IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cbu/jrnlec/y2023v6p184-193.html

Developing Innovation: An Overview On The Business Organizations In Romania Vs Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • DANILET ALEXANDRA-MARIA

    (STEFAN CEL MARE UNIVERSITY OF SUCEAVA, ROMANIA)

  • CHIFAN DENISA-ALEXANDRA

    (STEFAN CEL MARE UNIVERSITY OF SUCEAVA, ROMANIA, UNIVERSITY OF BEIRA INTERIOR, PORTUGAL)

Abstract

Innovation has a special place in the work of business organisations, regardless of their field of activity, size or market experience. Thus, whether we are looking at firms involved in the production of goods or the provision of services, innovation has become a buzzword that is not missing from corporate language or organisational processes. In fact, managers' concern for performance enhancement has led to the adoption and implementation of various innovative tools in certain aspects/activities in the companies they manage, tools that have a positive influence on competitiveness and organisational performance. Traditionally, innovation is approached through technical elements, and is usually associated with a new product, a new technology, which is easier to quantify/determine, as results can be observed more quickly. Business realities highlight that innovation also involves other elements that are part of a company's processes, playing at least as important a role as those strictly linked to new products/technologies, including process, organisational and marketing innovations. These contribute significantly to the way the firm streamlines its operations, improves certain processes, implements new techniques/tools that will facilitate a high level of performance. Therefore, there is a need for a broader approach to the types of innovations that are found in the work of business organisations and how they contribute beneficially to their economic progress.

Suggested Citation

  • Danilet Alexandra-Maria & Chifan Denisa-Alexandra, 2023. "Developing Innovation: An Overview On The Business Organizations In Romania Vs Portugal," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 6, pages 184-193, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cbu:jrnlec:y:2023:v:6:p:184-193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.utgjiu.ro/revista/ec/pdf/2023-06/19_danilet.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ricardo V Costa & Carlos Fernández-Jardon Fernández & Pedro Figueroa Dorrego, 2014. "Critical elements for product innovation at Portuguese innovative SMEs: an intellectual capital perspective," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 322-338, August.
    2. Martin Junge & Battista Severgnini & Anders Sørensen, 2016. "Product-Marketing Innovation, Skills, and Firm Productivity Growth," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62(4), pages 724-757, December.
    3. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    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. Gong, Cheng & Ribiere, Vincent, 2025. "Organizational agility unleashed: Tapping intellectual capital for digital transformation effectiveness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    2. Fulvio Castellacci & Magnus Gulbrandsen & Jarle Hildrum & E. Martinkenaite & Erlend Simensen & Vegard Tveito, 2016. "How Does Innovation Differ across Business Functions? Employee-level Analysis of a Multinational Company," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20160321, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    3. Marina Dabić & Jane Maley & Leo-Paul Dana & Ivan Novak & Massimiliano M. Pellegrini & Andrea Caputo, 2020. "Pathways of SME internationalization: a bibliometric and systematic review," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 705-725, October.
    4. Roberta De Angelis & Robert Morgan & Luigi M. De Luca, 2023. "Open strategy and dynamic capabilities: A framework for circular economy business models research," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4861-4873, November.
    5. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    6. Jiatong Yu & Jiajue Wang & Taesoo Moon, 2022. "Influence of Digital Transformation Capability on Operational Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Benjamin Cabrera & Ricardo Santa & Thomas Tegethoff & Diego Morante & Mario Ferrer, 2023. "Supply chain resilience in the Colombian defense sector before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(3), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Miguel Perez‐Valls & Jose Cespedes‐Lorente & Juan Moreno‐Garcia, 2016. "Green Practices and Organizational Design as Sources of Strategic Flexibility and Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8), pages 529-544, December.
    9. Alpana Taneja & Vinay Goyal & Kunjana Malik, 2023. "Sustainability‐oriented innovations – Enhancing factors and consequences," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 2747-2765, November.
    10. Lirios Alos-Simo & Antonio J. Verdu-Jover & Jose M. Gomez-Gras, 2020. "Knowledge Transfer in Sustainable Contexts: A Comparative Analysis of Periods of Financial Recession and Expansion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-24, June.
    11. Emre Yildiz, H. & Murtic, Adis & Klofsten, Magnus & Zander, Udo & Richtnér, Anders, 2021. "Individual and contextual determinants of innovation performance: A micro-foundations perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Christiana Müller & Stefan Vorbach, 2015. "Enabling Business Model Change: Evidence from High-Technology Firms," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 11(1), pages 53-75.
    13. Zhou, Jingyi & Xie, Mengyuan, 2025. "Chain leader policy and corporate green innovation—Perspectives of financing constraints and risk-taking," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    14. Muhammad Farooq Islam & Ozge Can, 2024. "Integrating digital and sustainable entrepreneurship through business models: a bibliometric analysis," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Francisco Javier Forcadell & Fernando Úbeda, 2022. "Individual entrepreneurial orientation and performance: the mediating role of international entrepreneurship," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 875-900, June.
    16. Giovanni Gavetti & Constance E. Helfat & Luigi Marengo, 2017. "Searching, Shaping, and the Quest for Superior Performance," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 194-209, September.
    17. Christoph Grimpe & Wolfgang Sofka & Andreas P. Distel, 2022. "SME participation in research grant consortia—the emergence of coordinated attention in collaborative innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(4), pages 1567-1592, December.
    18. Scherrer, Aline & Rogge, Karoline S., 2025. "When do incumbents adopt radical net-zero technologies? Analysing differences in strategy trajectories of European truck manufacturers towards alternative vehicle technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    19. Frank W. Geels & Jonatan Pinkse & Dimitri Zenghelis, 2021. "Productivity opportunities and risks in a transformative,low-carbon and digital age," Working Papers 009, The Productivity Institute.
    20. Brajer-Marczak Renata, 2014. "Employee engagement in continuous improvement of processes," Management, Sciendo, vol. 18(2), pages 88-103, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cbu:jrnlec:y:2023:v:6:p:184-193. 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: Ecobici Nicolae (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fetgjro.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.