IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aae/journl/v17y2021i2p53-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovative activity of Polish enterprises – a strategic aspect. The similarity of NACE divisions

Author

Listed:
  • Edyta

    (Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Department of Strategic Analysis, Institute of Management, College of Management and Quality, Cracow University of Economics, Rakowicka 27, 31-510 Krakow, Poland, email: bielinse@uek.krakow.pl)

  • Monika

    (Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of International Management, Institute of Management, College of Management and Quality, Cracow University of Economics, Rakowicka 27, 31-510 Krakow, Poland, e-mail: hamerskm@uek.krakow.pl)

Abstract

Purpose: The innovativeness of enterprises is dependent on many variables, including decisions regarding innovation, possessed resources and competences, and the sector of their activity. Therefore, it should be considered in a strategic dimension, both at the level of the enterprise’s strategic innovativeness and overall strategy. Strategic innovativeness, which is a long-term process that takes into account the interpenetration of various types of innovation together with strategic thinking, can be an effective tool for achieving high operating efficiency and maintaining a competitive advantage in the market. The analysis of literature on the subject, as well as observations, indicates that even within one industry, there are differences in this respect. A plethora of publications focusing on the problem of innovativeness in individual enterprises, sectors, industries, and regions were found. The authors aimed to divide industries classified by NACE (the Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community) divisions into homogeneous groups in terms of the innovative undertakings of said enterprises in a given industry. Methodology: The empirical part presents the results of own research using the cluster analysis method, while all calculations were performed with the use of R software. Findings: It can be concluded that industries can be grouped into homogeneous clusters in terms of the share of innovative enterprises. The authors can also conclude that clusters listed on the basis of the share of innovative companies that introduced new or improved products and clusters listed on the basis of the share of innovative companies that introduced new or improved business processes are very similar. Implications for theory and practice: The combined value of the considerations presented in the paper is the possibility of obtaining supplementary information about the homogeneity of innovative activities of said enterprises in an individual NACE division. These results can be used for further in-depth analysis of individual groups. Originality and value: However, there is no study presenting the similarity between industries and their division into homogeneous groups in terms of the share of innovative enterprises. Such a gap became an inspiration for the research, which allowed for the verification of this scientific problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Edyta & Monika, 2021. "Innovative activity of Polish enterprises – a strategic aspect. The similarity of NACE divisions," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 17(2), pages 53-98.
    • Handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:17:y:2021:i:2:p:53-98
    DOI: 10.7341/20211723
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jemi.edu.pl/uploadedFiles/file/all-issues/vol17/issue2/JEMI_Vol17_Issue2_2021_Article3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.7341/20211723?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Srholec, Martin & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "The Voyage of the Beagle in Innovation Systems Land.Explorations on Sectors, Innovation, Heterogeneity and Selection," MERIT Working Papers 2008-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Erika Urbankova & David Krizek, 2020. "Homogeneity of Determinants in the Financial Sector and Investment in EU Countries," Economies, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Mary M. Crossan & Marina Apaydin, 2010. "A Multi‐Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(6), pages 1154-1191, September.
    4. John R. Baldwin & Guy Gellatly, 2003. "Innovation Strategies and Performance in Small Firms," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3062.
    5. Branzei, Oana & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2006. "Strategic pathways to product innovation capabilities in SMEs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 75-105, January.
    6. Joern H. Block & Christian O. Fisch & Mirjam van Praag, 2017. "The Schumpeterian entrepreneur: a review of the empirical evidence on the antecedents, behaviour and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 61-95, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & López-Cabarcos, M. Ángeles & Romero-Castro, Noelia María & Pérez-Pico, Ada María, 2020. "Innovation, entrepreneurship and knowledge in the business scientific field: Mapping the research front," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 475-485.
    2. José Arias-Pérez & Carlos Mario Durango Yepes & Nora Teresa Millán López, 2015. "Capacidad de innovación de proceso y desempeno innovador: efecto mediador de la capacidad de innovación de producto," Revista Ad-Minister, Universidad EAFIT, issue 27, pages 75-93, November.
    3. Laurin Buchheim & Alexander Krieger & Sarah Arndt, 2020. "Innovation types in public sector organizations: a systematic review of the literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 509-533, November.
    4. Wenqian Zhou & Vivek K. Velamuri & Tobias Dauth, 2017. "Changing Innovation Roles Of Foreign Subsidiaries From The Manufacturing Industry In China," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(01), pages 1-32, January.
    5. Fulvio Castellacci & Magnus Gulbrandsen & Jarle Hildrum & E. Martinkenaite & Erlend Simensen & Vegard Tveito, 2016. "How Does Innovation Differ across Business Functions? Employee-level Analysis of a Multinational Company," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20160321, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    6. Pierre Therrien & Petr Hanel, 2011. "Innovation and Productivity: Summary Results for Canadian Manufacturing Establishments," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 22, pages 11-28, Fall.
    7. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    8. Heredia Pérez, Jorge A. & Geldes, Cristian & Kunc, Martin H. & Flores, Alejandro, 2019. "New approach to the innovation process in emerging economies: The manufacturing sector case in Chile and Peru," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 35-55.
    9. Tal Shahor, 2018. "Is the Marginal Effect of Education on Income Diminishing?," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 4, May - Aug.
    10. Sarel Gronum & John Steen & Martie-Louise Verreynne, 2016. "Business model design and innovation: Unlocking the performance benefits of innovation," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 41(3), pages 585-605, August.
    11. Jason Brennan, 2023. "Diversity for Justice vs. Diversity for Performance: Philosophical and Empirical Tensions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 433-447, October.
    12. Andres Felipe Cortes & Pol Herrmann, 2019. "Ceo Transformational Leadership And Sme Innovation: The Mediating Role Of Social Capital And Employee Participation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(03), pages 1-25, April.
    13. Bentivoglio, Deborah & Bucci, Giorgia & Belletti, Matteo & Finco, Adele, 2022. "A theoretical framework on network’s dynamics for precision agriculture technologies adoption," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 60(4), January.
    14. Silvia Cosimato & Roberto Vona, 2021. "Digital Innovation for the Sustainability of Reshoring Strategies: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    15. Cristiano Bellavitis & Christian Fisch & Rod B. McNaughton, 2022. "COVID-19 and the global venture capital landscape," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 781-805, October.
    16. Zbigniew Drewniak & Iwona Posadzinska, 2020. "Learning and Development Tools and the Innovative Potential of Artificial Intelligence Companies," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 388-404.
    17. Iskra Panteleeva & Anatoliy Asenov, 2020. "The Entrepreneurship and Innovation Context in an Integrated Model for the Development of Economies and Enterprises," Economic Archive, D. A. Tsenov Academy of Economics, Svishtov, Bulgaria, issue 4 Year 20, pages 35-51.
    18. Simona Alfiero & Laura Broccardo & Massimo Cane & Alfredo Esposito, 2018. "High Performance Through Innovation Process Management in SMEs. Evidence from the Italian wine sector," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 87-110.
    19. van den Broek, Tijs & van Veenstra, Anne Fleur, 2018. "Governance of big data collaborations: How to balance regulatory compliance and disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 330-338.
    20. Magnus Henrekson & Tino Sanandaji, 2020. "Measuring Entrepreneurship: Do Established Metrics Capture Schumpeterian Entrepreneurship?," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(4), pages 733-760, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:17:y:2021:i:2:p:53-98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna Ujwary-Gil (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://fundacjacognitione.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.