dissertation in pdf-format - Aalto-yliopisto

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4 Results, evaluation of the studies and concluding remarks 4.1 Summary of the results and conclusions In this section, the main results and conclusions presented in Articles I, II, III and IV are summarised, then the contributions (theoretical and practical) and limitations of the study are evaluated, and finally possible avenues for future research are suggested. The main research question addressed in Article I was: What factors affect innovation in growing SMEs? Five hypotheses were formulated and tested, based on the theoretical background and previous literature: that location, age, size, success and public R&D finance affect it. The results indicate that location, age and size of the firm do not statistically significantly differentiate innovative growing SMEs from non-innovative counterparts. These findings are consistent with previous conclusions that there is relatively little difference in the level of innovation and performance between SMEs in different areas (North and Smallbone, 2000), and that innovative output is not strongly related to either economies of scale (Kohn and Scott, 1982) or age of the firm (Huergo and Jaumandreu, 2004). The last of the cited studies showed that many mature firms seem to remain highly innovative and exhibit superb market performance. The results suggest that in a 3 – 5 year timeframe success may be negatively related to innovation and growth, in accordance with expectations that growing innovative SMEs may be subject to greater financial pressures than growing firms that do not produce IPRs (Bhide, 2000; Freel and Robson, 2004). The overall classification rate of innovative HGS SMEs improved when the variables location, size and age were excluded from LRA-analysis. The explanatory variables used in the best statistical model were success, public R&D funding and the turnover/employee ratio. Of these variables, the success index and public R&D funding had significant effects at the p 0.1 and p0.01 levels, respectively. The turnover/employee ratio was not statistically significant, but its inclusion improved the overall classification 48
4 Results, evaluation of the studies and concluding remarks rate. These results support the hypotheses that financial success and public R&D funding affect the innovation activity (as measured by the generation of IPRs) of growing SMEs. It was found that the lower the success, the greater the probability of a firm being classified as an innovative growth SME. This implies that innovative growing firms are probably less successful than non-innovative growing SMEs. The observed direction of the impact reflects the expected associations between innovation and high variance in short-term revenue and profitability (Bhide, 2000; Freel and Robson, 2004). The turnover/employee ratio correlated positively with innovation, indicating that high ratios are associated with innovative high growth SMEs. This is consistent with suggestions that rapidly growing businesses with high productivity tend to be more IPR intensive than other businesses (Coad and Rao, 2008). Public R&D funding was found to increase the odds of a firm being classified as a growing innovative firm, partly supporting the views of Santarelli and Piergiovanni (1996) that both private and public R&D expenditures are positively correlated with product innovation and the development of IPRs. However, the dependent variable also contains a growth element, and the relationships of the two variables with innovation cannot be separated. The purpose of Article II was to address the following questions. What factors are associated with simultaneous growth and success according to selected statistical procedures (RA, LRA and DA)? Are the concepts of growth and success surrogates? What problems are connected with different methods of analysing HG and HS SMEs? In the RA-analysis two independent regression models for growth and success were constructed. The former showed that age, branch of industry, growth in the number of personnel, innovativeness, location and profitability influenced the growth of the firms. In the regression equation the sign of age is negative but since the variable is logarithmic transformation the impact is positive. This means that older firms are growing faster. Both innovation and urban area location have positive influence on growth which presupposes better odds ratios for firms in urban area being innovative growing ventures. This is parallel with the assumptions of resource munificence and regional competitiveness theories (Almus, 2002; Covin and Slevin, 1998, Keeble, 1997; Ritsilä, 1999). Branch of industry dummy (other industries=0 and trade=1) and profitability factors have negative relationship with growth. This result proposes that firms within trade sector as well as ventures with higher profitability will have lower growth. Naturally the growth of the personnel is associated with higher growth of the turnover. The RA-model for success indicated that the number of auxiliary business names, branch of industry growth in the number of personnel and 49
Page 3 and 4:
Aalto University publication series
Page 5:
Author Tomi Heimonen Name of the do
Page 9 and 10: Acknowledgements This dissertation
