IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csc/cerisp/200706.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Heterogeneity of innovation strategies and firms’ performance

Author

Abstract

This work deals with two main issues: first, the possibility of identifying differences in firm economic returns (operating profit margins) for different groups of innovation strategy and second, the possibility of checking for factors explaining the probability of being within the best performers for each group of innovation strategy. It is an empirically based analysis using descriptive statistics (first part) and a probit econometric analysis (second part) where data are collected at firm level from two CIS surveys matched with economic accountability data for 902 Italian manufacturing firms for the period 1998-2000. The distribution analysis of profit margins by different populations of firms shows a better economic performance for groups characterized by more complex innovation strategies. Unexpectedly, the risk associated to economic returns is lower for groups where returns’ mean is higher. In this case skewness is higher too suggesting that reaching “excellence” is more difficult. The probit regressions account for the role played by different (market and firm) factors on the probability of being the best positioned for each firm population. This work gives two main messages: first, when studying the impact of R&D activity (both on firm productivity or competitiveness) it is worth to distinguish among different kinds of innovation strategy rather than limiting the analysis to aggregated results and second, it appears quite clear that competition awards more complex innovation strategies than simple R&D intra-muros activity.

Suggested Citation

  • Bianca Potì & Giovanni Cerulli, 2007. "Heterogeneity of innovation strategies and firms’ performance," CERIS Working Paper 200706, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
  • Handle: RePEc:csc:cerisp:200706
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.byterfly.eu/islandora/object/librib:352106
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Newey, Whitney K., 1987. "Efficient estimation of limited dependent variable models with endogenous explanatory variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 231-250, November.
    2. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    3. Jacques Mairesse & Mohamed Sassenou, 1991. "R&D Productivity: A Survey of Econometric Studies at the Firm Level," NBER Working Papers 3666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Rivers, Douglas & Vuong, Quang H., 1988. "Limited information estimators and exogeneity tests for simultaneous probit models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 347-366, November.
    5. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2002. "Accounting for Innovation and Measuring Innovativeness: An Illustrative Framework and an Application," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 226-230, May.
    6. Orietta Marsili & Ammon Salter, 2005. "'Inequality' of innovation: skewed distributions and the returns to innovation in Dutch manufacturing," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 83-102.
    7. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:19 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. F. M. Scherer, 1998. "The Size Distribution of Profits from Innovation," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 495-516.
    10. Elena Cefis & Matteo Ciccarelli, 2005. "Profit differentials and innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 43-61.
    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. Cerina, Fabio & Mureddu, Francesco, 2014. "Is agglomeration really good for growth? Global efficiency, interregional equity and uneven growth," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 9-22.

    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. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    2. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    3. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2015. "Crossing the innovation threshold through mergers and acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 698-710.
    4. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    5. Mickey Folkeringa & Andre van Stel & Joris Meijaard, 2005. "Innovation, strategic renewal and its effect on small firm performance," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-36, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    6. Ebersberger, Bernd & Marsili, Orietta & Reichstein, Toke & Salter, Ammon, 2008. "Fortune favours the brave: The distribution of innovative returns in Finland, the Netherlands and the UK," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 357-362, December.
    7. Bogliacino, Francesco & Pianta, Mario, 2011. "Engines of growth. Innovation and productivity in industry groups," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 41-53, February.
    8. Fontana, Roberto & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2016. "Technological leadership and persistence in product innovation in the Local Area Network industry 1990–1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1604-1619.
    9. Fan, Shuangrui & Wang, Cong, 2021. "Firm age, ultimate ownership, and R&D investments," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1245-1264.
    10. 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.
    11. Richard Harris & John Moffat, 2011. "R&D, Innovation and Exporting," SERC Discussion Papers 0073, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    12. Francesco Bogliacino & Marco Vivarelli, 2012. "The Job Creation Effect Of R&D Expenditures," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 96-113, June.
    13. H. T. Tran & E. Santarelli, 2013. "Determinants and Effects of Innovative Activities in Vietnam. A Firm-level Analysis," Working Papers wp909, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    14. Kano, Kazuko & Kano, Takashi & Takechi, Kazutaka, 2013. "Exaggerated death of distance: Revisiting distance effects on regional price dispersions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 403-413.
    15. Roper, Stephen & Hewitt-Dundas, Nola & Love, James H., 2004. "An ex ante evaluation framework for the regional benefits of publicly supported R&D projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 487-509, April.
    16. 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).
    17. Criscuolo, Chiara & Mariagrazia, Squicciarini & Olavi, Lehtoranta, 2010. "R&D, innovation and productivity, and the CIS: sampling, specification and comparability issues," MPRA Paper 39261, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Jean-Paul Azam & Kartika Bhatia, 2017. "Provoking insurgency in a federal state: theory and application to India," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 183-210, March.
    19. Jarke-Neuert, Johannes & Perino, Grischa & Schwickert, Henrike, 2021. "Free-Riding for Future: Field Experimental Evidence of Strategic Substitutability in Climate Protest," SocArXiv sh6dm, Center for Open Science.
    20. Anna Piil Damm, 2009. "Ethnic Enclaves and Immigrant Labor Market Outcomes: Quasi-Experimental Evidence," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 281-314, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    profitability; strategic heterogeneity; R&D and innovation; probit regression;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L60 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - General
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:csc:cerisp:200706. 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 Perin or Giancarlo Birello (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cerisit.html .

    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.