IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifmmat/212.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovationstätigkeit im Mittelstand: Messung und Bewertung

Author

Listed:
  • Maaß, Frank
  • Führmann, Bettina

Abstract

Gegenstand der vorliegenden Studie ist eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme der Innovationstätigkeit kleiner und mittlerer Unternehmen (KMU) im Vergleich zu Großunternehmen in Deutschland. Hierzu wird die vorhandene Literatur ausgewertet und die existierenden Daten-sammlungen in ihrer Erfassungssystematik analysiert. Die Untersuchung zeigt, dass Großunternehmen häufiger als KMU innovativ sind. Dies ist insbesondere hinsichtlich der technologischen Innovationen zu beobachten. Neueste Berichtssysteme basierend auf der erweiterten OECD-Begriffsdefinition berücksichtigen auch nicht-technologische Innovationen. Hier zeigt sich eine besondere Stärke der KMU. In der Gesamtbetrachtung sind die KMU deutlich häufiger innovativ als bislang angenommen. 78 % der Unternehmen mit 10 bis 49 und 84 % der Unternehmen mit 50 bis 249 Beschäftigten beteiligen sich am Innovationsprozess. Der Anteilswert für die Großunternehmen liegt bei 95 %.

Suggested Citation

  • Maaß, Frank & Führmann, Bettina, 2012. "Innovationstätigkeit im Mittelstand: Messung und Bewertung," IfM-Materialien 212, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifmmat:212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/55666/1/687056292.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rammer, Christian & Bethmann, Nicola, 2009. "Schwerpunktbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2008: Innovationspartnerschaften - Schutz und Verletzung von intellektuellem Eigentum," ZEW Dokumentationen 09-01, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Spielkamp, Alfred & Rammer, Christian, 2006. "Balanceakt Innovation: Erfolgsfaktoren im Innovationsmanagement kleiner und mittlerer Unternehmen," ZEW Dokumentationen 06-04, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Gottschalk, Sandra & Janz, Norbert & Peters, Bettina & Rammer, Christian & Schmidt, Tobias, 2002. "Innovationsverhalten der deutschen Wirtschaft: Hintergrundbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2001," ZEW Dokumentationen 02-03, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Horst Penzkofer, 2005. "Rise of the industry innovations continued in 2004," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 58(05), pages 42-49, March.
    5. Rammer, Christian & Aschhoff, Birgit & Doherr, Thorsten & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Schubert, Torben & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2010. "Innovationsverhalten der deutschen Wirtschaft: Indikatorenbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2009," The Annual German Innovation Survey, Key Figures Reports 111707, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Fischer, Gabriele & Janik, Florian & Müller, Dana & Schmucker, Alexandra, 2008. "Das IAB-Betriebspanel - von der Stichprobe über die Erhebung bis zur Hochrechnung," FDZ Methodenreport 200801_de, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    7. Rüggeberg, Harald & Burmeister, Kjell, 2008. "Innovationsprozesse in kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen," Working Papers 41, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute of Management Berlin (IMB).
    8. Andreas Stephan & Jan Weiss, 2010. "Regionale Innovationspolitik: Konzentration auf Hightech kann in die Irre führen," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 77(29), pages 8-11.
    9. repec:iab:iabfme:201104(de is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1993. "In search of useful theory of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 108-108, April.
    11. Bellmann, Lutz & Dahms, Vera & Wahse, Jürgen, 2005. "IAB-Betriebspanel Ost: Ergebnisse der neunten Welle 2004 : Teil 3: Innovationen im Betrieb, wirtschaftliche Lage der Betriebe," IAB-Forschungsbericht 200522, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    12. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    13. Rammer, Christian & Pesau, Agnes, 2011. "Innovationsverhalten der Unternehmen in Deutschland 2009: Aktuelle Entwicklungen, Bundesländerunterschiede, internationaler Vergleich," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 7-2011, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    14. Janik, Florian, 2011. "Unit-Nonresponse bei erstbefragten Betrieben im IAB-Betriebspanel," FDZ Methodenreport 201104_de, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    15. Oliver Falck & Stefan Kipar & Pascal Paul, 2010. "Enterprise co-operation in the innovation process: a first report on new questions in the Ifo Innovation Survey," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 63(01), pages 23-27, January.
    16. Licht, Georg & Harhoff, Dietmar, 1993. "Das Mannheimer Innovationspanel," ZEW Discussion Papers 93-21, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Günther, Jutta & Marek, Philipp, 2011. "Einflussfaktoren betrieblicher Innovationstätigkeit: Kleine Betriebe in Ostdeutschland mit viel Potenzial," Wirtschaft im Wandel, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH), vol. 17(7-8), pages 276-282.
    18. Rammer, Christian & Aschhoff, Birgit & Crass, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Schubert, Torben & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2011. "Innovationsverhalten der deutschen Wirtschaft: Indikatorenbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2010," The Annual German Innovation Survey, Key Figures Reports 111708, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Rammer, Christian & Köhler, Christian & Murmann, Martin & Pesau, Agnes & Schwiebacher, Franz & Kinkel, Steffen & Kirner, Eva & Schubert, Torben & Som, Oliver, 2010. "Innovationen ohne Forschung und Entwicklung: Eine Untersuchung zu Unternehmen, die ohne eigene FuE-Tätigkeit neue Produkte und Prozesse einführen," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 15-2011, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oliver Arentz & Clemens Recker & Leonhard Münstermann & Steffen J. Roth, 2015. "Der Dienstleistungssektor in Deutschland: Überblick und Deregulierungspotenziale," Otto-Wolff-Institut Discussion Paper Series 01/2015, Otto-Wolff-Institut für Wirtschaftsordnung, Köln, Deutschland.
    2. Brink, Siegrun & Nielen, Sebastian & May-Strobl, Eva, 2018. "Innovationstätigkeit des nicht-forschenden Mittelstands," IfM-Materialien 266, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    3. Welter, Friederike & Levering, Britta & May-Strobl, Eva, 2016. "Mittelstandspolitik im Wandel," IfM-Materialien 247, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.

