IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/53man2016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of Employee Innovative Behavior: Do Foreign and Domestic Companies in Russia Differ?

Author

Listed:
  • A.S. Gogoleva

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • E.S. Balabanova

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Azer G. Efendiev

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

This paper investigates employees’ individual innovative behavior. Three main stages of innovative process – new ideas generation, their promotion and implementation – are examined. 623 Russian employees of domestic and foreign companies operating in Russia were surveyed. The results show high significance of individual determinants (status and self-assessment of professional competence), favorable organizational environment (managerial incentives) and types of decision-making for all three stages of innovative process. The authors’ main proposition that foreign companies demonstrate higher level of individual innovative activity was not confirmed but qualitative distinctions at all three stages of innovative process were revealed.

Suggested Citation

  • A.S. Gogoleva & E.S. Balabanova & Azer G. Efendiev, 2016. "Determinants of Employee Innovative Behavior: Do Foreign and Domestic Companies in Russia Differ?," HSE Working papers WP BRP 53/MAN/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:53man2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://wp.hse.ru/data/2016/11/28/1112777273/53MAN2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    2. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    3. Castellacci, Fulvio & Natera, Jose Miguel, 2013. "The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 579-594.
    4. Evgeny Yassin & Nadezhda Lebedeva, 2009. "Culture and Innovation: Approach to the Problem," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 3(2), pages 16-26.
    5. Igor Gurkov, 2011. "Innovative actions and innovation (in)capabilities of Russian industrial companies: a further extension of observations," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 507-516, May.
    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. Irena A. Esaulova, 2020. "Company innovative values differentiation in the context of personal mechanisms of employee proactivity and work types," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 11(2), pages 41-52, April.

    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. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Boschma, Ron, 2022. "Do scientific capabilities in specific domains matter for technological diversification in European regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    2. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Qiu, Shumin & Liu, Xielin & Gao, Taishan, 2017. "Do emerging countries prefer local knowledge or distant knowledge? Spillover effect of university collaborations on local firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1299-1311.
    4. Amable, Bruno & Ledezma, Ivan & Robin, Stéphane, 2016. "Product market regulation, innovation, and productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2087-2104.
    5. 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.
    6. Nicola Bellini & Jukka Teras & Hakan Ylinenpaa, 2012. "Science and Technology Parks in the Age of Open Innovation. The Finnish Case," Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, Niccolò Cusano University, issue 1 Innovat, pages 25-44.
    7. Francesco Aiello & Paola Cardamone & Valeria Pupo, 2019. "New evidence on the firm-university linkages in Europe. The role of meritocratic management practices," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 813-828, November.
    8. Titze, Mirko & Brachert, Matthias & Günther, Jutta & Schwartz, Michael, 2010. "Die Identifikation von Wissenschaftsräumen: Eine Konzeptstudie über methodische Ansätze sowie Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der empirischen Erfassung," IWH-Sonderhefte 5/2010, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    9. Guijie Zhang & Yuqiang Feng & Guang Yu & Luning Liu & Yanqiqi Hao, 2017. "Analyzing the time delay between scientific research and technology patents based on the citation distribution model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1287-1306, June.
    10. Ryan, Paul & Geoghegan, Will & Hilliard, Rachel, 2018. "The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 15-27.
    11. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    12. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    13. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Donato Iacobucci, 2014. "Designing and Implementing a Smart Specialisation Strategy at Regional Level: Some Open Questions," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1), pages 107-126.
    15. Leydesdorff, Loet & Fritsch, Michael, 2006. "Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a Triple Helix dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1538-1553, December.
    16. Roediger-Schluga, Thomas & Dachs, Bernhard, 2006. "Does technology affect network structure? - A quantitative analysis of collaborative research projects in two specific EU programmes," MERIT Working Papers 2006-041, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    17. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & van den Berg, Jesse & Koch, Joost & Hekkert, Marko P., 2015. "Smart innovation policy: How network position and project composition affect the diversity of an emerging technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1094-1107.
    18. Loet Leydesdorff & Martin Meyer, 2007. "The scientometrics of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations (Introduction to the topical issue)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 207-222, February.
    19. Faïz Gallouj & Antonello Zanfei, 2013. "Innovation in public services: Filling a gap in the literature," Post-Print halshs-01114107, HAL.
    20. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    innovative process; employee innovative behavior; innovative organizational environment.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:hig:wpaper:53man2016. 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: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.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.