IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iae/iaewps/wp2003n05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Firms' Decisions to Innovate and Innovation Routines

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Webster

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

This paper investigates the forces that lead some firms to engage in more innovative activities than others using a survey of 360 large Australian firms. Many earlier studies on the determinants of innovation followed the Schumpeterian tradition, and focused on size and market structure as possible causes of innovativeness, however with the event of new qualitative measures of industry knowledge and managerial styles, these factors have been found to be less important. The results of the present study show that external factors and generic routines common to all industries, such as the extent of learning, knowledge spillovers, appropriability and managerial approach are more important than industry specific forces. Foreign owned companies were also found to be more innovative, other things considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Webster, 2003. "Firms' Decisions to Innovate and Innovation Routines," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2003n05, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    • Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2003n05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2003n05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suma Athreye, 2001. "Competition, Rivalry And Innovative Behaviour," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21.
    2. Alfred Kleinknecht, 1996. "New Indicators and Determinants of Innovation: An Introduction," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht (ed.), Determinants of Innovation, chapter 1, pages 1-11, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Isabelle Kabla, 1996. "Schumpeterian Conjectures: A Moderate Support from Various Innovation Measures," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht (ed.), Determinants of Innovation, chapter 3, pages 63-98, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Spyros Arvanitis, 2008. "Explaining Innovative Activity In Service Industries: Micro Data Evidence For Switzerland," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 209-225.
    5. Erik Brouwer & Alfred Kleinknecht, 1996. "Determinants of Innovation: A Microeconometric Analysis of Three Alternative Innovation Output Indicators," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht (ed.), Determinants of Innovation, chapter 4, pages 99-124, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Galende, Jesus & de la Fuente, Juan Manuel, 2003. "Internal factors determining a firm's innovative behaviour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 715-736, May.
    7. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo & Andrea Bassanini & Marco Valente, 2000. "Norms as Emergent Properties of Adaptive Learning: The Case of Economic Routines," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 6, pages 189-210, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Spyros Arvanitis & Heinz Hollenstein, 1996. "Industrial Innovation in Switzerland: A Model-based Analysis with Survey Data," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht (ed.), Determinants of Innovation, chapter 2, pages 13-62, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. J. M. Keynes, 1937. "The General Theory of Employment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 51(2), pages 209-223.
    10. Spyros Arvanitis & Heinz Hollenstein, 2002. "The Impact of Spillovers and Knowledge Heterogeneity on Firm Performance: Evidence from Swiss Manufacturing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 10, pages 225-252, Palgrave Macmillan.
    11. Sidney Winter & Yuri Kaniovski & Giovanni Dosi, 2003. "A baseline model of industry evolution," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 355-383, October.
    12. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 1999. "Evolution and Institutions," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1481.
    13. 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.
    14. Geroski, P A & Walters, C F, 1995. "Innovative Activity over the Business Cycle," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(431), pages 916-928, July.
    15. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Slevin, Dennis P. & Heeley, Michael B., 2001. "Strategic decision making in an intuitive vs. technocratic mode: structural and environmental considerations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 51-67, April.
    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. DeVaro, Jed & Farnham, Martin, 2011. "Two perspectives on multiskilling and product-market volatility," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 862-871.
    2. Francesco Quatraro, 2009. "Diffusion of Regional Innovation Capabilities: Evidence from Italian Patent Data," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(10), pages 1333-1348, December.
    3. Xhavit Ajvaz Islami & Enis Shaban Mulolli & Naim Mustafa, 2018. "The Sensitivity of the Effect of on-the-Job Training on Employment Outcomes in Experimental and Non-Experimental Settings," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 14(5), pages 154-166, OCTOBER.
    4. Andrea Nagy & Carmen Mihaela Băbăiță, 2017. "Orientation Towards Innovation, Participative Decision-Making And Performance In Romanian Hotels," Revista de turism - studii si cercetari in turism / Journal of tourism - studies and research in tourism, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 24(24), pages 1-9, December.
    5. Burcu Fazlıoğlu & Başak Dalgıç & Ahmet Burçin Yereli, 2019. "The effect of innovation on productivity: evidence from Turkish manufacturing firms," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 439-460, April.
