IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p2199-d501471.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodology for Calculating the European Innovation Scoreboard—Proposition for Modification

Author

Listed:
  • Edyta Bielińska-Dusza

    (Department of Strategic Analysis, Cracow University of Economics, 31-510 Kraków, Poland)

  • Monika Hamerska

    (Department of International Management, Cracow University of Economics, 31-510 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

The primary purpose of this article is to identify determinants affecting the Summary Innovation Index and, consequently, the positions of countries on the European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS). Then, based on the identified determinants, these countries are ranked using the linear ordering method. This article presents the concept of innovation as an unwavering subject of interest for researchers from around the world. Issues relating to measuring innovation, which is necessary for the efficient management of an organization, as well as to the study of innovation in individual countries, are discussed. Special attention is drawn to the methodological aspects of constructing the European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS). The identification of determinants affecting the level of the Summary Innovation Index is performed through stepwise regression. This makes it possible to reduce the number of factors utilized in the EIS ranking procedure from 27 to 22. This was the inspiration to apply an innovative approach and use the linear ordering method, in order to show that it is possible to obtain a ranking that is very similar to the EIS ranking with a reduced number of indicators. These results may be significant, both for units developing this type of ranking and for users, such as decision-makers, using the results to make strategic decisions. In our opinion, this innovative approach—that is, using the linear ordering method and a reduced number of indicators—makes it possible to create a more transparent EIS ranking. This article is of theoretical, methodological, and empirical interest.

Suggested Citation

  • Edyta Bielińska-Dusza & Monika Hamerska, 2021. "Methodology for Calculating the European Innovation Scoreboard—Proposition for Modification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2199-:d:501471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2199/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2199/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antoncic, Bostjan & Hisrich, Robert D., 2001. "Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 495-527, September.
    2. Kahn, Kenneth B., 2018. "Understanding innovation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 453-460.
    3. Christian Voegtlin & Andreas Georg Scherer, 2017. "Responsible Innovation and the Innovation of Responsibility: Governing Sustainable Development in a Globalized World," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 227-243, June.
    4. Szopik-Depczyńska, Katarzyna & Cheba, Katarzyna & Bąk, Iwona & Kędzierska-Szczepaniak, Angelika & Szczepaniak, Krzysztof & Ioppolo, Giuseppe, 2020. "Innovation level and local development of EU regions. A new assessment approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Bengt-ake Lundvall & Bjorn Johnson, 1994. "The Learning Economy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 23-42.
    6. Danny Miller, 1983. "The Correlates of Entrepreneurship in Three Types of Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(7), pages 770-791, July.
    7. Szopik-Depczyńska, Katarzyna & Kędzierska-Szczepaniak, Angelika & Szczepaniak, Krzysztof & Cheba, Katarzyna & Gajda, Waldemar & Ioppolo, Giuseppe, 2018. "Innovation in sustainable development: an investigation of the EU context using 2030 agenda indicators," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 251-262.
    8. Christian Voegtlin & Scherer Andreas Georg, 2017. "Responsible Innovation and the Innovation of Responsibility: Governing Sustainable Development in a Globalized World," Post-Print hal-01540972, HAL.
    9. Edmund Mallinguh & Zeman Zoltan, 2020. "Map of the existing research on business innovation, funding, and policy framework," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 16(2), pages 161-202.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Monika Sipa & Iwona Gorzeń-Mitka, 2021. "Assessment of the Progress towards the Management of Renewable Energy Consumption in the Innovativeness Context—A Country Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Borko Katanic & Sanja Pekovic & Radenko M. Matic & Jovan Vukovic & Bojan Masanovic & Stevo Popovic, 2022. "The 2021 National Report on Sports Innovation for Montenegro: Content Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Evelina Maria Oliveira Coutinho & Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira, 2023. "Factors Influencing Innovation Performance in Portugal: A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis Based on the Global Innovation Index and on the European Innovation Scoreboard," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, July.

