IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i20p11352-d656059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Policy Perceptions and Entrepreneurs’ Preferences in Firms’ Response to Industry 4.0: The Case of Chinese Firms

Author

Listed:
  • Chenguang Li

    (School of Economics and Management, North China University of Technology, Beijing 100144, China)

  • Zhenjun Qiu

    (School of Economics and Management, North China University of Technology, Beijing 100144, China)

  • Tao Fu

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100122, China)

Abstract

Favorable policy implementation results are due not only to policy makers’ abilities but also to the behavior of those responding to the policies. For example, a CEO’s understanding of a government policy’s content and his or her willingness to respond to it, based on the expectation of profits, plays a vital role. To understand the relationship between how policies are perceived and how enterprises behave in response to innovation policies in the era of the 4th Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0), in this study, we use structural equation modeling to investigate the roles of various factors and examine the response mechanisms in enterprises through which entrepreneurs react to Industry 4.0 innovation policies. The hypothesized model is validated empirically using a sample collected from 337 domestic Chinese high-tech firms. The modeling results indicate that positive perceptions of policies have a positive effect on entrepreneurs’ preferences which, in turn, motivate positive behavior toward innovation. Moreover, testing the model showed partial and complete mediation effects, indicating that the perceived practicability of a policy is a factor with a strong impact on response behavior that sometimes exerts its influence by altering the mediator of entrepreneurs’ responsive preferences. The empirical results and management implications of this study can serve as a reference for the effective implementation of and response to government development plans.