    6. Liliana Araújo & Sandra T. Silva & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2013. "Knowledge spillovers and economic performance of firms located in depressed areas: does geographical proximity matter?," FEP Working Papers 488, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    7. Barros, Henrique M., 2011. "The Effects of Innovation Partnership, Foreign Ownership and Enhanced Management Practices on the Use of Patents in Brazilian Manufacturing," Insper Working Papers wpe_255, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    8. Cristina Fernandes & João Ferreira & Carla Marques, 2015. "Innovation management capabilities in rural and urban knowledge intensive business services: empirical evidence," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 9(2), pages 233-256, June.
    9. Samandar Ali Eshtehardi, Mojgan & Bagheri, Seyed Kamran & Di Minin, Alberto, 2017. "Regional innovative behavior: Evidence from Iran," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 128-138.
    10. Laurie Hunter & Elizabeth Webster & Anne Wyatt, 2005. "Measuring Intangible Capital: A Review of Current Practice," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 15(36), pages 4-21, July.
    11. Vega-Jurado, Jaider & Gutiérrez-Gracia, Antonio & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio & Manjarrés-Henri­quez, Liney, 2008. "The effect of external and internal factors on firms' product innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 616-632, May.
    12. Chatterjee, Sidharta, 2015. "Teleological Dynamics of Organizational Performance: From Process to Practice and Performance," MPRA Paper 68530, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Juergensen, Jill Josefina & Narula, Rajneesh & Surdu, Irina, 2022. "A systematic review of the relationship between international diversification and innovation: A firm-level perspective," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(2).
    14. Meyer, Jenny, 2008. "The Adoption of New Technologies and the Age Structure of the Workforce," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-045, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. Spyros Arvanitis & Juliette von Arx, 2004. "Bestimmungsfaktoren der Innovationstätigkeit und deren Einfluss auf Arbeitsproduktivität, Beschäftigung und Qualifikationsstruktur," KOF Working papers 04-91, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    2. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "Examining Biases in Measures of Firm Innovation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    3. Gurkov, Igor, 2013. "Why some Russian industrial companies innovate regularly: Determinants of firms’ decisions to innovate and associated routines," Journal of East European Management Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 18(1), pages 66-96.
    4. William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "The Determinants of Research and Development and Intellectual Property Usage among Australian Companies, 1989 to 2002," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n27, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    5. 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.
    6. David Dequech, 2008. "Varieties of uncertainty: a survey of the economic literature," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807211223070, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    7. Nanditha Mathew & George Paily, 2022. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 435-458, April.
    8. 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).
    9. S .G. Winter & Y. M. Kaniovski, 2000. "Modeling Industrial Dynamics with Innovative Entrants," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 16, pages 459-500, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Taalbi, Josef, 2017. "What drives innovation? Evidence from economic history," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1437-1453.
    11. Anker Lund Vinding, 2006. "Absorptive capacity and innovative performance: A human capital approach," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 507-517.
    12. Bastian Rake, 2017. "Determinants of pharmaceutical innovation: the role of technological opportunities revisited," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 691-727, September.
    13. Faber, Jan & Hesen, Anneloes Barbara, 2004. "Innovation capabilities of European nations: Cross-national analyses of patents and sales of product innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 193-207, March.
    14. William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2009. "What Governs Firm-Level R&D: Internal or External Factors?," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2009n13, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    15. Ortega-Argilés , Raquel & Moreno, Rosina, 2009. "Evidence on the role of ownership structure on firms’ innovative performance," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 15, pages 231-250.
    16. Jurgen Essletzbichler & David Rigby, 2005. "Technological evolution as creative destruction of process heterogeneity: evidence from US plant-level data," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 25-45.
    17. Albert Amankwaa & Pattanee Susomrith & Pi-Shen Seet, 2022. "Innovative behavior among service workers and the importance of leadership: evidence from an emerging economy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 506-530, April.
    18. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2009. "Macroeconomic Conditions and Successful Commercialization," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2009n09, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    19. Juan Máñez & María Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis-Llopis & Juan Sanchis-Llopis, 2015. "The determinants of R&D persistence in SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 505-528, March.
    20. José García-Quevedo & Gabriele Pellegrino & Maria Savona, 2017. "Reviving demand-pull perspectives: The effect of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on R&D strategy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 41(4), pages 1087-1122.

    More about this item

    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:iae:iaewps:wp2003n05. 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: Sheri Carnegie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.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.