IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v104y2015i3d10.1007_s11192-015-1632-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation indices: the need for positioning them where they properly belong

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Kozłowski

    (Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Poland)

Abstract

A specific quality of the discussion about innovation indices (scoreboards) is that more often than not the subject is dealt with from a purely technical point of view. Such a narrow approach silently assumes that indices used as a policy tool are an accurate reflection of the phenomenon and should not be questioned, and also that the whole discussion concerning them should refer to methodological aspects and is best left to the statisticians. This author is of the opinion that for an accurate evaluation of the value of indices as a policy tool, it is necessary to consider the matter from the broader point of view and from the context in which such indices are generated and used. This article puts forward the thesis that progress in science and innovation policy studies depends on a diversity of issues, approaches and perspectives. If that is the case, maintaining thematic and methodological variety may be more important than creating coherent and closed analytical tools, i.e. indices. The advantage of indices is that they focus attention on those variables which are deemed to be key. Among their disadvantages, however, are their highly abstract nature (in order to understand innovation-related phenomena, it is necessary to study them in tangible, composite forms); their tendency to skip unmeasurable determinants; their prior acceptance of definitions and concepts of innovation (instead of searching for them); the way they apply a single yardstick to diverse countries and regions, assumed linearity and causality in a complex and non-linear world, the way they direct policy towards implementing indicators (rather than identifying and solving problems). It is suggested that big data revolution will allow the emergence of a new measurement tools that will replace innovation indices.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Kozłowski, 2015. "Innovation indices: the need for positioning them where they properly belong," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 609-628, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:104:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1632-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1632-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1632-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-015-1632-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benedetto Lepori & Emanuela Reale & Robert Tijssen, 2011. "Designing indicators for policy decisions: challenges, tensions and good practices: introduction to a special issue," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 3-5, March.
    2. Beñat Bilbao‐Osorio & Andrés Rodríguez‐Pose, 2004. "From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 434-455, September.
    3. Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitia & Fernando Jiménez-Sáez & Elena Castro-Martínez & Antonio Gutiérrez-Gracia, 2007. "What indicators do (or do not) tell us about Regional Innovation Systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 85-106, January.
    4. Oecd, 2013. "Exploring Data-Driven Innovation as a New Source of Growth: Mapping the Policy Issues Raised by "Big Data"," OECD Digital Economy Papers 222, OECD Publishing.
    5. Crespi, Gustavo A. & Geuna, Aldo, 2008. "An empirical study of scientific production: A cross country analysis, 1981-2002," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 565-579, May.
    6. Andreas Schibany & Gerhard Streicher, 2008. "The European Innovation Scoreboard: drowning by numbers?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(10), pages 717-732, December.
    7. Christian Bjørnskov & Kim Sønderskov, 2013. "Is Social Capital a Good Concept?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 1225-1242, December.
    8. Moldaschl, Manfred, 2010. "Why innovation theories make no sense," Papers and Preprints of the Department of Innovation Research and Sustainable Resource Management 9/2010, Chemnitz University of Technology, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    9. Edquist, Charles & Zabala, Jon Mikel, 2009. "Outputs of innovation systems: a European perspective," Papers in Innovation Studies 2009/14, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    10. Rosenbusch, Nina & Brinckmann, Jan & Bausch, Andreas, 2011. "Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 441-457, July.
    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. Bresciani, Stefano & Puertas, Rosa & Ferraris, Alberto & Santoro, Gabriele, 2021. "Innovation, environmental sustainability and economic development: DEA-Bootstrap and multilevel analysis to compare two regions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    2. Hauser, Christoph & Siller, Matthias & Schatzer, Thomas & Walde, Janette & Tappeiner, Gottfried, 2018. "Measuring regional innovation: A critical inspection of the ability of single indicators to shape technological change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 43-55.
    3. Eva Švandová & Michal Jirásek, 2019. "On Measuring Countries' Innovation Performance: Organisational Level Perspective," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(3), pages 871-881.
    4. S. Arunachalam & Sridhar N. Ramaswami & Pol Herrmann & Doug Walker, 2018. "Innovation pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing capabilities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 744-766, July.
    5. Patricia Kotnik & Eva Hagsten, 2018. "ICT use as a determinant of export activity in manufacturing and service firms: Multi-country evidence," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 36(1), pages 103-128.
    6. Katarzyna Growiec & Jakub Growiec, 2016. "Bridging Social Capital and Individual Earnings: Evidence for an Inverted U," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 601-631, June.
    7. Agnieszka Kuś & Dorota Grego-Planer, 2021. "A Model of Innovation Activity in Small Enterprises in the Context of Selected Financial Factors: The Example of the Renewable Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, May.
    8. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    9. Frida Thomas Pacho, 2018. "Diversified Network Effects on Innovation Performance in Tanzania: Innovation Strategy in Service Firms," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Innovation, Macrothink Institute, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Innovation, vol. 5(1), pages 1-1, December.
    10. Kafigi Jeje, 2020. "Risk-Taking and Performance of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Lessons from Tanzanian Bakeries," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 12(3), pages 1-22.
    11. Simona Alfiero & Laura Broccardo & Massimo Cane & Alfredo Esposito, 2018. "High Performance Through Innovation Process Management in SMEs. Evidence from the Italian wine sector," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 87-110.
    12. Caliendo, Marco & Rodriguez, Daniel, 2023. "Divergent Thinking and Post-Launch Entrepreneurial Outcomes: Non-Linearities and the Moderating Role of Experience," IZA Discussion Papers 16443, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Francesco Ciampi & Alessandro Giannozzi & Giacomo Marzi & Edward I. Altman, 2021. "Rethinking SME default prediction: a systematic literature review and future perspectives," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2141-2188, March.
    14. Massimo Finocchiaro Castro & Calogero Guccio, 2020. "Birds of a feather flock together: trust in government, political selection and electoral punishment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 263-287, September.
    15. Tsui-Yii Shih, 2018. "Determinants of Enterprises Radical Innovation and Performance: Insights into Strategic Orientation of Cultural and Creative Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, June.
    16. Nadia Loukil & Ouidad Yousfi, 2022. "Do CEO’s traits matter in innovation outcomes?," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 375-403, September.
    17. Fischer, Denise & Greven, Andrea & Tornow, Mark & Brettel, Malte, 2021. "On the value of effectuation processes for R&D alliances and the moderating role of R&D alliance experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 606-619.
    18. H. T. Tran & E. Santarelli, 2013. "Determinants and Effects of Innovative Activities in Vietnam. A Firm-level Analysis," Working Papers wp909, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    19. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    20. Teplykh, Grigorii & Galimardanov, Amal, 2017. "Modeling of innovative investment in Russian regions," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 46, pages 104-125.

    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:spr:scient:v:104:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1632-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.