IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7428-d1137225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Searching for Dependencies between Business Strategies and Innovation Outputs in Manufacturing: An Analysis Based on CIS

Author

Listed:
  • Sylwia Pangsy-Kania

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland)

  • Anna Golejewska

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland)

  • Katarzyna Wierzbicka

    (Faculty of Economics and Finance, University of Bialystok, 15-082 Bialystok, Poland)

  • Magdalena Mosionek-Schweda

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland)

Abstract

A modern enterprise can use changes in its environment as an opportunity to create new products and services, constituting a competitive advantage. This ability is in turn determined by its adopted business strategy. The aim of this study is an attempt to find the relationship between business strategies used in industrial enterprises and their effects in the form of various types of innovations. Our research covered innovative manufacturing companies from selected EU member states and Turkey. Two research hypotheses were formulated: H1: The importance of business strategies to innovative companies is different between countries. H2: The clusters identified are not homogeneous in terms of the innovation outputs achieved by the companies. Our analyses are based on data derived from the CIS 2018 for the period of 2016–2018. To verify these hypotheses, statistical methods were used, including a cluster analysis. The results of the analysis indicate that the manufacturing companies in the surveyed countries apply various combinations of business strategies, which may translate into results in terms of innovation. Business process innovations are dominated by new or improved methods for producing goods or providing services.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylwia Pangsy-Kania & Anna Golejewska & Katarzyna Wierzbicka & Magdalena Mosionek-Schweda, 2023. "Searching for Dependencies between Business Strategies and Innovation Outputs in Manufacturing: An Analysis Based on CIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7428-:d:1137225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7428/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7428/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, John R. & Johnson, Joanne, 1996. "Business strategies in more- and less-innovative firms in Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 785-804, August.
    2. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    3. Manfred M. Fischer, 2001. "Innovation, knowledge creation and systems of innovation," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 35(2), pages 199-216.
    4. Ozlem CETINKAYA BOZKURT & Adnan KALKAN, 2014. "Business Strategies of SME’s, Innovation Types and Factors Influencing Their Innovation: Burdur Model," Ege Academic Review, Ege University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 14(2), pages 189-198.
    5. John E. Ettlie & William P. Bridges & Robert D. O'Keefe, 1984. "Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 682-695, June.
    6. Anne Marie Knott, 2003. "Persistent heterogeneity and sustainable innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(8), pages 687-705, August.
    7. Stewart Johnston & Angela Paladino, 2007. "Knowledge management and involvement in innovations in MNC subsidiaries," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 281-302, March.
    8. Ufuah, Allan N & Utterback, James M, 1997. "Responding to Structural Industry Changes: A Technological Evolution Perspective," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 183-202.
    9. Richard A. Wolfe, 1994. "Organizational Innovation: Review, Critique And Suggested Research Directions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 405-431, May.
    10. Nathanaël Randriamihamison & Nathalie Vialaneix & Pierre Neuvial, 2021. "Applicability and Interpretability of Ward’s Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering With or Without Contiguity Constraints," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 38(2), pages 363-389, July.
    11. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2004. "Innovation indicators and corporate credit ratings: evidence from German firms," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 377-384, March.
    12. Cooper, Robert, 1998. "Benchmarking new product performance:: Results of the best practices study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1-17, February.
    13. Elenkov, Detelin S. & Manev, Ivan M., 2009. "Senior expatriate leadership's effects on innovation and the role of cultural intelligence," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 357-369, October.
    14. Ritter, Thomas & Gemunden, Hans Georg, 2004. "The impact of a company's business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 548-556, May.
    15. António Abreu, 2021. "Innovation Ecosystems: A Sustainability Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-3, February.
    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. Jhon Zartha & Gina Orozco & Diana Barreto & Diego García, 2024. "Sustainable Innovation in Organizations: A Look from Processes, Products, and Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-16, March.

    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. Kogabayev Timur & Maziliauskas Antanas, 2017. "The definition and classification of innovation," HOLISTICA – Journal of Business and Public Administration, Sciendo, vol. 8(1), pages 59-72, April.
    2. Souitaris, Vangelis, 2002. "Technological trajectories as moderators of firm-level determinants of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 877-898, August.
    3. Bernardo Batiz-Lazo & Kassa Woldesenbet, 2006. "The dynamics of product and process innovations in UK banking," International Journal of Financial Services Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(4), pages 400-421.
    4. Da Mota de Pina E Cunha, A.M. & Verhallen, T.M.M., 1998. "Organizational innovation : An overview of topics, models and research directions," Other publications TiSEM 03119425-3fea-4334-ad00-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Popadiuk, Silvio & Choo, Chun Wei, 2006. "Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related?," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 302-312.
    6. Mary M. Crossan & Marina Apaydin, 2010. "A Multi‐Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(6), pages 1154-1191, September.
    7. Robert G. Fichman, 2004. "Real Options and IT Platform Adoption: Implications for Theory and Practice," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 132-154, June.
    8. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    9. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    10. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    11. Gosselin, Maurice, 1997. "The effect of strategy and organizational structure on the adoption and implementation of activity-based costing," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 105-122, February.
    12. Li-Min Chuang & Wen-Chia Tsai, 2014. "The Organizational Innovativeness Inventory for information and electronic enterprises: Development and Validation," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 6(4), pages 302-309.
    13. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    14. David Emsley & Lai Hong Chung, 2010. "How Management Accountants' Cognitive Style and Role Involvement Combine to Affect the Effort Devoted to Initiating Change," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 46(3), pages 232-257, September.
    15. Reena das Nair & Namhla Landani, 2020. "Making agricultural value chains more inclusive through technology and innovation," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2020-38, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. Hubert Gatignon & Michael L. Tushman & Wendy Smith & Philip Anderson, 2002. "A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(9), pages 1103-1122, September.
    17. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    18. Flor, M. Luisa & Cooper, Sarah Y. & Oltra, María J., 2018. "External knowledge search, absorptive capacity and radical innovation in high-technology firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 183-194.
    19. Dongqing Lyu & Kaile Gong & Xuanmin Ruan & Ying Cheng & Jiang Li, 2021. "Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 287-303, January.
    20. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.

    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:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7428-:d:1137225. 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.