IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cauman/253.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Zur Messung des Innovationserfolgs: Revidierte Fassung eines Vortrags der 2nd TIM Conference of Technology Management, Hamburg, 10./11. Mai 1990

Author

Listed:
  • Hauschildt, Jürgen

Abstract

Empirische Untersuchungen zum Innovationsmanagement versuchen, den Einfluß unterschiedlicher Managementinstrumente auf den Erfolg der Innovation zu bestimmen. In dieser Studie werden 24 großzahlige Untersuchungen unter der Frage verglichen, wie der Innovationserfolg jeweils gemessen wurde. Der Befund: Von einer einheitlichen Meßkonvention ist die Forschung noch weit entfernt. Unterschiede finden sich hinsichtlich des Meßbereichs, der Meßdimensionen, der Meßzeitpunkte, der Referenzgrößen der Messung sowie des Meßsubjektes. Die Messungen werfen nicht nur erhebliche Reliabilitätsprobleme, sondern vor allem schwerwiegende Validitätsprobleme auf. Die Vielgestaltigkeit der Meßkonzepte läßt eine vergleichende Innovationsforschung streng genommen nicht zu. Ausgehend von dieser Analyse wird ein Vorschlag einer prozeßbegleitenden Erfolgsmessung skizziert.

Suggested Citation

  • Hauschildt, Jürgen, 1990. "Zur Messung des Innovationserfolgs: Revidierte Fassung eines Vortrags der 2nd TIM Conference of Technology Management, Hamburg, 10./11. Mai 1990," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 253, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cauman:253
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/161997/1/manuskript_253.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hans H. Glismann & Ernst-Jürgen Horn, 1988. "Comparative Invention Performance of Major Industrial Countries: Patterns and Explanations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(10), pages 1169-1187, October.
    2. Cordero, Rene, 1990. "The measurement of innovation performance in the firm: An overview," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 185-192, April.
    3. Marc H. Meyer & Edward B. Roberts, 1986. "New Product Strategy in Small Technology-Based Firms: A Pilot Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 806-821, July.
    4. Michael L. Tushman & Ralph Katz, 1980. "External Communication and Project Performance: An Investigation into the Role of Gatekeepers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(11), pages 1071-1085, November.
    5. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horlsey, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1974. "SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 258-291, November.
    6. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    7. Narin, Francis & Noma, Elliot & Perry, Ross, 1987. "Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 143-155, August.
    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. Miozzo, Marcela & Desyllas, Panos & Lee, Hsing-fen & Miles, Ian, 2016. "Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1337-1351.
    2. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    3. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    4. Nicolai J. Foss & Keld Laursen & Torben Pedersen, 2011. "Linking Customer Interaction and Innovation: The Mediating Role of New Organizational Practices," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 980-999, August.
    5. Joly, Pierre-Benoit & de Looze, Marie-Angele, 1996. "An analysis of innovation strategies and industrial differentiation through patent applications: the case of plant biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1027-1046, October.
    6. Masatoshi Kato & Koichiro Onishi & Yuji Honjo, 2022. "Does patenting always help new firm survival? Understanding heterogeneity among exit routes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 449-475, August.
    7. Ernst, Holger, 1998. "Industrial research as a source of important patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-15, May.
    8. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Yang, Hongyan & Steensma, H. Kevin, 2014. "When do firms rely on their knowledge spillover recipients for guidance in exploring unfamiliar knowledge?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1496-1507.
    10. Atul Nerkar & Srikanth Paruchuri, 2005. "Evolution of R&D Capabilities: The Role of Knowledge Networks Within a Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 771-785, May.
    11. Aija Leiponen, 2005. "Core complementarities of the corporation: organization of an innovating firm," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 351-365.
    12. Nelson, Andrew J., 2009. "Measuring knowledge spillovers: What patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 994-1005, July.
    13. 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.
    14. Maximilian A. Maier & Alexander Brem, 2018. "What innovation managers really do: a multiple-case investigation into the informal role profiles of innovation managers," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1055-1080, October.
    15. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Gino Cattani, 2005. "Preadaptation, Firm Heterogeneity, and Technological Performance: A Study on the Evolution of Fiber Optics, 1970–1995," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 563-580, December.
    17. K. Debackere & M. Luwel & Reinhilde Veugelers, 1999. "Can technology lead to a competitive advantage? A case study of Flanders using european patent data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 44(3), pages 379-400, March.
    18. Jörg Mahlich, 2010. "Patents and performance in the Japanese pharmaceutical industry: An institution-based view," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 99-113, March.
    19. Srikanth Paruchuri & Atul Nerkar & Donald C. Hambrick, 2006. "Acquisition Integration and Productivity Losses in the Technical Core: Disruption of Inventors in Acquired Companies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(5), pages 545-562, October.
    20. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.

    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:zbw:cauman:253. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ibkiede.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.