Suggested Citation

  • Chenguang Li & Zhenjun Qiu & Tao Fu, 2021. "The Role of Policy Perceptions and Entrepreneurs’ Preferences in Firms’ Response to Industry 4.0: The Case of Chinese Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11352-:d:656059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11352/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11352/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    2. Fan, Joseph P.H. & Wong, T.J. & Zhang, Tianyu, 2007. "Politically connected CEOs, corporate governance, and Post-IPO performance of China's newly partially privatized firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 330-357, May.
    3. Han, Syungjin, 2019. "CEO political preference and corporate innovation," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 370-375.
    4. Kuhlmann, Stefan, 2001. "Future governance of innovation policy in Europe -- three scenarios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 953-976, June.
    5. Dirk Meissner & Sandrine Kergroach, 2021. "Innovation policy mix: mapping and measurement," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 197-222, February.
    6. Mariana Mazzucato, 2016. "From market fixing to market-creating: a new framework for innovation policy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 140-156, February.
    7. Hagedoorn, John, 1996. "Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Schumpeter Revisited," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(3), pages 883-896.
    8. Sunder, Jayanthi & Sunder, Shyam V. & Zhang, Jingjing, 2017. "Pilot CEOs and corporate innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 209-224.
    9. Freeman, Chris, 1995. "The 'National System of Innovation' in Historical Perspective," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 5-24, February.
    10. Nambisan, Satish & Wright, Mike & Feldman, Maryann, 2019. "The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    11. Michael L. Polemis & Markos Tselekounis, 2021. "Threshold effects in the regulation-innovation nexus: evidence from the telecommunications industry," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 74-93, August.
    12. Allen, Darcy W.E. & Berg, Chris & Markey-Towler, Brendan & Novak, Mikayla & Potts, Jason, 2020. "Blockchain and the evolution of institutional technologies: Implications for innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    13. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & MinHwa Lee & KyungBae Park & Xiaofei Zhao, 2019. "Open Innovation and Serial Entrepreneurs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-31, September.
    14. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2013. "Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1647-1656.
    15. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Does innovation respond to climate change? Empirical evidence from patents and greenhouse gas emissions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 49-62.
    16. Meuleman, Miguel & De Maeseneire, Wouter, 2012. "Do R&D subsidies affect SMEs’ access to external financing?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 580-591.
    17. Amer Mutrik Sayaf & Mahdi Mohammed Alamri & Mohammed Ayid Alqahtani & Waleed Mugahed Al-Rahmi, 2021. "Information and Communications Technology Used in Higher Education: An Empirical Study on Digital Learning as Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Dirk Meissner & Sandrine Kergroach, 2021. "Correction to: Innovation policy mix: mapping and measurement," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1705-1705, October.
    19. Barbara Aquilani & Michela Piccarozzi & Tindara Abbate & Anna Codini, 2020. "The Role of Open Innovation and Value Co-creation in the Challenging Transition from Industry 4.0 to Society 5.0: Toward a Theoretical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    20. McCONNELL, ALLAN, 2010. "Policy Success, Policy Failure and Grey Areas In-Between," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 345-362, December.
    21. Lanahan, Lauren & Feldman, Maryann P., 2015. "Multilevel innovation policy mix: A closer look at state policies that augment the federal SBIR program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1387-1402.
    22. Xinwei Ye & Lei Ma & Junwen Feng & Yang Cheng & Zheng Liu, 2018. "Impact of Technology Habitual Domain on Ambidextrous Innovation: Case Study of a Chinese High-Tech Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    23. Rahman, Syed Abidur & Taghizadeh, Seyedeh Khadijeh & Ramayah, T. & Alam, Mirza Mohammad Didarul, 2017. "Technology acceptance among micro-entrepreneurs in marginalized social strata: The case of social innovation in Bangladesh," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 236-245.
    24. Kleinknecht, Alfred & Verspagen, Bart, 1990. "Demand and innovation: Schmookler re-examined," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 387-394, August.
    25. Ping, Robert Jr., 2004. "On assuring valid measures for theoretical models using survey data," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 125-141, February.
    26. Cheryl McEwan & Emma Mawdsley & Glenn Banks & Regina Scheyvens, 2017. "Enrolling the Private Sector in Community Development: Magic Bullet or Sleight of Hand?," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 48(1), pages 28-53, January.
    27. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    28. Coad, Alex & Segarra, Agustí & Teruel, Mercedes, 2016. "Innovation and firm growth: Does firm age play a role?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 387-400.
    29. Wang, Fang & Chen, Kaihua, 2020. "Do product imitation and innovation require different patterns of organizational innovation? Evidence from Chinese firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 60-74.
    30. Lin MA & Jiayu HU, 2018. "An Analysis of the Eco-Innovation Mechanism and Policies in the Pulp and Paper Industry Based on Coupled Game Theory and System Dynamics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-25, September.
    31. Alberto Marzucchi & Davide Antonioli & Sandro Montresor, 2015. "Industry–research co-operation within and across regional boundaries. What does innovation policy add?," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(3), pages 499-524, August.
    32. Leonidou, Erasmia & Christofi, Michael & Vrontis, Demetris & Thrassou, Alkis, 2020. "An integrative framework of stakeholder engagement for innovation management and entrepreneurship development," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 245-258.
    33. Caiyan Jia & Xiaoyun Tang & Zhehan Kan, 2020. "Does the Nation Innovation System in China Support the Sustainability of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Innovation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, March.
    34. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    35. Schot, Johan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2018. "Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1554-1567.
    36. Kuan Chung Lin & Joseph Z. Shyu & Kun Ding, 2017. "A Cross-Strait Comparison of Innovation Policy under Industry 4.0 and Sustainability Development Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    37. Ki‐Hoon Lee & David M. Herold & Ae‐Li Yu, 2016. "Small and Medium Enterprises and Corporate Social Responsibility Practice: A Swedish Perspective," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 88-99, March.
    38. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 799-819.
    39. Kieron Flanagan & Elvira Uyarra, 2016. "Four dangers in innovation policy studies -- and how to avoid them," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 177-188, February.
    40. Guan, JianCheng & Yam, Richard C.M., 2015. "Effects of government financial incentives on firms’ innovation performance in China: Evidences from Beijing in the 1990s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 273-282.
    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. Jiang, Zihao & Shi, Jiarong, 2023. "Government intervention and technological innovation in the wind power industry in China: The role of industrial environmental turbulence," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 344(C).
    2. Tea Petrin & Dragana Radicic, 2023. "Instrument policy mix and firm size: is there complementarity between R&D subsidies and R&D tax credits?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 181-215, February.
    3. Daniel Catalá‐Pérez & María de‐Miguel‐Molina, 2021. "Analyzing Territorial and Sectorial Dimensions of Public–Private Partnerships in Science, Technology, and Innovation policies," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(1), pages 113-138, January.
    4. Laatsit, Mart & Grillitsch, Markus & Fünfschilling, Lea, 2022. "Great expectations: the promises and limits of innovation policy in addressing societal challenges," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/9, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    5. Verónica Robert & Gabriel Yoguel, 2022. "Exploration of trending concepts in innovation policy," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 259-292, July.
    6. Che, Xiao-Jing & Zhou, P. & Chai, Kah-Hin, 2022. "Regional policy effect on photovoltaic (PV) technology innovation: Findings from 260 cities in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. Elvira Uyarra & Kieron Flanagan & Edurne Magro & James R Wilson & Markku Sotarauta, 2017. "Understanding regional innovation policy dynamics: Actors, agency and learning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(4), pages 559-568, June.
    8. Trotter, Philipp A. & Brophy, Aoife, 2022. "Policy mixes for business model innovation: The case of off-grid energy for sustainable development in sub-Saharan Africa," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    9. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2019. "Policy-mix evaluation: Governance challenges from new place-based innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    10. Nysveen, Herbjørn & Pedersen, Per E. & Skard, Siv, 2020. "Ecosystem adoption of practices over time (EAPT): Toward an alternative view of contemporary technology adoption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 542-551.
    11. Chen, Jin & Heng, Cheng Suang & Tan, Bernard C.Y. & Lin, Zhijie, 2018. "The distinct signaling effects of R&D subsidy and non-R&D subsidy on IPO performance of IT entrepreneurial firms in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 108-120.
    12. Maria Rabadjieva & Judith Terstriep, 2020. "Ambition Meets Reality: Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy as a Driver for Participative Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, December.
    13. Ainhoa Arrona, 2017. "Can interpretive policy analysis contribute to a critical scholarship on regional innovation policy studies?," Working Papers 2017R01, Orkestra - Basque Institute of Competitiveness.
    14. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    15. Giulia Giacomello Pompilio & Tiago F. A. C. Sigahi & Izabela Simon Rampasso & Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Moraes & Lucas Veiga Ávila & Walter Leal Filho & Rosley Anholon, 2023. "Innovation in Brazilian Industries: Analysis of Management Practices Using Fuzzy TOPSIS," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Jan Fagerberg & Håkon Endresen Normann, 2022. "Innovation policy, regulation and the transition to net zero," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20220531, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    17. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas, 2020. "Mapping variety of innovation strategies sponsored by the policy-mix: an analytical framework and an empirical exploration," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 741-771, July.
    18. Harry Jeong & Kwangsoo Shin & Seunghyun Kim & Eungdo Kim, 2021. "What Types of Government Support on Food SMEs Improve Innovation Performance?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-23, August.
    19. Senna, Pedro P. & Bonnin Roca, Jaime & Barros, Ana C., 2023. "Overcoming barriers to manufacturing digitalization: Policies across EU countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    20. Sonja Đuričin & Isidora Beraha & Olivera Jovanović & Marija Mosurović Ružičić & Marija Lazarević-Moravčević & Mihailo Paunović, 2022. "The Efficiency of National Innovation Policy Programs: The Case of Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-14, July.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11352-:d:656059. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.