IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bal/journl/2256-074220206315.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation Of Risk Impact On Implementation Of Innovation Projects Within The Framework Of Machine-Building Quasi-Integration Structures

Author

Listed:
  • Sergii Solntsev

    (National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, Ukraine)

  • Zhanna Zhygalkevych

    (National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, Ukraine)

  • Maryna Kravchenko

    (National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, Ukraine)

Abstract

The risk management of innovation project can improve the level of risk control of quasi-integration structures (QIS), so as to make more effective decisions, reduce investment losses and achieve mutual benefit as well. Therefore, an assessment of the risk impact on implementation of innovation project makes this study relevance. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the impact of market risks on the success of innovative QIS engineering projects with the involvement of an economic-probabilistic model based on a conjoint analysis. Research methodology. The article substances the feasibility and results of the application of the method of conjoint analysis – one of the methods of mathematical psychology – to assess the impact of risks on the effectiveness of innovative projects implemented within quasi-integration structures in the engineering complex. Findings. The most likely scenarios for implementing an innovative project in terms of the impact of risk events on the financial result had been found with a help of a conjoint procedure with a fractional factorial design. The relative impact of each risk on the success of the innovation project was evaluated. The rule of deciding on the eligibility of an innovative project by the participants of machine-building QIS was formulated on the basis of the technique of the internal rate of investment return (IRR). Research limitations. The developed methodology is proposed to be used in assessing the impact of risks on innovative projects within machine-building quasi-integration structures. The proposed method of assessing the impact of risks on the financial results of innovative projects within the machine-building QIS can be used in more general situations. Practical implications. The methodology was tested on the example of an innovation project within an innovation and technology cluster, which included six participants: mechanical engineering companies, a service company, a scientific institution and an educational institution. The market and specific inter-corporate risks that influence the results of innovative projects within machine-building QISs were identified and evaluated for operationalization. According to the results of implementation of the methodology, the feasibility of implementing an innovative project within the innovation-technological cluster was substantiated. Originality/value. The scientific novelty of this study is the use of a conjoint analysis methodology to assess the impact of market risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergii Solntsev & Zhanna Zhygalkevych & Maryna Kravchenko, 2020. "Evaluation Of Risk Impact On Implementation Of Innovation Projects Within The Framework Of Machine-Building Quasi-Integration Structures," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 6(3).
    • Handle: RePEc:bal:journl:2256-0742:2020:6:3:15
    DOI: 10.30525/2256-0742/2020-6-3-124-135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/issue/article/view/842/893
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/issue/article/view/842
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30525/2256-0742/2020-6-3-124-135?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. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    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. Merja Halme & Kari Linden & Kimmo Kääriä, 2009. "Patients’ Preferences for Generic and Branded Over-the-Counter Medicines," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 2(4), pages 243-255, December.
    2. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    3. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Yoon, Moon Gil & Yoon, Duk Young & Yang, Tae Won, 2006. "Impact of e-business on air travel markets: Distribution of airline tickets in Korea," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 253-260.
    5. Norbert Bajkó & Zsolt Fülöp & Kinga Nagyné Pércsi, 2022. "Changes in the Innovation- and Marketing-Habits of Family SMEs in the Foodstuffs Industry, Caused by the Coronavirus Pandemic in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Heap, Shaun P. Hargreaves & Koop, Christel & Matakos, Konstantinos & Unan, Asli & Weber, Nina Sophie, 2021. "We Cannot Disagree Forever! Reality Polarization and Citizens’ Post-Pandemic Fiscal Adjustment Preferences," SocArXiv 69tup, Center for Open Science.
    7. Emmanuel Olateju Oyatoye & Sulaimon Olanrewaju Adebiyi & Bilqis Bolanle Amole, 2013. "An Application of Conjoint Analysis to Consumer Preference for Beverage Products in Nigeria," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 9(6), pages 43-56, December.
    8. Krieger, Abba M. & Green, Paul E., 2006. "A tactical model for resource allocation and its application to advertising budgeting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(3), pages 935-949, May.
    9. John Liechty & Duncan Fong & Eelko Huizingh & Arnaud Bruyn, 2008. "Hierarchical Bayesian conjoint models incorporating measurement uncertainty," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 141-155, June.
    10. Christian P Theurer & Andranik Tumasjan & Isabell M Welpe, 2018. "Contextual work design and employee innovative work behavior: When does autonomy matter?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-35, October.
    11. Shakila Yasmin & Khaled Mahmud & Farzan Afrin, 2016. "Job Attribute Preference of Executives: A Conjoint Analysis," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(2), pages 1-68, February.
    12. Kick, Markus & Littich, Martina, 2015. "Brand and Reputation as Quality Signals on Regulated Markets," EconStor Preprints 182503, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    13. Dean A. Shepherd & Holger Patzelt, 2015. "Harsh Evaluations of Entrepreneurs Who Fail: The Role of Sexual Orientation, Use of Environmentally Friendly Technologies, and Observers' Perspective Taking," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 253-284, March.
    14. Meixner, Oliver & Haas, Rainer & Pochtrager, Siegfried, 2007. "Importance and Relevance of Quality Labels in the Austrian Meat Supply Chain," 2007 1st Forum, February 15-17, 2007, Innsbruck, Austria 6598, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    15. Andreas Klein, 2011. "Die Entwicklung eines agentenbasierten Basismodells zur Bestimmung der deckungsbeitragsmaximierenden Anzahl von Außendienstmitarbeitern," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 189-210, January.
    16. Vetschera, Rudolf & Weitzl, Wolfgang & Wolfsteiner, Elisabeth, 2014. "Implausible alternatives in eliciting multi-attribute value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(1), pages 221-230.
    17. Ragna Nilssen & Geoff Bick & Russell Abratt, 2019. "Comparing the relative importance of sustainability as a consumer purchase criterion of food and clothing in the retail sector," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(1), pages 71-83, January.
    18. Anil Markandya & Enrica De Cian & Laurent Drouet & Josué M. Polanco-Martìnez & Francesco Bosello, 2016. "Building Uncertainty into the Adaptation Cost Estimation in Integrated Assessment Models," Working Papers 2016.21, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    19. Olivier Toubia & Duncan I. Simester & John R. Hauser & Ely Dahan, 2003. "Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 273-303.
    20. Daniel V. Holland & Dean A. Shepherd, 2013. "Deciding to Persist: Adversity, Values, and Entrepreneurs’ Decision Policies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(2), pages 331-358, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    machine-building; Ukraine; quasi-integration structures; innovative project; risks; conjoint analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C19 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Other
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G31 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Capital Budgeting; Fixed Investment and Inventory Studies

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bal:journl:2256-0742:2020:6:3:15. 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: Anita Jankovska (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.