.1177/0266242617707566.
• Bronzini, R., & Piselli, P. (2016). The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), 442?457. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.008.
• Caiazza, R., & Stanton, J. (2016). The effect of strategic partnership on innovation: an empirical analysis. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 54, 208?212. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2016.05.016.
• Chapman, G., Lucena, A., & Afcha, S. (2018). R&D subsidies & external collaborative breadth: differential gains and the role of collaboration experience. Research Policy, 47(3), 623?636. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.009.
• Chatterjee, S., & Hadi, A. S. (2013). Regression analysis by example. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
• Chen, M. Y., Huang, M. J., & Cheng, J. Ch. (2009). Measuring knowledge management performance using a competitive perspective: an empirical study. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 8449?8459. doi: 10.1016/j.es wa.2008.10.067.
• Chlebovský, V., Schüller, D., & Škapa, S. (2018). Are product innovation-oriented firms prepared for effective product customization? Scientific papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D, Faculty of Economics and Administration, 44(1), 77?89.
• Cooke, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). Regional development in the knowledge-based economy: the construction of advantage. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 5?15. doi: 10.1007/s10961-005-5009-3.
• Cruz-González, J., López-Sáez, P., EmilioNavas-López, J., & Delgado-Verde, M. (2014). Directions of external knowledge search: investigating their different impact on firm performance in high-technology industries. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(5), 847?866. doi: 10.1108/JKM-06-2014-0243.
• Dachs, B., & Peters, B. (2014). Innovation, employment growth, and foreign ownership of firms: a European perspective. Research Policy, 43(1), 214?232. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.001.
• De Tienne, D., & Mallette, P. (2012). Antecedents and outcomes of innovation-oriented cultures. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(18), 1?11. doi: 10.5539/ijbm.v7n18p1.
• Dong, Y., Wei, Z., Liu, T., & Xing, X. (2021). The impact of R&D intensity on the innovation performance of artificial intelligence enterprises-based on the moderating effect of patent portfolio. Sustainability, 13(1), 328. doi: 10.3390/su130 10328
• Dvouletý, O., & Blažková, I. (2020). Determinants of competitiveness of the Czech SMEs: findings from the global competitiveness project. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 31(3), 361?378. doi: 10.1108/CR-01-2020-0007.
• Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660?679. doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.1255632.
• Ehrenberger, M., Koudelková, P., & Strielkowski, W. (2015). Factors influencing innovation in small and medium enterprises in the Czech Republic. Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences, 23(2), 73?83. doi: 10.3311/P Pso.7737.
• European Commission (2020). European innovation scoreboard; internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs. Retrieved form https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/innovation/scoreboards_en (9.09.2020).
• 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. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2009.05.002.
• Garcia Martinez, M., Lazzarotti, V., Manzini, R., & SánchezGarcía, M. (2014). Open innovation strategies in the food and drink industry: determinants and impact on innovation performance. International Journal of Technology Management, 66(2), 212?242. doi: 10.1504/IJTM.2014.064588.
• Gardiner, R., & Hajek, P. (2016). The role of innovative SMEs to the growth of regional economy: the case of the Czech Republic. In 13th international scientific conference on economic and social development. Book of proceedings, 630. Rijeka: Varazdin Development and Entrepreneurship Agency.
• Guo, D., Guo, Y., & Jiang, K. (2016). Government-subsidized R&D and firm innovation: evidence from China. Research Policy, 45(6), 1129?1144. doi: 10.10 16/j.respol.2016.03.002.
• Gustafsson, A., & Wogenius, S. (2014). Modelling apartment prices with the multiple linear regression model. Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/sm ash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A725045&dswid=4329.
• Gyamfi, S., & Stejskal, J. (2019). Does external knowledge acquisition aid innovation performance in firms? In ECKM 2019 20th European conference on knowledge management 2 VOLS. Academic Conferences and publishing limited. 449?457.
• Hannen, J., Antons, D., Piller, F., Salge, T. O., Coltman, T., & Devinney, T. M. (2019). Containing the not-invented-here syndrome in external knowledge absorption and open innovation: the role of indirect countermeasures. Research Policy, 48(9), 103822. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103822.
• Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62(3), 42?54. doi: 10.1177/002224299806200303.
• Hussinger, K., & Wastyn, A. (2016). In search for the not?invented?here syndrome: the role of knowledge sources and firm success. R&D Management, 46(S3), 945?957. doi: 10.1111/radm.12136.
• Kafouros, M. I., & Forsans, N. (2012). The role of open innovation in emerging economies: do companies profit from the scientific knowledge of others? Journal of World Business, 47(3), 362?370.
• Keizer, J. A., Dijkstra, L., & Halman, J. I. (2002). Explaining innovative efforts of SMEs.: an exploratory survey among SMEs in the mechanical and electrical engineering sector in The Netherlands. Technovation, 22(1), 1?13. doi: 10.1016 /S0166-4972(00)00091-2.
• Klímová, V. (2018). How do regions use indirect R&D support for their innovation activities? Scientific papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D, Faculty of Economics and Administration, 42(1), 104?115.
• Klímová, V., Žítek, V., & Králová, M. (2019). How public R&D support affects research activity of enterprises: evidence from the Czech Republic. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 11, 888?907. doi: 10.1007/s13132-019-0580-2.
• Knell, M., & Srholec, M. (2005). Innovation cooperation and foreign ownership in the Czech Republic. Norwegian Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU-STEP).
• Kotkova Striteska, M., & Prokop, V. (2020). Dynamic innovation strategy model in practice of innovation leaders and followers in CEE countries ? a prerequisite for building innovative ecosystems. Sustainability, 12(9), 3918. doi: 10.339 0/su12093918.
• Kraśnicka, T., Głód, W., & Wronka-Pośpiech, M. (2018). Management innovation, pro-innovation organisational culture and enterprise performance: testing the mediation effect. Review of Managerial Science, 12(3), 737?769. doi: 10.1007 /s11846-017-0229-0.
• Lavčák, M., Hudec, O., & Sinčáková, Ž. (2019). Local and institutional factors of start-up ecosystems: common and inherited attributes. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 10(4), 1765?1783. doi: 10.1007/s13132-019-00598-0.
• Lee, K., Woo, H. G., & Joshi, K. (2017). Pro-innovation culture, ambidexterity and new product development performance: polynomial regression and response surface analysis. European Management Journal, 35(2), 249?260. doi: 10.1016 /j.emj.2016.05.002.
• McKelvie, A., Brattström, A., & Wennberg, K. (2017). How young firms achieve growth: reconciling the roles of growth motivation and innovative activities. Small Business Economics, 49, 273?293. doi: 10.1007/s11187-017-9847-9.
• Meričková, B., Prokop, V., & Stejskal, J. (2016). Consequences of enterprises´ cooperation within the innovation process - case study of the Czech Machinery Industry. E+M Ekonomie a Management, 19(3), 110?122.
• Myšková, R., & Kuběnka, M. (2019). Information sharing in the context of business cooperation?as a source of competitive advantage. Journal of International Studies, 12(3), 169?182. doi: 10.14254/2071-8330.2019/12-3/14.
• Nemec, J. (2015). Public policy in the Czech Republic. Central European Journal of Public Policy, 9(1), 4?6.
• Odei, S. A., Stejskal, J., & Prokop, V. (2020). Revisiting the factors driving firms? innovation performances: the case of Visegrad countries. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 12, 1?14. doi: 10.1007/s13132-020-00669-7.
• Patel, P. C., Fernhaber, S. A., McDougall-Covin, P. P., & van der Have, R. P. (2014). Beating competitors to international markets: the value of geographically balanced networks for innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 35(5), 691?711. doi: 10.1002/smj.2114.
• Pisár, P., Ďurčeková, I., & Stachová, M. (2020). The contribution of innovation actors into business R&D funding?does the substitution effect of public support work in the EU? E+M Ekonomie a Management, 23(1), 121?134.
• Procházka, O., & Hájek, P. (2015). Modelling knowledge management processes using fuzzy cognitive maps. In 10th International conference on knowledge management in organizations. Springer, 41?50.
• Prokop, V., & Stejskal, J. (2014). Impacts of local planning to competitiveness index change ? using approximate initial analysis to the Czech regions. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 12(1), 279?288.
• Prokop, V., & Stejskal, J. (2019). Determinants of innovation activities and SME absorption?Case study of Germany. Scientific papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D, Faculty of Economics and Administration. 46(2), 134?146.
• Prokop, V., Odei, S. A., & Stejskal, J. (2018). Propellants of University-Industry-Government synergy: comparative study of Czech and Slovak manufacturing industries. Ekonomický časopis, 66(10), 987?1001.
• Prokop, V., Stejskal, J., Klimova, V., & Zitek, V. (2021). The role of foreign technologies and R&D in innovation processes within catching-up CEE countries. Plos one, 16(4), e0250307. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250307.
