IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/abw/journl/y2022id978.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Key Indicators Of Innovation Performance: Perception Of Significance And Practical Application

Author

Listed:
  • A. V. Trachuk
  • N. V. Linder

Abstract

This paper is devoted to the study of the correlation between the perceived significance of indicators of innovation activity and their actual use at enterprises of the Russian manufacturing industry. A sample of 132 manufacturing enterprises in Russia was used for the analysis. It was found that the recognition of the significance and the actual use of financial and non-financial indicators varies significantly depending on the affiliation of companies to a particular innovation regime: radical innovators, technological innovators, effective producers, creators of value innovations and imitators. Three key performance indicators (KPIs) reflecting the company's focus on the introduction of technological innovations (the share of modern equipment in the company's technology park (taking into account the technological features of industries); the average time to adapt the acquired innovative product, days; the share of implemented patents from the total number of patents received by the organization) were recognized as important managers of companies belonging to technological and radical innovators (74.5, 76.9, 78.1%, respectively). Three key performance indicators reflecting customer orientation (the number of new categories of products or services introduced in the reporting year; the share of products certified according to international standards in the total production of the company; the percentage of innovative expenditures on the modernization of existing products/processes/business models in relation to the total innovative expenditures on products/processes/business models) were recognized as important companies classified as effective producers and creators of value innovations (83.4, 81.9, 76.8%, respectively).But at the same time, the study showed that the most commonly used indicators are sales growth from new products (88.7%); the share of patents implemented (74.3%); total R&D expenses per 1 thousand dollars of revenue in the current reporting period (89.2%). In summary, conclusions are drawn about the actual application of key performance indicators of innovation activity by companies.

Suggested Citation

  • A. V. Trachuk & N. V. Linder, 2022. "Key Indicators Of Innovation Performance: Perception Of Significance And Practical Application," Strategic decisions and risk management, Real Economy Publishing House, vol. 12(4).
    • Handle: RePEc:abw:journl:y:2022:id:978
    DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2021-4-284-298
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/article/viewFile/978/921
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/article/viewFile/978/929
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17747/2618-947X-2021-4-284-298?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2005. "The Importance of R&D for Innovation: A Reassessment Using French Survey Data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 183-197, January.
    2. Rammer, Christian & Crass, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hud, Martin & Hünermund, Paul & Iferd, Younes & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Schubert, Torben, 2016. "Innovationsverhalten der deutschen Wirtschaft: Indikatorenbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2015," The Annual German Innovation Survey, Key Figures Reports 128149, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Coombs, R. & Narandren, P. & Richards, A., 1996. "A literature-based innovation output indicator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 403-413, May.
    4. Leiponen, Aija & Helfat, Constance E., 2006. "When Does Distributed Innovation Activity Make Sense? Location, Decentralization, and Innovation Success," Discussion Papers 1063, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    5. A. V. Trachuk & N. V. Linder, 2019. "Innovative Activity Of Industrial Enterprises: Measurement And Effectiveness Evaluation," Strategic decisions and risk management, Real Economy Publishing House, vol. 10(2).
    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. Beneito, Pilar, 2006. "The innovative performance of in-house and contracted R&D in terms of patents and utility models," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 502-517, May.
    2. García-Granero, Ana & Llopis, Óscar & Fernández-Mesa, Anabel & Alegre, Joaquín, 2015. "Unraveling the link between managerial risk-taking and innovation: The mediating role of a risk-taking climate," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1094-1104.
    3. Fedyunina, Anna & Radosevic, Slavo, 2022. "The relationship between R&D, innovation and productivity in emerging economies: CDM model and alternatives," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 46(3).
    4. Chen, Jiaqi & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2020. "Endogenous timing game with R&D decisions and output subsidies," MPRA Paper 99503, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Elena Huergo & Lourdes Moreno, 2011. "Does history matter for the relationship between R&D, innovation, and productivity?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(5), pages 1335-1368, October.
    6. Sandro Montresor & Antonio Vezzani, 2016. "Intangible investments and innovation propensity: Evidence from the Innobarometer 2013," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 331-352, May.
    7. Fadhila HAMZA & Anis JARBOUI, 2012. "Investor’s Commitment Bias and Escalation of Firm’s Investment Decision," Economia. Seria Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 15(2), pages 327-345, December.
    8. Marco Corsino & Giuseppe Espa & Rocco Micciolo, 2008. "R&D, Firm Size, and Product Innovation Dynamics," ROCK Working Papers 045, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 12 Jun 2008.
    9. Marco Corsino, 2008. "Product Innovation and Growth: The Case of Integrated Circuits," ROCK Working Papers 047, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 23 Jun 2008.
    10. Salvatore Farace & Fernanda Mazzotta, 2015. "The effect of human capital and networks on knowledge and innovation in SMEs," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 39-71.
    11. Ángela Vásquez-Urriago & Andrés Barge-Gil & Aurelia Rico & Evita Paraskevopoulou, 2014. "The impact of science and technology parks on firms’ product innovation: empirical evidence from Spain," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 835-873, September.
    12. Jean-Marie Dubois & Laurence Lizé & Patrick Rousset, 2020. "Du recrutement à la formation : le renouvellement des compétences au cœur de la politique des entreprises du numérique," Post-Print hal-03023479, HAL.
    13. Carmen Camelo & Mariluz Fernández‐Alles & Ana B. Hernández, 2010. "Strategic consensus, top management teams, and innovation performance," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(6), pages 678-695, September.
    14. Gombau, Verònica & Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 2011. "The Innovation and Imitation Dichotomy in Spanish firms: do absorptive capacity and the technological frontier matter?," Working Papers 2072/179666, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    15. Güngör Turan & Irma Gjana, 2015. "The Link Between Innovation Behaviors and Productivity Strategies of Enterprises in Albanian Economic Growth," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 1, September.
    16. Josef Taalbi, 2022. "Innovation with and without patents," Papers 2210.04102, arXiv.org.
    17. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    18. Nathan, Max & Rosso, Anna, 2022. "Innovative events: product launches, innovation and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    19. Cucculelli, Marco & Ermini, Barbara, 2012. "New product introduction and product tenure: What effects on firm growth?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 808-821.
    20. Lin, Eric S. & Lin, Chia-Ling & Lin, Hui-Lin & Hsiao, Yi-Chi, 2023. "Is downsizing a good strategy during the downturn? Evidence from Taiwanese manufacturing firms," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).

    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:abw:journl:y:2022:id:978. 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: ООО Ð˜Ð·Ð´Ð°Ñ‚ÐµÐ»ÑŒÑ ÐºÐ¸Ð¹ дом Â«Ð ÐµÐ°Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ð°Ñ Ñ ÐºÐ¾Ð½Ð¾Ð¼Ð¸ÐºÐ°Â» (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/about/journalSponsorship .

    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.