Decoupling management and technological innovations: Resolving the individualism-collectivism controversy

This study aims to resolve the contradictory previous research findings on the relationship between individualism–collectivism and innovation. We draw on innovation theory and relate to the difference between non-technological (management) and technological innovation types as well as to the distinction between exploration and exploitation (invention and commercialization of technological innovations). Using Community Innovation Survey (CIS) 2006 micro data for innovation at the organizational level in 13 countries – along with Hofstede (1980, 2001), GLOBE (2005), and Schwartz (2006) scores for individualism–collectivism – we apply Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM). The results indicate that individualism is positively related to the invention phase, whereas collectivism is beneficial for the commercialization of innovative ideas. Furthermore, in collectivistic cultures, management innovation plays a more important stimulating role in enhancing technological innovation than it does in individualistic ones. This provides the managers with an idea of when innovation processes in their companies would be more favorable versus detrimental

Stylised facts about Slovenian high-growth firms

The paper analyses high-growth firms in Slovenia over two three-year periods: 2007-2010 and 2011-2014. The analysis has been carried out for four stylised facts on high-growth firms established in the literature: (1) growth-rate distributions are heavy-tailed; (2) different growth indicators select different high-growth firms; (3) a small share of high-growth firms generates a large share of jobs; and (4) high-growth firms are not more common in high-tech industries. The results find the growth-rate distributions to be heavy-tailed, but also somewhat asymmetric and thicker than the Laplace tails. The paper shows that different indicators indeed select different high-growth firms, which is especially evident when comparing employment- and revenue-based selected firms. Furthermore, Slovenia has a smaller share of high-growth firms compared to more developed countries like the United Kingdom and Sweden; however, this smaller share of firms does contribute to a large share of jobs created, but the effect is not as large as in more developed countries. The analysis also confirms the significant effect of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises on overall job creation. Finally, only a small portion of high-growth firms can be found in high-tech sectors in Slovenia

National innovation policies in the EU: A fuzzy- set analysis

This paper argues that innovation policy research can benefit from utilizing new research methods as they might lead to different policy recommendations. It demonstrates this by using a set-theoretic fsQCA method to analyse the data on innovation policies in the European Union (EU). It shows that the use of correlation-based statistical methods is not appropriate for the evaluation of innovation policies due to their causally complex nature that correlational statistical methods cannot unravel. This paper demonstrates this by focusing on the special importance of linkages among actors and innovation commercialisation through entrepreneurship and the notion that they represent a necessary condition for innovation success. Results confirm that the single factor of Linkages & entrepreneurship is the necessary condition for innovation success, thus emphasizing the importance of an open innovation framework for innovation policy-making. Results also show three combinations of sufficient conditions (but no single factor) lead to innovation success. They confirm the causal complexity of innovation policy and confirm that using different research methods will lead to different policy recommendation

Decoupling management and technological innovations: Resolving the individualism-collectivism controversy

This is the authors' final and accepted version of the article, post refereeing. Publisher's version is available at www.sciencedirect.comThis study aims to resolve the contradictory previous research findings on the relationship between individualism–collectivism and innovation. We draw on innovation theory and relate to the difference between non-technological (management) and technological innovation types as well as to the distinction between exploration and exploitation (invention and commercialization of technological innovations). Using Community Innovation Survey (CIS) 2006 micro data for innovation at the organizational level in 13 countries – along with Hofstede (1980, 2001), GLOBE (2005), and Schwartz (2006) scores for individualism–collectivism – we apply Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM). The results indicate that individualism is positively related to the invention phase, whereas collectivism is beneficial for the commercialization of innovative ideas. Furthermore, in collectivistic cultures, management innovation plays a more important stimulating role in enhancing technological innovation than it does in individualistic ones. This provides the managers with an idea of when innovation processes in their companies would be more favorable versus detrimental