IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v39y2014i2p199-218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking innovation, productivity, and competitiveness: implications for policy and practice

Author

Listed:
  • E. Carayannis
  • E. Grigoroudis

Abstract

A country’s competitiveness is a complex concept that has been widely studied from different perspectives. Given that the competitive performance depends on the formation of intellectual capital and society’s capacity to innovate, economic research has identified innovation and productivity as key engines for the increase of competitiveness. There are several alternatives approaches for measuring innovation, productivity, and competitiveness. These approaches lead to different assessments, since there is no universally accepted definition and measuring technique of the aforementioned concepts. Moreover, these definitions appear to have several overlaps and this complicates the analysis of their relations. The aim of this paper is to present a methodological framework for studying the dynamic linkage among innovation, productivity, and competitiveness and explore the implications for policy and practice. For each one of these measures, an overall score is estimated, using a regression-based model that follows the principles of multi-objective mathematical programming. For the purpose of the analysis, a database containing a set of 25 indicators for 19 countries for the period 1998–2008 has been developed. The most important results include a series of contour maps and gap analysis diagrams that illustrate the evolution of the overall innovation, productivity, and competitiveness indices and compare the performance of the examined countries. These results show that, by average, there are no significant gaps among innovation, productivity, and competitiveness, although several variations may be found for particular countries. The motivation for this research from a policy and management perspective, is to explore whether, how and why certain combinations of competitiveness, productivity and innovation levels for a given country as well as across countries reveal any particular set of intrinsic strengths or weaknesses as well as more effective entry points regarding public sector (policy) interventions. A systematic profiling and comparison of competitiveness, productivity and innovation competence levels may reveal guidelines and insights for private sector (management) choices and initiatives as well. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • E. Carayannis & E. Grigoroudis, 2014. "Linking innovation, productivity, and competitiveness: implications for policy and practice," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 199-218, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:39:y:2014:i:2:p:199-218
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-012-9295-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-012-9295-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-012-9295-2?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grupp, Hariolf & Schubert, Torben, 2010. "Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 67-78, February.
    2. Albert Link & Dianne Welsh, 2013. "From laboratory to market: on the propensity of young inventors to form a new business," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 1-7, January.
    3. Evangelos Grigoroudis & Yannis Siskos, 2010. "Customer Satisfaction Evaluation," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-1-4419-1640-2, April.
    4. Jonathan Haskel, 2007. "Measuring innovation and productivity in a knowledge-based service economy," Economic & Labour Market Review, Palgrave Macmillan;Office for National Statistics, vol. 1(7), pages 27-31, July.
    5. Ozcelik, Emre & Taymaz, Erol, 2004. "Does innovativeness matter for international competitiveness in developing countries?: The case of Turkish manufacturing industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 409-424, April.
    6. Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2009. "Drivers of national innovation in transition: Evidence from a panel of Eastern European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 845-860, June.
    7. Chakrabarti, Alok K., 1990. "Innovation and productivity: An analysis of the chemical, textiles and machine tool industries in the U.S," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 257-269, June.
    8. Audretsch, David B. & Bozeman, Barry & Combs, Kathryn L. & Feldman, Maryann & Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S. & Stephan, Paula, 2002. "The Economics of Science and Technology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 155-203, April.
    9. Grigoroudis, E. & Siskos, Y., 2002. "Preference disaggregation for measuring and analysing customer satisfaction: The MUSA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 148-170, November.
    10. Robert J W Tijssen, 2003. "Scoreboards of research excellence," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 91-103, August.
    11. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin, 2008. "National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1417-1435, October.
    12. David Audretsch & Albert Link, 2012. "Entrepreneurship and innovation: public policy frameworks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 1-17, February.
    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. Elias G. Carayannis & Evangelos Grigoroudis, 2016. "Using multiobjective mathematical programming to link national competitiveness, productivity, and innovation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(2), pages 635-655, December.
    2. Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Noel, Laurent & Galariotis, Emilios & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2021. "An ordinal regression approach for analyzing consumer preferences in the art market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 718-733.
    3. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    4. Barbero, Javier & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Zofío, José L., 2021. "Is more always better? On the relevance of decreasing returns to scale on innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin & Verspagen, Bart, 2010. "Innovation and Economic Development," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 833-872, Elsevier.
    6. Ewa Kopczynska & Joao J. Ferreira, 2020. "Smart Specialization as a New Strategic Framework: Innovative and Competitive Capacity in European Context," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(2), pages 530-557, June.
    7. Hugo Erken & Piet Donselaar & Roy Thurik, 2018. "Total factor productivity and the role of entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1493-1521, December.
    8. Filippetti, Andrea & Peyrache, Antonio, 2011. "The Patterns of Technological Capabilities of Countries: A Dual Approach using Composite Indicators and Data Envelopment Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1108-1121, July.
    9. E. Grigoroudis & E. Tsitsiridi & C. Zopounidis, 2013. "Linking customer satisfaction, employee appraisal, and business performance: an evaluation methodology in the banking sector," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 205(1), pages 5-27, May.
    10. Ferreira, Diogo Cunha & Marques, Rui Cunha & Nunes, Alexandre Morais & Figueira, José Rui, 2021. "Customers satisfaction in pediatric inpatient services: A multiple criteria satisfaction analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    11. Loukas Kipenis & Dimitris Askounis, 2016. "Assessing e-Participation via user’s satisfaction measurement: the case of OurSpace platform," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(2), pages 599-615, December.
    12. Nuno Boavida, 2011. "Decision making processes based on innovation indicators: which implications for technology assessment?," Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, vol. 7(7), pages 33-55, November.
    13. Ferreira, Paulo Jorge Silveira & Dionísio, Andreia Teixeira Marques, 2016. "What are the conditions for good innovation results? A fuzzy-set approach for European Union," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5396-5400.
    14. Aikaterini Zerva & Evangelos Grigoroudis & Evangelia Karasmanaki & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2021. "Multiple criteria analysis of citizens’ information and trust in climate change actions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7706-7727, May.
    15. Carayannis, Elias G. & Goletsis, Yorgos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2018. "Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 4-17.
    16. Proksch, Dorian & Haberstroh, Marcus Max & Pinkwart, Andreas, 2017. "Increasing the national innovative capacity: Identifying the pathways to success using a comparative method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 256-270.
    17. Nuno Boavida, 2011. "How composite indicators of innovation can influence technology policy decision?," IET Working Papers Series 03/2011, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology.
    18. Tiiu PAAS & Helen POLTIMÄE, 2012. "Consistency between innovation indicators and national innovation performance in the case of small economies," Eastern Journal of European Studies, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 3, pages 101-121, June.
    19. Bérangère Gosse & Christian Hurson, 2016. "Assessment and improvement of employee job-satisfaction: a full-scale implementation of MUSA methodology on newly recruited personnel in a major French organisation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(2), pages 657-675, December.
    20. Lee, Sangwon & Nam, Yoonjae & Lee, Seonmi & Son, Hyunjung, 2016. "Determinants of ICT innovations: A cross-country empirical study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 71-77.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; Competitiveness; Productivity; Metrics; Multi-objective mathematical programming; Contour maps; Gap analysis; M13; M31; 031; 032;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    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:kap:jtecht:v:39:y:2014:i:2:p:199-218. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.