IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/scn/mngsci/y2017i3p43-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Инновации и производительность: эмпирическое исследование факторов, препятствующих росту методом продольного анализа // Innovations and Productivity: the Empiric Study of Barriers to Advancement through Longitudinal Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • A. Trachuk V.

    (Financial University)

  • N. Linder V.

    (Financial University)

  • АРКАДИЙ Трачук ВЛАДИМИРОВИЧ

    (Финансовый университет)

  • НАТАЛИЯ Линдер ВЯЧЕСЛАВОВНА

    (Финансовый университет)

Abstract

The paper is devoted to the research of the factors interfering “Industries 4.0” innovations for the Russian companies of manufacturing industry. We analyze the influence of various barriers effects at each stage of an innovative cycle on company productivity as a productivity indicator of its activity. The empirical analysis is based on 678 manufacturing industry companies’ data from 2012 to 2016. We use the modified CDM model for the analysis, allowing estimating the investments dependence in researches and development (R&D) on productivity at each stage of an innovative cycle. This research Within this research two main levels of studying the influence of factors interfering productivity increase at the expense of innovations are emphasized: the level of creating the innovation and level of commercializing the innovation: contribution to development of the complex offer for the late majority, creation of an ecosystem of an innovation, after-sale support and focus on services, cooperation with consumers and partners at a stage of commercialization of innovations. Such an approach allowed us to carry out deeper analysis of the barriers interfering introduction of innovations and to analyze tools stimulating transition to the fourth industrial revolution. The received results have shown the following: 1) the barriers of innovative activity are various: at the level of creating the innovations the greatest negative effect spreads over the factors of insufficient liquidity, attraction complexity of investment resources for innovative activity financing, as well as the complexity of the commercialization, insufficient demand for innovative production and the lack of risk assessment procedures and return of investments, as for the stage of innovations commercialization the factors of experts shortcoming, capable to be engaged in innovative activity have the greatest value, a lack of experience of the heads in innovative projects implementation; 2) the assumption that the influence power of innovative activity barriers effects will be various in different sectors of manufacturing industry, is confirmed; 3) relations between innovation investments and productivity growth are not linear and have a steady positive interrelation only after a certain critical mass of investments in research and design and experimental works is reached; 4) the companies of low-technology branches have negative investments elasticity in innovations and productivity that is connected with the influence of unprofitability effect into investments innovations (appropriability effect), i. e. the additional investment profit is not really essential. Статья посвящена исследованию факторов, препятствующих инновациям «Индустрии 4.0» для российских компаний обрабатывающей промышленности. Мы анализируем влияние эффектов различных барьеров на каждой стадии инновационного цикла на производительность компании как показателя результативности ее деятельности. Эмпирический анализ основан на данных 678 компаний обрабатывающей промышленности с 2012 по 2016 г. Для анализа мы используем модифицированную модель CDM, позволяющую оценить зависимость вложений в исследования и разработки на производительность на каждом из этапов инновационного цикла. В рамках данного исследования выделяются два основных уровня изучения влияния факторов, препятствующих повышению производительности за счет инноваций: уровень создания инновации и уровень коммерциализации инновации. Такой подход позволил нам провести более глубокий анализ барьеров, препятствующих внедрению инноваций, и проанализировать инструменты, стимулирующие переход к четвертой промышленной революции. Полученные результаты показали: 1) барьеры инновационной активности различны: на уровне создания инноваций наибольший отрицательный эффект имеют факторы недостаточной ликвидности, сложности привлечения инвестиционных ресурсов для финансирования инновационной деятельности, а также сложности коммерциализации, недостаточный спрос на инновационную продукцию и отсутствие процедур оценки риска и возврата инвестиции, а для этапа коммерциализации инноваций наибольшее значение имеют факторы недостатка специалистов, способных заниматься инновационной деятельностью, недостатка опыта руководителей в реализации инновационных проектов; 2) предположение о том, что сила влияния эффектов барьеров инновационной активности будет различна в разных секторах обрабатывающей промышленности, подтверждено; 3) отношения между вложениями в инновации и ростом производительности не линейны и имеют устойчивую положительную взаимосвязь только после того, как достигнута определенная критическая масса вложений в научно-исследовательские и опытно-конструкторские работы; 4) компании низкотехнологичных отраслей имеют отрицательную эластичность вложений в инновации и производительность, что связано с влиянием эффекта нерентабельности инвестиций в инновации (appropriability effect), т. е. дополнительная прибыль от инвестирования не очень существенна.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Trachuk V. & N. Linder V. & АРКАДИЙ Трачук ВЛАДИМИРОВИЧ & НАТАЛИЯ Линдер ВЯЧЕСЛАВОВНА, 2017. "Инновации и производительность: эмпирическое исследование факторов, препятствующих росту методом продольного анализа // Innovations and Productivity: the Empiric Study of Barriers to Advancement throu," Управленческие науки // Management Science, ФГОБУВО Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации // Financial University under The Government of Russian Federation, vol. 7(3), pages 43-58.
