Competing in the Global Economy – The Innovation Challenge

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fig 39. Percentage of innovators with innovation co-operation agreement on technological innovation activities with other enterprises or institutions, manufacturing, 1996 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Fig 40. Percentage of innovators with some co-operation agreement on technological innovation activities with other enterprises or institutions, services, 1996 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 In key areas linked to innovation, such as supplier and customer engagement, the UK performs strongly. Data shows, for example, that UK firms appear to place less emphasis on sources of knowledge within their own enterprise and are more likely to collaborate with clients or customers or suppliers compared to their EU counterparts. 45 71 Finland 66 Denmark 59 Sweden Source: CIS 1994-1996. 61 60 Norway Source: CIS 1994-1996. 57 Denmark Finland 49 Norway 48 Sweden 36 35 Ireland 46 45 Luxembourg France Belgium 32 32 Belgium 35 France UK 28 28 Netherlands 29 29 Netherlands UK Luxembourg 24 23 23 EU 15 27 EU 15 Ireland Portugal 24 23 Germany Austria 18 17 Austria Germany 21 20 Spain Portugal 0 0 Spain 11 Italy Italy
Sources of information for innovation, proportion of innovators quoting sources as very important Manufacturing Services UK EU average UK EU average Sources within the enterprises 43 47 38 52 Other enterprises within the enterprise group 19 25 29 39 Competitors 17 16 20 19 Clients or customers 54 42 65 38 Consultancy enterprises 2 5 10 11 Suppliers of equipment; material; 23 19 27 18 components or software Universities or other higher education institutes 4 4 4 5 Source: Second Community Innovation Survey 1994–1996 According to the AIM review, network relationships can be intermittent and driven by short-term decision making which possibly undermines the stable relationships required for innovation. However, the latest data show that UK enterprises do cooperate with others on innovation projects particularly up and down the supply chain. Innovation Partnerships Per cent of enterprises with cooperation arrangements Region Type of Partner Local National Europe US Other Other enterprises within 14 17 14 12 6 the enterprise group Suppliers 14 37 16 9 5 Clients or customers 14 37 15 10 5 Competitors 7 12 5 10 2 Consultants 11 19 2 3 1 Commercial laboratories/R&D enterprises 5 11 4 4 0 Universities/higher education institutes 15 19 6 2 1 Government research organisations 5 9 3 1 1 Private research institutes 3 8 2 2 0 Source: CIS 1998-2000 The AIM review also indicated that the network infrastructure in the UK, whilst it operates adequately, has limited impact in promoting innovation because of insufficient scale. There are also large differences between regions in the scale and effectiveness of their network infrastructure. 46
Page 1 and 2:
DTI ECONOMICS PAPER NO. 7 Competing
Page 3 and 4: Foreword The recent DTI strategy sh
Page 5 and 6: Key factors determining UK innovati
Page 7 and 8: Challenges facing the UK • The op
Page 9 and 10: Contents Introduction..............
Page 11 and 12: Part I: Innovation and productivity
Page 13 and 14: Relatively weaker performance has l
Page 15 and 16: UK owned establishments. And simila
Page 17 and 18: Growth accounting studies 8 have be
Page 19 and 20: Community Innovation Survey The Com
Page 21 and 22: Fig 13. Output measures of UK innov
Page 23 and 24: Fig 16. Share of foreign affiliates
Page 25 and 26: Analysis 25 of patents and other IP
Page 27 and 28: Fig 22. The barriers to lean manufa
Page 29 and 30: • Institutional economics which s
Page 31 and 32: The mapping of the ‘national inno
Page 33 and 34: The UK has for a number of years la
Page 35 and 36: Fig 25. Share of total S & T gradua
Page 37 and 38: • Furthermore, employees77 feel t
Page 39 and 40: Fig 28. Summary indicators of the s
Page 41 and 42: Fig 30. Proportion of enterprises t
Page 43 and 44: But firms appear to base their deci
Page 45 and 46: There is usually no simple way of d
Page 47 and 48: However if the economic models that
Page 49 and 50: Turning to the demand for finance,
Page 51 and 52: Despite lower levels of funding com
Page 53: Investments in design can help busi
Page 57 and 58: Fig 42. Services value added as % o
Page 59 and 60: Fig 45. Imports of goods in high-te
Page 61 and 62: Fig 47. Share of labour force who h
Page 63 and 64: Increasing internationalisation Inn
Page 65 and 66: As a result of lock in, and the fac
Page 67 and 68: Illustrative classification of serv
Page 69 and 70: Company Manufactured Service Final
Page 71 and 72: Industry benefits from access to th
Page 73 and 74: technologies developed in new appli
Page 75 and 76: • Procures goods and services wor
Page 77 and 78: Annex B: Private and Social returns
Page 79 and 80: On balance it is likely that nation
Page 81 and 82: Fig 53. Business R&D spend per head
Page 83 and 84: Fig 56. Novel process innovation by
Page 85 and 86: Fig 59. Region of enterprises findi
Page 87 and 88: Some authors have lamented the rela
Page 89 and 90: A number of schemes, in particular
Page 91 and 92: • Faraday partnerships aim to add
Page 93 and 94: References Aghion, P. and Howitt, P
Page 95 and 96: Council for Excellence in Managemen
Page 97 and 98: HM Treasury, Small Business Service
Page 99 and 100: OECD, Technology, Productivity and
Page 101: Tamkin, P., Hillage, J. and Williso
show all

Competing in the Global Economy – The Innovation Challenge

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?