IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sec/cnstan/0454.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

External vs Internal Determinants of Firm Technology Strategy:Evidence from the Polish Services Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Krzysztof Szczygielski
  • Wojciech Grabowski
  • Richard Woodward

Abstract

Differences in the growth of firms remain a major topic in economics and strategy research.In this paper we investigated the link between innovation performance and employment growth. First we discuss the problem from the theoretical point of view and then we analyze the relationship between innovation performance and the dynamics of employment in the Polish service firms in 2004-2009. Firms that introduced new services or marketing techniques experienced stronger growth. Process innovations contributed to employment reduction. Tellingly, this effect could only be observed in 2008-2009, a subperiod which saw the lowest levels of aggregate demand. This conclusion yields support to the presumption formulated by Pianta (2005) that the impact of innovation on employment growth depends on the macroeconomic situation.

Suggested Citation

  • Krzysztof Szczygielski & Wojciech Grabowski & Richard Woodward, 2013. "External vs Internal Determinants of Firm Technology Strategy:Evidence from the Polish Services Sector," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0454, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:sec:cnstan:0454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://case-research.eu/sites/default/files/publications/CNSA_2013_454.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tommy Clausen & Mikko Pohjola & Koson Sapprasert & Bart Verspagen, 2012. "Innovation strategies as a source of persistent innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(3), pages 553-585, June.
    2. Koson Sapprasert & Tommy Høyvarde Clausen, 2012. "Organizational innovation and its effects," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1283-1305, October.
    3. Ireland, R. Duane & Webb, Justin W., 2009. "Crossing the great divide of strategic entrepreneurship: Transitioning between exploration and exploitation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 469-479, September.
    4. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    5. 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.
    6. Zahra, Shaker A., 1996. "Technology strategy and financial performance: Examining the moderating role of the firm's competitive environment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 189-219, May.
    7. Wojciech Grabowski & Krzysztof Szczygielski, 2012. "Innovation Strategies and Productivity in the Polish Services Sector in the light of CIS 2008," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0448, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    8. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    9. John Haltiwanger & Ron S. Jarmin & Javier Miranda, 2010. "Who Creates Jobs? Small vs. Large vs. Young," Working Papers 10-17, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    10. Patel, Pari & Vega, Modesto, 1999. "Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 145-155, March.
    11. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin & Verspagen, Bart, 2010. "Innovation and Economic Development," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 833-872, Elsevier.
    12. Robert A. Burgelman, 1991. "Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-262, August.
    13. Subodh Kandamuthan, 2002. "Market Concentration, Firm Size and Innovative Activity: A Firm-level Economic Analysis of Selected Indian Industries under Economic Liberalization," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2002-108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    14. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    15. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    16. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    17. Richard R. Nelson, 1991. "Why do firms differ, and how does it matter?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(S2), pages 61-74, December.
    18. Krzysztof Szczygielski, 2011. "What are service sector innovations and how do we measure them?," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 422, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Auh, Seigyoung & Menguc, Bulent, 2005. "Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(12), pages 1652-1661, December.
    20. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    21. Martin Srholec & Bart Verspagen, 2012. "The Voyage of the Beagle into innovation: explorations on heterogeneity, selection, and sectors," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1221-1253, October.
    22. Jeffrey G. Covin & Dennis P. Slevin, 1989. "Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 75-87, January.
    23. Aija Leiponen, 2012. "The benefits of R&D and breadth in innovation strategies: a comparison of Finnish service and manufacturing firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1255-1281, October.
    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. Jorge Ferreira & Sofia Cardim & Arnaldo Coelho, 2021. "Dynamic Capabilities and Mediating Effects of Innovation on the Competitive Advantage and Firm’s Performance: the Moderating Role of Organizational Learning Capability," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 620-644, June.
    2. Slavo Radosevic & Denis Eylem Yoruk & Richard Woodward, 2010. "Knowledge source preferences as determinants of strategic entrepreneurial orientation," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 109, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    3. Strobl, Andreas & Bauer, Florian & Matzler, Kurt, 2020. "The impact of industry-wide and target market environmental hostility on entrepreneurial leadership in mergers and acquisitions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    4. Belderbos, Rene & Gilsing, Victor & Lokshin, Boris, 2009. "Persistence of and interrelation between horizontal and vertical technology alliances," MERIT Working Papers 2009-065, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2020. "Shifting back and forth: How does the temporal cycling between exploratory and exploitative R&D influence firm performance?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 386-396.
    6. Matsuno, Ken & Kohlbacher, Florian, 2020. "Proactive marketing response to population aging: The roles of capabilities and commitment of firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 93-104.
    7. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.
    8. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    9. Hyojung Kim & Namgyoo Park & Jeonghwan Lee, 2014. "How does the second-order learning process moderate the relationship between innovation inputs and outputs of large Korean firms?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 69-103, March.
    10. Alp Eren Yurtseven & Mehmet Teoman Pamukçu, 2022. "Innovation patterns in firms and intra-industry heterogeneity empirical evidence from Turkey," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 645-679, September.
    11. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    12. Pilar Bernal & Juan P. Maicas & Pilar Vargas, 2016. "Exploration, exploitation and innovation performance: Disentangling environmental dynamism," Documentos de Trabajo dt2016-03, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    13. Arie Y. Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2011. "Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 81-98, February.
    14. Lori Rosenkopf & Patia McGrath, 2011. "Advancing the Conceptualization and Operationalization of Novelty in Organizational Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1297-1311, October.
    15. Maurice J. Lyver & Ta-Jung Lu, 2018. "Sustaining Innovation Performance in SMEs: Exploring the Roles of Strategic Entrepreneurship and IT Capabilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-27, February.
    16. Krzysztof Szczygielski & Wojciech Grabowski & Richard Woodward, 2013. "Innovation and the Growth of Service Firms:The Polish Case," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0453, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    17. Chung-Jen Chen & Bou-Wen Lin & Jun-You Lin & Yung-Chang Hsiao, 2020. "Learning-from-parents: exploitative knowledge acquisition and the innovation performance of joint venture," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 228-258, February.
    18. Guktae Kim & Moon-Goo Huh, 2015. "Exploration and organizational longevity: The moderating role of strategy and environment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 389-414, June.
    19. Jingoo Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2020. "Performance implications of incremental transition and discontinuous jump between exploration and exploitation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1083-1111, June.
    20. Parisa Haim Faridian & Donald O Neubaum & Siri Terjesen & Roland E Kidwell, 2023. "The link between technical knowledge transfer in alliances and resource efficiency: ambidexterity in development of R&D and appropriation capabilities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2179-2203, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology Strategy; Poland; Services; Innovation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
    • L8 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:sec:cnstan:0454. 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: Anna Budzynska (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caseepl.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.