INNOVATION IN LT/LMT SECTORS – DISCIPLINARY DEBATES, KEY INSIGHTS AND SYNTHESIS OF LITERATURE
5.8. Synthesizing Empirical Studies
The reviewed publications were further subjected to some analysis to derive results and conclusions. Following information was extracted in this regard;
February 2011
(1) Author(s) and year of publication (2) Approach/methodology/methods
(3) Country or region and sector/industry focus
(4) Main focus or topic of research within LT/LMT context
Table 5.6 provides a sample of this categorization.
Table 5.6: Sample Table: Synthesizing the Empirical Studies on LT/LMT Innovation
Author(s) and Year Approach/Methodology/Methods Country/Region & Sector Main Focus of Research within LT/LMT Context FIRM-LEVEL DETERMINANTS
De Jong and Marsili (2006)
Computer Assisted Telephone Survey (database of 1234 small & micro firms)
Data collected in 2003
Netherlands, different sectors
Empirical taxonomy of small innovative firms
Evangelista and Mastrostefano (2006)
Survey (10 European countries) Europe, 22 different sectors Influence of firm size, sector and country on variety in determinants of innovation
Vega-Jurado et al. (2008) Survey (6094 manufacturing firms)) Data collected in 2000
Spain, different sectors Effect of external and internal factors on firm’s product innovation
Santamaria et al. (2009) Survey (1300 SMEs) Data collected in 2002
Spain, different sectors Factors/determinants of innovation other than R&D
Kirner et al. (2009) Postal survey (1663 manufacturing firms) Data collected in 2006
Germany, different sectors Comparison among LT, LMT and HT firms in terms of Innovation paths and innovation performance INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL DETERMINANTS
Entrialgo et al. (2000) Survey – database (233 SMEs) Spain, fifteen sectors Influence of individual/psychological characteristics on innovation in a firm
COMPARING LT/LMT WITH HT TO UNDERSTAND DETERMINANTS Thornhill (2006) Survey (sample of 845 observations) Canada, different HT and LT
sectors
Comparison of LT and HT with regards to knowledge, innovation and firm performance
Blanes and Busom (2004)
Survey – database (2000 manufacturing firms), data for the time period 1990 – 1996 analyzed
Spain, different sectors Effect of R&D subsidy programs on innovation in HT, MT and LT sectors
Vonortas (2002) Literature review, archival Miscellaneous Latin American Countries, different sectors
Technology and innovation policy initiatives; comparisons for different HT and LT sectors
SECTORAL DETERMINANTS OF INNOVATION Jones-Evans et al. (1999) Qualitative – face-to-face semi-structured
interviews (representatives of ILOs)
Ireland and Sweden Role of industrial liaison office in influencing innovation as a result of university-industry collaboration
Bigliardi and Dormio (2009)
Survey (98 firms) Northern Italy, food
machinery sector
Determinants of technological innovation
Kirbach and
Schmiedeberg (2008)
Survey (sample of 12600 manufacturing firms, up to 47 % LT & LMT firms)
Database (1993 – 2003)
Germany (East & West), different sectors
Comparison of two geographical regions in terms of
relationship between innovation and export performance and factors influencing innovation
Avermaete et al. (2003) Survey (top manager or owner of 55 micro and small enterprises)
Belgium (two regions – north
& south), food sector (foods and drinks)
Determinants of innovation, comparison of two regions with two different sectors
KNOWLEDGEBASE, TECHNOLOGIES, OTHER INPUTS Schmidt (2009) Case Study (archival records and publications) USA, bedding mattress
sector
Technology spillover from HT to LT/LMT sector
Waguespack and Birnir (2005)
Archival records (patent database 1990 – 1994) USA, different sectors Geographical characteristics of knowledge flows
Schmierl and Kohler (2005)
Firm case studies Not specified Knowledge management and training in LT and LMT firms
LEARNING PROCESS AND DEMAND Von Tunzelmann and
Acha (2005)
Literature Review - Perspectives on innovation in LT sectors
Guerzoni (2010) Literature review - Impact of demand (market size, user sophistication) on
