IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/abw/journl/y2022id978.html

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. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Coombs, R. & Narandren, P. & Richards, A., 1996. "A literature-based innovation output indicator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 403-413, May.
    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. 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.
    3. Tether, B. S., 1998. "Small and large firms: sources of unequal innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 725-745, November.
    4. Andrés Barge-Gil & Alberto López, 2015. "R versus D: estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 93-129.
    5. Seppä, Elina, 2007. "Innovation Performance of Firms in Manufacturing Industry: Evidence from Belgium, Finland and Germany in 1998-2000," Discussion Papers 414, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Veronika Frigyesi & Patrice Laget & Mark Boden, 2019. "Exploitation of patent information in R&D output analysis for policymaking," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1717-1736, December.
    7. Hassan Arabshahi & Hamed Fazlollahtabar, 2018. "Classifying Innovative Activities Using Decision Tree and Gini Index," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-14, June.
    8. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    9. Brink, Siegrun & Nielen, Sebastian & May-Strobl, Eva, 2018. "Innovationstätigkeit des nicht-forschenden Mittelstands," IfM-Materialien 266, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    10. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    11. Ortega-Argilés, Raquel & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2011. "Productivity Gains from R&D Investment: Are High-Tech Sectors Still Ahead?," IZA Discussion Papers 5975, IZA Network @ LISER.
    12. Maimunah Ismail & Efizah Sofiah Ramly, 2010. "Carreer Aspirations of R&D Professionals in Government Research Institutes and Multinational Corporations in Malaysia," Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Faculty of Economics, Vilnius University, vol. 1(2).
    13. Varga, Attila, 2004. "Az egyetemi kutatások regionális gazdasági hatásai a nemzetközi szakirodalom tükrében [Regional economic effects of university researches in the light of international literature]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 259-275.
    14. García-Vega, María & Huergo, Elena, 2019. "The role of international and domestic R&D outsourcing for firm innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 775-792.
    15. Juan A. Mañez & María E. Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis & Juan A. Sanchis, 2011. "On The Role Of Process Innovations On Smes Productivity Growth?," Working Papers 1125, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    16. Thomas Brenner & Matthias Duschl, 2015. "Causal dynamic effects in regional systems of technological activities: a SVAR approach," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 55(1), pages 103-130, October.
    17. Hervas-Oliver, Jose-Luis & Sempere-Ripoll, Francisca & Boronat-Moll, Carles, 2012. "Process innovation objectives and management complementarities: patterns, drivers, co-adoption and performance effects," MERIT Working Papers 2012-051, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    18. Wilfred Dolfsma & Gerben Velde, 2014. "Industry innovativeness, firm size, and entrepreneurship: Schumpeter Mark III?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 713-736, September.
    19. Kotorov Iouri & Krasylnykova Yuliya & Demel Jaroslav & Blaschke Petr, 2023. "The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Economic Growth and R&D Spending in Czechia, Germany, and Poland," ACC Journal, Paradigm, vol. 29(2), pages 37-50.
    20. Ådne Cappelen & Arvid Raknerud & Marina Rybalka, 2013. "Returns to public R&D grants and subsidies," Discussion Papers 740, Statistics Norway, Research Department.

    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.