    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. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2002. "A Percolation Model of Innovation in Complex Technology," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Carolina Castaldi & Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2009. "‘Chariots of fire’: the evolution of tank technology, 1915–1945," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 545-566, August.
    3. Petersen, Alexander M. & Rotolo, Daniele & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2016. "A triple helix model of medical innovation: Supply, demand, and technological capabilities in terms of Medical Subject Headings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 666-681.
    4. Hagedoorn, John & Carayannis, Elias & Alexander, Jeffrey, 2001. "Strange bedfellows in the personal computer industry: technology alliances between IBM and Apple," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 837-849, May.
    5. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    6. Alessandri, Enrico, 2023. "Identifying technological trajectories in the mining sector using patent citation networks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    7. repec:got:cegedp:102 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Parayil, Govindan, 2003. "Mapping technological trajectories of the Green Revolution and the Gene Revolution from modernization to globalization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 971-990, June.
    9. Ivanova, Inga & Strand, Øivind & Kushnir, Duncan & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2017. "Economic and technological complexity: A model study of indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 77-89.
    10. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    11. Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 243-255, February.
    12. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Technological paradigms, regimes and trajectories: Manufacturing and service industries in a new taxonomy of sectoral patterns of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 978-994, July.
    13. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    14. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    15. Kamp, Linda M. & Smits, Ruud E. H. M. & Andriesse, Cornelis D., 2004. "Notions on learning applied to wind turbine development in the Netherlands and Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(14), pages 1625-1637, September.
    16. Mary Tripsas, 2008. "Customer preference discontinuities: a trigger for radical technological change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 79-97.
    17. Wilfred Dolfsma & Patrick J. Welch, 2009. "Paradigms and Novelty in Economics: The History of Economic Thought as a Source of Enlightenment," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(5), pages 1085-1106, November.
    18. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    19. Schmidt, Susanne K. & Werle, Raymund, 1992. "Koordination und Evolution: Technische Standards im Prozeß der Entwicklung technischer Systeme," MPIfG Discussion Paper 92/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    20. Hötte, Kerstin, 2020. "How to accelerate green technology diffusion? Directed technological change in the presence of coevolving absorptive capacity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    21. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovationsindikatoren; Forschung und Entwicklung (FuE); Patentanmeldungen; technologische Innovationen; nicht-technologische Innovationen; KMU; Deutschland; innovation indicators; R&D measurement; patent data; technological innovation; non-technological innovation; SME; Germany;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:ifmmat:212. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifmbode.html .

    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.