  • Handle: RePEc:scn:mngsci:y:2017:i:3:p:43-58
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://managementscience.fa.ru/jour/article/viewFile/115/116.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    2. Pierre Mohnen & Bronwyn Hall, 2013. "Innovation and Productivity: An Update," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 47-65, June.
    3. Tatyana Kuznetzova & Vitaly Roud, 2011. "Efficiency Factors and Motivations Driving Innovative Activity of Russian Industrial Enterprises," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 5(2), pages 34-47.
    4. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    5. Savona, Maria & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2013. "Service output, innovation and productivity: A time-based conceptual framework," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 118-132.
    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. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2014. "Innovation and Productivity in Services: Evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2014-04, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2018. "Internationalisation, innovation and productivity in services: evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(3), pages 585-615, August.
    3. Morris, Diego M., 2018. "Innovation and productivity among heterogeneous firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1918-1932.
    4. Emanuela Carbonara & Giuseppina Gianfreda & Enrico Santarelli & Giovanna Vallanti, 2021. "The impact of intellectual property rights on labor productivity: do constitutions matter? [Research and development in the growth process]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(4), pages 884-904.
    5. Teimuraz Gogokhia & George Berulava, 2021. "Business environment reforms, innovation and firm productivity in transition economies," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(2), pages 221-245, June.
    6. Jaan Masso & Amaresh K Tiwari, 2021. "Productivity Implications Of R&D, Innovation And Capital Accumulation For Incumbents And Entrants: The Case Of Estonia," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 130, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    7. Dawid, Herbert & Pellegrino, Gabriele & Vivarelli, Marco, 2017. "Is the demand-pull driver equally crucial for product vs process innovation?," MERIT Working Papers 2017-035, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Klaus Friesenbichler & Michael Peneder, 2016. "Innovation, competition and productivity," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 24(3), pages 535-580, July.
    9. Başak Dalgıç & Burcu Fazlıoğlu, 2021. "Innovation and firm growth: Turkish manufacturing and services SMEs," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(3), pages 395-419, September.
    10. Spyros Arvanitis & Euripidis N. Loukis, 2014. "Investigating the effects of ICT on innovation and performance of European hospitals," KOF Working papers 14-366, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    11. Baumann, Julian & Kritikos, Alexander S., 2016. "The link between R&D, innovation and productivity: Are micro firms different?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1263-1274.
    12. Wadho, Waqar & Chaudhry, Azam, 2020. "Innovation Strategies and Productivity Growth in Developing Countries: Evidence from Pakistan," GLO Discussion Paper Series 466, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    13. Eric J. Bartelsman & Martin Falk & Eva Hagsten & Michael Polder, 2019. "Productivity, technological innovations and broadband connectivity: firm-level evidence for ten European countries," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(1), pages 25-48, March.
    14. Bettina Peters & Mark J. Roberts & Van Anh Vuong, 2017. "Dynamic R&D choice and the impact of the firm's financial strength," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 134-149, February.
    15. Costa-Campi, M.T. & Duch-Brown, N. & García-Quevedo, J., 2014. "R&D drivers and obstacles to innovation in the energy industry," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 20-30.
    16. Ugur, Mehment & Vivarelli, Marco, 2020. "The role of innovation in industrial dynamics and productivity growth: a survey of the literature," GLO Discussion Paper Series 648, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    17. Davide Castellani & Mariacristina Piva & Torben Schubert & Marco Vivarelli, 2018. "The source of the US /EU Productivity Gap:Less and less effective R&D," LEM Papers Series 2018/16, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Max Nathan & Anna Rosso, 2017. "Innovative events," Development Working Papers 429, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano, revised 08 Apr 2019.
    19. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel & Romero, Carlos, 2015. "Linking public support, R&D, innovation and productivity: New evidence from the Spanish food industry," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 50-61.
    20. Eleonora Bartoloni & Maurizio Baussola, 2018. "Driving business performance: innovation complementarities and persistence patterns," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(5), pages 505-525, May.

    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:scn:mngsci:y:2017:i:3:p:43-58. 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: Алексей Скалабан (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://managementscience.elpub.ru .

    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.