    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. Geradts, Thijs H.J. & Alt, Elisa, 2022. "Social entrepreneurial action in established organizations: Developing the concept of social intrapreneurship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 197-206.
    2. Chahal, Hardeep & Gupta, Mahesh & Lonial, Subhash & Raina, Swati, 2019. "Operational flexibility-entrepreneurial orientation relationship: Effects and consequences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 154-167.
    3. Emmanuelle Reuter, 2022. "Hybrid business models in the sharing economy: The role of business model design for managing the environmental paradox," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 603-618, February.
    4. Constantin Schmidt & Stefan Tewes, 2021. "Developing New Things: Implications of the Platform Economy for Intrapreneurship," International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 7(6), pages 34-44, September.
    5. Tina C. Ambos & Katherine Tatarinov, 2022. "Building Responsible Innovation in International Organizations through Intrapreneurship," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 92-125, January.
    6. Sergio Edú Valsania & Juan A. Moriano & Fernando Molero, 2016. "Authentic leadership and intrapreneurial behavior: cross-level analysis of the mediator effect of organizational identification and empowerment," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 131-152, March.
    7. Tachia Chin & Francesco Caputo & Yi Shi & Mario Calabrese & Chiraz Aouina‐Mejri & Armando Papa, 2022. "Depicting the role of cross‐cultural legitimacy for responsible innovation in Asian‐Pacific business models: A dialectical systems view of Yin‐Yang harmony," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 2083-2093, November.
    8. Simone Pizzi & Fabio Caputo & Andrea Venturelli, 2020. "Does it pay to be an honest entrepreneur? Addressing the relationship between sustainable development and bankruptcy risk," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 1478-1486, May.
    9. Turró, Andreu & Urbano, David & Peris-Ortiz, Marta, 2014. "Culture and innovation: The moderating effect of cultural values on corporate entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 360-369.
    10. Esthela Galván-Vela & Eduardo Arango Herrera & Deisy Milena Sorzano Rodríguez & Rafael Ravina-Ripoll, 2021. "State-of-the-Art Analysis of Intrapreneurship: A Review of the Theoretical Construct and Its Bibliometrics," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Agata Gurzawska & Markus Mäkinen & Philip Brey, 2017. "Implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Practices in Industry: Providing the Right Incentives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-26, September.
    12. Sophie Bacq & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2022. "Stakeholder Governance for Responsible Innovation: A Theory of Value Creation, Appropriation, and Distribution," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 29-60, January.
    13. Thais Assis de Souza & Rodrigo Marçal Gandia & Bruna Habib Cavazza & André Grützmann & Isabelle Nicolaï, 2020. "A Conceptual Proposal for Responsible Innovation," Post-Print hal-03014720, HAL.
    14. Shuang Meng & Pengxiang Wang & Jiajie Yu, 2022. "Going Abroad and Going Green: The Effects of Top Management Teams’ Overseas Experience on Green Innovation in the Digital Era," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-20, November.
    15. Louise Lindbjerg & Theodor Vladasel, 2021. "Hiring Entrepreneurs for Innovation," Working Papers 1309, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Qinghua Huang & Xiding Chen & Mi Zhou & Xiaoqin Zhang & Lingling Duan, 2019. "How Does CEO’s Environmental Awareness Affect Technological Innovation?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Antonio Rodríguez-Peña, 2023. "Corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance relationship under the moderating effect of environmental dynamism: Replication and extension analysis," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 550-585, December.
    18. Jennifer Saniossian, 2020. "Co-évolution durant la création des méta-organisations multi-parties prenantes : influence sur les enjeux sociaux de territoire," Post-Print hal-04654634, HAL.
    19. Sophie Bollinger & Marion Neukam, 2023. "Les valeurs de l'organisation, moteur de créativité," Post-Print hal-04162043, HAL.
    20. Seray Ergene & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjee & Erim Ergene, 2024. "Environmental Racism and Climate (In)Justice in the Anthropocene: Addressing the Silences and Erasures in Management and Organization Studies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 193(4), pages 785-800, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2199-:d:501471. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.