Page 11 and 12: CONTENTS PART 1: Overview of the di
Page 13: List of Articles This thesis is bas
Page 16 and 17: 1 Introduction Some scholars claim
Page 18 and 19: 1 Introduction In addition, the dur
Page 20 and 21: 1 Introduction Figure 1: Framework
Page 22 and 23: 1 Introduction factors that affect
Page 24 and 25: 1 Introduction 1.4 Key concepts and
Page 26 and 27: 2 Literature review and conceptual
Page 46 and 47: 3 Research methodology Constructivi
Page 48 and 49: 3 Research methodology and the meth
Page 50 and 51: 3 Research methodology The data use
Page 52 and 53: 3 Research methodology 3.4 Models a
Page 54 and 55: 3 Research methodology reliable. Se
Page 56 and 57: 3 Research methodology concluded th
Page 60 and 61: 4 Results, evaluation of the studie
Page 70 and 71: References Abetti, P. A. (2001). Ac
Page 72 and 73: References Bhide, A. (2000). The or
Page 74 and 75: References Creswell, J. W. (2003).
Page 76 and 77: References Golafshani, N. (2003). U
Page 78 and 79: References Leitch, C., Hill, F., an
Page 80 and 81: References Pellikka, J. and Laurone
Page 82 and 83: References Storper, M. (1992). The
Page 84 and 85: Appendixes Overview: Appendix 1: Ke
Page 86 and 87: Appendixes High growth When examini
Page 88 and 89: Appendixes profitability, liquidity
Page 90 and 91: Appendixes Appendix 1 Continued (Ke
Page 92 and 93: Appendixes Appendix 2 Construction
Page 94 and 95: Appendixes Appendix 2 Continued (Co
Page 96 and 97: not increased compared to Eastern F
Page 98 and 99: ___________________________________
Page 100 and 101: propensity for risk taking (Covin a
Page 102 and 103: 2. Former studies and derivation of
Page 104 and 105: firm’s annual sales growth (Arund
Page 106 and 107: H4. Firm success has an impact on t
Page 108 and 109:
other branches in which employment
Page 110 and 111:
and Rao, 2008). Because of the unev
Page 112 and 113:
Table 1. Characteristics of the dat
Page 114 and 115:
firms from other firms. The data in
Page 116 and 117:
Table 2. Logistic Regression analys
Page 118 and 119:
Public R&D funding was shown to inc
Page 120 and 121:
References Achtenhagen, L., Naldi,
Page 122 and 123:
Kanter, R. (1985), “Supporting in
Page 124 and 125:
Appendix 1. Corporate population ch
Page 126 and 127:
Appendix 3. Distribution of personn
Page 128 and 129:
12 Int. J. Business and Globalisati
Page 130 and 131:
14 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen we u
Page 132 and 133:
16 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen suff
Page 134 and 135:
18 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Glan
Page 136 and 137:
20 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen 3.2.
Page 138 and 139:
22 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen diff
Page 140 and 141:
24 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen sepa
Page 142 and 143:
26 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Tabl
Page 144 and 145:
28 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen All
Page 146 and 147:
30 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen 5.2
Page 148 and 149:
32 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Tabl
Page 150 and 151:
34 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen The
Page 152 and 153:
36 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Davi
Page 154 and 155:
38 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Appe
Page 156 and 157:
40 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen 100
Page 158 and 159:
___________________________________
Page 160 and 161:
412 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen “
Page 162 and 163:
414 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen gro
Page 164 and 165:
416 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen 6 f
Page 166 and 167:
418 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen Fig
Page 168 and 169:
420 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen The
Page 170 and 171:
422 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen the
Page 172 and 173:
424 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen 4.6
Page 174 and 175:
426 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen exc
Page 176 and 177:
428 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen Dav
Page 178 and 179:
430 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen The
Page 180 and 181:
432 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen Cha
Page 182 and 183:
392 Int. J. Entrepreneurial Venturi
Page 184 and 185:
394 J. Siikonen et al. firms’ gro
Page 186 and 187:
396 J. Siikonen et al. generally re
Page 188 and 189:
398 J. Siikonen et al. determinants
Page 190 and 191:
400 J. Siikonen et al. 3.1 National
Page 192 and 193:
402 J. Siikonen et al. 2 the firm
Page 194 and 195:
404 J. Siikonen et al. 4 Results 4.
Page 196 and 197:
406 J. Siikonen et al. innovation a
Page 198 and 199:
408 J. Siikonen et al. the responde
Page 200 and 201:
410 J. Siikonen et al. activities i
Page 202 and 203:
412 J. Siikonen et al. Eastern Finl
Page 204 and 205:
414 J. Siikonen et al. Delmar, F.,
Page 206 and 207:
416 J. Siikonen et al. Oerlemans, L
Page 208 and 209:
418 J. Siikonen et al. Appendix 1 V
Page 211:
9HSTFMG*afacab+
show all

dissertation in pdf-format - Aalto-yliopisto

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?