Résumé
Purpose
This paper aims to provide evidence of the major role of non‐technological activities in the innovation process. It seeks to highlight the effects of marketing and organizational innovation strategies on technological innovation performance.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper tests theoretical hypotheses on a sample of 555 firms of the Fourth Community Innovation Survey (CIS 4) in 2006 in Luxembourg. Data are analyzed through a generalized Tobit model.
Findings
Evidence is found to support the impact of innovation in the marketing and organization fields on a firm's capacity to innovate, but not on the innovative performance. The paper also statistically shows that the effects of non‐technological innovation differ depending on the phase of the innovation process.
Research limitations/implications
The causal link and the question of time frame between the various innovations could be further investigated, especially through longitudinal studies. Further research should also focus on the differences between large versus small firms, and service versus industrial firms.
Practical implications
The effects of non‐technological innovation are not the same according to whether the firm is in the first step of the innovation process (i.e. being innovative), or in a later step (i.e. innovative performance). Managers should be aware of these various effects in order to efficiently adopt non‐technological innovation strategies.
Originality/value
Few works have taken into account the role of other innovative strategies such as marketing and organization. As far as is known, this is the first study based on recent CIS data that looks at the interrelations between different types of innovation.
This paper aims to provide evidence of the major role of non‐technological activities in the innovation process. It seeks to highlight the effects of marketing and organizational innovation strategies on technological innovation performance.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper tests theoretical hypotheses on a sample of 555 firms of the Fourth Community Innovation Survey (CIS 4) in 2006 in Luxembourg. Data are analyzed through a generalized Tobit model.
Findings
Evidence is found to support the impact of innovation in the marketing and organization fields on a firm's capacity to innovate, but not on the innovative performance. The paper also statistically shows that the effects of non‐technological innovation differ depending on the phase of the innovation process.
Research limitations/implications
The causal link and the question of time frame between the various innovations could be further investigated, especially through longitudinal studies. Further research should also focus on the differences between large versus small firms, and service versus industrial firms.
Practical implications
The effects of non‐technological innovation are not the same according to whether the firm is in the first step of the innovation process (i.e. being innovative), or in a later step (i.e. innovative performance). Managers should be aware of these various effects in order to efficiently adopt non‐technological innovation strategies.
Originality/value
Few works have taken into account the role of other innovative strategies such as marketing and organization. As far as is known, this is the first study based on recent CIS data that looks at the interrelations between different types of innovation.
| langue originale | Anglais |
|---|---|
| Pages (de - à) | 313-33 |
| Nombre de pages | 23 |
| journal | European Journal of Innovation Management |
| Volume | 13 |
| Numéro de publication | 3 |
| Les DOIs | |
| état | Publié - 3 août 2010 |
mots-clés
- innovation
- organisations
- organisational performance
- Luxembourg
- corporate strategy