innovation Keskin (2006) Survey (managers of 157 SMEs) Turkey, eleven different
sectors
Relationship among market orientation, learning orientation and innovativeness
INSTITUTIONS (SECTORAL AND NATIONAL INFLUENCES) Storz (2008) Mixed methods (documents and interviews) Japan, games software
sector
Institutional setting and competence of actors: Dynamics of innovation system
Fisher-Vanden and Terry (2009)
Four different datasets for manufacturing firms (archives), quantitative analysis
China, steel sector Influence of technology acquisition factors and technology absorptive capacity factors on a firm’s ability to utilize
Casper and Whitley (2004)
Archival research Germany, Sweden and UK,
five different sectors
Comparing institutions across different countries
INTERACTIONS AMONG AGENTS (FIRMS & NON-FIRMS) Freel (2003) Survey (5200 manufacturing SMEs, 597
responses), database developed in 2001
Scotland & Northern England, ten different sectors
Relationship of cooperation for innovation and interactions with firms’ product/process ‘innovativeness’
Douthwaite et al. (2001) Case Study (archival records) Asia (countries not specified) Focus on four different technologies
Analysis of innovation history of four technologies with high and low levels of complexity
Abramovsky et al. (2004) Survey – database developed in 2001 France, Germany, Spain, UK, sectors not specified
Innovation through cooperation and collaboration: Comparing four countries
INTERACTIONS AMONG AGENTS & INSTITUTIONS Faulkner (2009) Mixed methods (secondary data, interviews,
observations)
Europe, tissue engineering sector
Role of regulation with regards to innovation in technology sectors
Boymal et al. (2007) Archival records, qualitative Vietnam, internet-based sector
The influence of innovation policy on a sector
INTERACTIONS AMONG SECTORAL ELEMENTS Andersen and
Munksgaard (2009)
Qualitative (3 cases), interviews and observations
Denmark, food industry Collaborative product development and knowledge contexts
Cetindamar and Ulusoy (2008)
Survey (135 manufacturing firms), face-to-face structured interviews
Turkey, textile, chemical, food & machinery sector
Impact of collaboration and partnership on innovation performance of firms
Bengtsson et al. (2009) Survey (267 manufacturing firms), questionnaire Sweden, eight different sectors
Comparing low cost strategy vs. innovation strategy in the context of outsourcing
The categorization of literature (as shown in the sample Table 5.6) has been used to arrive at a number of conclusions regarding nature of research work on LT/LMT innovation. Figures 5.3 and 5.4.below provide geographical spread of empirical work on LT/LMT innovations over the time period 1999-2010.
Figure 5.3: Region-wise Geographical Spread of Publications on LT/LMT Innovation (1999 – 2010)
Figures 5.4: Three-Category Spread of Literature on LT/LMT Innovation (1999 – 2010)
Table 5.7 below further provides information about the types of LT/LMT sectors and countries the literature focuses on;
MAJOR LT/LMT SECTORS STUDIED (Predominantly Manufacturing)
MAJOR
COUNTRY-CONTEXTS Agriculture, Mineral (Metallic), Mineral (Non-Metallic), Food,
Beverages, Chemical, Machinery and Equipment, Pharmaceuticals, Building Materials, Biotechnology, Semiconductor, Steel, Metal Packaging, Wood, Medical Equipment, Rubber, Leather, Plastic, Paper, Food Machinery, Construction, Textile, Electronics, Tobacco, Housing, Furniture, Ferrous Ore mining, Non-Ferrous Ore Mining, Glass, Footwear, Printing/Publishing, By-Products, Graphic Arts, Bedding Mattress, Mechanical Engineering, Ceramic, Electronic Games, Games Software, Integrated Circuit, Vehicles Equipment, Transport, Fertilizer, Office Equipment
United Kingdom, Germany, France, Belgium, Portugal, Austria, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Greece, Australia, USA, Canada, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, India, Kazakhstan, Vietnam, Jamaica
Table 5.7: Sectors and Countries included in Empirical Work (1999 – 2010)
As evident from Figures 5.3 and 5.4, there is a dominant focus on various European countries and USA which are developed economies (83% studies).
