Persistence And Ability In The Innovation Decisions
The main concern of this paper is to analyse the complementarities between the decisions to carry out both product and process innovations. We also try to identify the main determinants of the innovation activity as well as to separate the experience effect of the firm (capacities, routines as organization) from the experience effect of the manager (skills, abilities). It has been common when facing the study of technological change, to consider innovation as a homogeneous activity. The main analyses have focused on the determinants of such activity trying to explain decisions, counts or R&D expenses in the context of a unique activity. Several recent works, however, are worried about the possibility of analysing innovation distinguishing among different types according to the final purpose of this activity. We focus on two different decisions, product and process innovations, using typical discrete choice specifications (univariate and bivariate models) and also binary choice models with heterogeneity. Among the results, we find complementary but asymmetric effects concerning both decisions in static models even controlling heterogeneity. We also test whether the persistence in conducting innovation activities matter. We do so in an extensive database that provides information about manufacturing firms. Our results point towards the importance of both ability of the manager (unobserved heterogeneity) and experience of the firm (dynamics in the equation indicator).
|Date of creation:||Jan 2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +34 91 624-9630
Fax: +34 91 624-9608
Web page: http://portal.uc3m.es/portal/page/portal/dpto_economia_empresa
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- repec:fth:inseep:9326 is not listed on IDEAS
- Miravete, Eugenio J. & Pernias, Jose C., 1998.
"Innovation Complementarity and Scale of Production,"
98-42, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- Miravete, Eugenio J & Pernías, Jose C, 2004. "Innovation Complimentarity and Scale of Production," CEPR Discussion Papers 4483, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1970. "Market Structure, Elasticity of Demand and Incentive to Invent," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 241-52, April.
- Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984.
"Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship,"
Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-38, July.
- Jerry A. Hausman & Bronwyn H. Hall & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," NBER Technical Working Papers 0017, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Richard C. Levin & Peter C. Reiss, 1988. "Cost-Reducing and Demand-Creating R&D with Spillovers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(4), pages 538-556, Winter.
- Rosenkranz, Stephanie, 1996. "Simultaneous Choice of Process and Product Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 1321, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Firm Size and the Nature of Innovation within Industries: The Case of Process and Product R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 232-43, May.
- Michael Fritsch & Monika Meschede, 2001.
"Product Innovation, Process Innovation, and Size,"
Review of Industrial Organization,
Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 335-350, November.
- Fritsch, Michael & Meschede, Monika, 1998. "Product Innovation, Process Innovation, and Size," Freiberg Working Papers 1998,13, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
- Fritsch, M. & Meschede, M., 1998. "Product Innovation, Process Innovation, and Size," Papers 98/13, Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
- Bonanno, Giacomo & Haworth, Barry, 1998. "Intensity of competition and the choice between product and process innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 495-510, July.
- Sabourin, David & Baldwin, John R. & Hanel, Peter, 2000. "Determinants of Innovative Activity in Canadian Manufacturing Firms: The Role of Intellectual Property Rights," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 2000122e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
- Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & John Van Reenen, 1994.
"Dynamic count data models of technological innovation,"
IFS Working Papers
W94/10, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Van Reenen, John, 1995. "Dynamic Count Data Models of Technological Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 333-44, March.
- Lunn, John E, 1986. "An Empirical Analysis of Process and Product Patenting: A Simultaneous Equation Framework," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 319-30, March.
- Arellano, M & Carrasco, R, 1996.
"Binary Choice Panel Data Models with Predetermined Variables,"
9618, Centro de Estudios Monetarios Y Financieros-.
- Arellano, Manuel & Carrasco, Raquel, 2003. "Binary choice panel data models with predetermined variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 125-157, July.
- Zvi Griliches, 1998.
"Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey,"
in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Griliches, Zvi, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 1661-1707, December.
- Zvi Griliches, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Working Papers 3301, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Zvi Griliches & Jerry A. Hausman, 1984. "Patents and R&D: Is There A Lag?," NBER Working Papers 1454, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ester Martinez-Ros & Jose Labeaga, 2002. "The Relationship Between Firm Size and Innovation Activity: A Double Decision Approach," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 35-50.
- Bughin, J. & Jacques, J. M., 1994. "Managerial efficiency and the Schumpeterian link between size, market structure and innovation revisited," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 653-659, November.
- Bronwyn H. Hall., 1989.
"The Impact of Corporate Restructuring on Industrial Research and Development,"
Economics Working Papers
89-129, University of California at Berkeley.
- Bronwyn H. Hall, 1989. "The Impact of Corporate Restructuring on Industrial Research and Development," NBER Working Papers 3216, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hall, Bronwyn H., 1989. "TheImpact of Corporate Restructuring On Industrial Research and Development," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7dw7p5dq, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1987. "Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(4), pages 567-74, November.
- Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-51, July.
- Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-28, June.
- A. Michael Spence, 1975. "Monopoly, Quality, and Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(2), pages 417-429, Autumn.
- Del Canto, Jesus Galende & Gonzalez, Isabel Suarez, 1999. "A resource-based analysis of the factors determining a firm's R&D activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 891-905, November.
- Levin, Richard C & Cohen, Wesley M & Mowery, David C, 1985. "R&D Appropriability, Opportunity, and Market Structure: New Evidence on Some Schumpeterian Hypotheses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 20-24, May.
- Crepon, Bruno & Duguet, Emmanuel, 1997.
"Research and development, competition and innovation pseudo-maximum likelihood and simulated maximum likelihood methods applied to count data models with heterogeneity,"
Journal of Econometrics,
Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 355-378, August.
- Crepon, B. & Duguet, E., 1995. "Research and Development, Competition and Innovation; Pseudo Maximum Likelihood and Simulated Maximum Likelihood Methods Applied to Count Data Models with Heterogeneity," Papiers d'Economie MathÃ©matique et Applications 95.08, UniversitÃ© PanthÃ©on-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
- Chamberlain, Gary, 1984. "Panel data," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Z. Griliches† & M. D. Intriligator (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 22, pages 1247-1318 Elsevier.
- Soete, Luc L. G., 1979. "Firm size and inventive activity : The evidence reconsidered," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 319-340, October.
- Zvi Griliches & Jacques Mairesse, 1981. "Productivity and R and D at the Firm Level," NBER Working Papers 0826, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cte:wbrepe:wb030101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.