• Prokop, V., Stejskal, J., & Kuvikova, H. (2017). The different drivers of innovation activities in European countries: a comparative study of Czech, Slovak, and Hungarian manufacturing firms. Ekonomický časopis, 65(1), 31?45.
• Pucci, T., Brumana, M., Minola, T., & Zanni, L. (2020). Social capital and innovation in a life science cluster: the role of proximity and family involvement. Journal of Technology Transfer, 45(1), 205?227. doi: 10.1007/s10961-017-9591-y
• Radosevic, S. (1999). Transformation of science and technology systems into systems of innovation in central and eastern Europe: the emerging patterns and determinants. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 10(3?4), 277?320.
• Radosevic, S. (2002). Regional innovation systems in Central and Eastern Europe: determinants, organizers and alignments. Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 87?96.
• Rašula, J., Vukšić, V. B., & Štemberger, M. I. (2012). The impact of knowledge management on organisational performance. Economic and Business Review, 14(2), 147?168.
• Rayna, T., Striukova, L., & Darlington, J. (2015). Co-creation and user innovation: The role of online 3D printing platforms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 37, 90?102. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2015.07.002.
• Retherford, R. D., & Choe, M. K. (2011). Statistical models for causal analysis. New York: John Wiley.
• Rim, G. N., Kim, G. S., Hwang, S. H., & Ko, U. D. (2019). Some problems in statistically assessing the level of knowledge economy. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 10(3), 974?996. doi: 10.1007/s13132-017-0510-0.
• Roper, S., Love, J. H., & Bonner, K. (2017). Firms? knowledge search and local knowledge externalities in innovation performance. Research Policy, 46(1), 43?56. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.10.004.
• Santi, C., & Santoleri, P. (2017). Exploring the link between innovation and growth in Chilean firms. Small Business Economics, 49(2), 445?467. doi: 10.10 07/s11187-016-9836-4.
• Shaikh, I. A., & O?Connor, G. C. (2020). Understanding the motivations of technology managers in radical innovation decisions in the mature R&D firm context: an agency theory perspective. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 55, 101553. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101553.
• Sofka, W., & Grimpe, C. (2010). Specialized search and innovation performance?evidence across Europe. R&D Management, 40(3), 310?323. doi: 10.1111/j.14 67-9310.2010.00592.x.
• Stejskal, J., & Hájek, P. (2015). Modelling knowledge spillover effects using moderated and mediation analysis ? the case of Czech high-tech industries. In 10th International conference on knowledge management in organizations. 224, 329?341.
• Stejskal, J., Hájek, P., & Hudec, O. (Eds.). (2018). Knowledge spillovers in regional innovation systems: a case study of CEE regions. Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-67029-4.
• Stojčić, N. (2021). Collaborative innovation in emerging innovation systems: evidence from Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of Technology Transfer, 46(2), 531?562. doi: 10.1007/s10961-020-09792-8.
• Stulova, V., & Rungi, M. (2017). Untangling the mystery of absorptive capacity: a process or a set of success factors? Journal of High Technology Management Research, 28(1), 110?123. doi: 10.1016/j.hitech.2017.04.008.
• Sum, N. L., & Jessop, B. (2013). Competitiveness, the knowledge-based economy and higher education. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4(1), 24?44. doi: 10.1007/s13132-012-0121-8.
• Szücs, F. (2020). Do research subsidies crowd out private R&D of large firms? Evidence from European Framework Programmes. Research Policy, 49(3), 103923. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.103923.
• Vásquez-Urriago, Á. R., Barge-Gil, A., & Rico, A. M. (2016). Science and technology parks and cooperation for innovation: empirical evidence from Spain. Research Policy, 45(1), 137?147. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.006.
• Vlachogianni, A., Kassomenos, P., Karppinen, A., Karakitsios, S., & Kukkonen, J. (2011). Evaluation of a multiple regression model for the forecasting of the concentrations of NOx and PM10 in Athens and Helsinki. Science of the Total Environment, 409(8), 1559?1571. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.12.040.
• Westlund, H., & Nilsson, E. (2005). Measuring enterprises? investments in social capital: a pilot study. Regional Studies, 39(8), 1079?1094. doi: 10.1080/00343 400500328164.
• Wu, C. H., Li, J. B., & Chang, T. Y. (2013). SLinRA2S: a simple linear regression analysis assisting system. In e-Business engineering (ICEBE), 2013 IEEE 10th international conference. IEEE, 219?223.
• Yang, J., & Grabe, M. E. (2011). Knowledge acquisition gaps: a comparison of print versus online news sources. New Media & Society, 13(8), 1211?1227. doi: 10.1177/1461444811401708.

Identifiers

DOI

10.24136/oc.2021.022

Biblioteka Nauki

19233701