However, only 11% research papers focus on developing countries mainly located in Asia, Latin America and Africa. This points to a gap in our knowledge about LT/LMT innovation because developing country contexts for innovation and systems of innovation are different from developed country contexts. Thus attention needs to be paid to conduct research on LT/LMT innovation in less developed parts of the world including Pakistan (for which no empirical work was found).
Another purpose of categorizing literature (as shown in the sample Table 5.6) was to help find out methodologies/methods applied by researchers to study LT/LMT innovation. Figure 5.5 below provide information in this regard;
Figure 5.5: Methodology/Methods Applied by Researchers (Percentage of Articles)
Findings suggest that most research relies on using quantitative methods (67% papers) influenced from positivist paradigm to illustrate some aspect of LT/LMT innovations while 20% apply qualitative methods (phenomenological approach). However, studies that employ a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods are far less (3% of publications with mainly case study approach) while the influence of critical realism as a paradigm seems non-existent. In order to fill the gap this research applies case study and mixed methods approach underpinned by critical realist view of reality and knowledge to address research objectives and questions regarding LT/LMT innovation in the marble sector of north-west Pakistan.
All information contained in column 4 titled ‘Main Focus of Research in LT/LMT Context’ (as shown in sample Table 5.6) was further subjected to analysis. In this regard a software tool named Leximancer 2.25 was used.
Leximancer is software used to extract themes and concepts contained within electronic documents. These themes and concepts are displayed visually on interactive maps that provide the researcher with a unique perspective on text-based data. Additionally, the software also allows for automatically
interactive maps help understand the contents of a large body of text or information. Provided below are figures 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8.
Figure 5.6: Key Themes: Main Focus of Research in LT/LMT Context
Figure 5.7: Concepts: Main Focus of Research in LT/LMT Context
Entities
Concept Absolute Count Relative Count
innovation 49 100%
Influence 48 97.9%
firms 17 34.6%
knowledge 15 30.6%
product 15 30.6%
technological 14 28.5%
firm 13 26.5%
sectors 11 22.4%
LT 9 18.3%
Role 9 18.3%
capacity 8 16.3%
absorptive 8 16.3%
market 8 16.3%
organizational 5 10.2%
developing 4 8.1%
formal 3 6.1%
Open 3 6.1%
size 3 6.1%
characteristics 3 6.1%
sophistication 3 6.1%
Understanding 3 6.1%
management 2 4%
economy 2 4%
mode 1 2%
Figure 5.8: Concept Ranking: Main Focus of Research in LT/LMT Context
In Figure 5.6 the circles highlight the key themes identified among the main focus or topics of research in LT/LMT context. The dots in Figure 5.7 point out the key concepts within the themes. It is important to point out that the brighter and larger a theme and concept in the two figures are, the more central they are in terms of the list of ‘main focus of research’. As can be observed none of the themes have a circle significantly large compared to others. Also, none of the circles (except ‘LT’ and ‘Firms’) intersect to suggest a conceptual relationship. This leads to the conclusion that the main focus or topics of research on LT/LMT innovation are very diverse and scattered across a wide spectrum suggesting a lack of direction or focus among the research community.
Figure 5.8 reveals the frequency of a concept within the ‘main focus of research’. ‘Innovation’, ‘firms’, ‘firm’ and ‘product’ emerge as the most frequent concepts (as expected because most research has been about innovation from firm perspective with products occupying centre-stage). However, an interesting dimension is the appearance of ‘influence’ as the second most frequent concept. This suggests that the main focus of research on LT/LMT innovation (1999 to 2010) has been on understanding influence with regards to some aspect of LT/LMT innovation.