No Access

DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATION IN COMPANIES IN INCUBATION: THE CASE OF PORTUGAL

JOSĒ PEDRO CARRIÇO CRAVO

Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra, ISCAC, Quinta Agrícola – Bencanta 3040-316 Coimbra, Portugal

E-mail Address: jose.cravo88@gmail.com

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

and

JOÃO PAULO COELHO MARQUES

Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra, ISCAC, Quinta Agrícola – Bencanta 3040-316 Coimbra, Portugal

Department of Economics, Management and Industrial Engineering, Research Unit on Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policies, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S136391961950018XCited by:4 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

This paper highlights the relevance of innovation in small firms based on university business incubators in Portugal. Ever since Schumpeter indicated innovation to be the main economic driver of economic development and a critical factor in the development and performance of companies, a number of authors have discussed this phenomenon but there is still no consensus on how it operates. Through statistical analysis, the study focuses on a sample of 243 Portuguese companies based on incubators linked to or promoted by universities. It was concluded that product innovation is most significant in an incubation environment, and also that the origin of businesses and the development of R&D activities determine the type of innovation generated. However, most of the companies surveyed are not engaged in R&D activities. We propose some policy measures and lessons for management.

Keywords:

References

Barney, JB [2001] Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 41–56. Web of Science, Google Scholar
Bergek, A, C Berggren, T Magnusson and M Hobday [2013] Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation? Research Policy, 42, 1210–1224. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Carayannis, EG and M Von Zedtwitz [2005] Architecting gloCal (global-local), real-virtual incubator networks (G-RVINs) as catalysts and accelerators of entrepreneurship in transitioning and developing economies: Lessons learned and best practices from current development and business incubation practices. Technovation, 25, 95–110. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Dewick, P, K Green, T Fleetwood and M Miozzo [2006] Modelling creative destruction: Technological diffusion and industrial structure change to 2050. Technological Forecast & Social Change, 73, 1084–1106. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Drucker, P [1985] The discipline of innovation. Harvard Business Review, May–Jun. 63 (3), 67–72. Web of Science, Google Scholar
Etzkowitz, H [2002] Incubation of incubators: Innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks. Science and Public Policy, 29 (2), 115–128. Crossref, Google Scholar
Etzkowitz, H [2014] Making a humanities town: Knowledge-infused clusters, civic entrepreneurship and civil society in local innovation systems. Triple Helix Journal, 1, 12. Google Scholar
Etzkowitz, H, A Webster, C Gebhardt and B Terra [2000] The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Fagerberg, J [1987] A technology gap approach to why growth rates differ. Research Policy, 16, 87–99. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Freeman, C [1991] Innovation and growth. In Handbook of Industrial Innovation, M Dodgson and R Rothwell (eds.), pp. 78–93, Aldershot: Elgar. Google Scholar
Frisch, R [1933] Propagation problems and impulse problems in dynamic economics. In Economic Essays in Honour of Gustav Cassel, K Koch (eds.), pp. 171–205. London: Frank Cass. Google Scholar
Ganter, A and A Hecker [2013] Deciphering antecedents of organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research, 66, 575–584. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Grundström, C, R Sjöström, A , Uddenberg and A Rönnbäck [2012] Fast Growing SME’s and the role of innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 16 (3), 19. Link, Google Scholar
Kaufman, A, CL Tucci and M Brumer [2003] Can creative destruction be destroyed? Military IR&D and destruction along the value-added chain. Research Policy, 32, 1537–1554. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Kline, SJ and N Rosenberg [1986] An overview of innovation. In The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth, R Landau and N Rosenberg (ed.) pp. 275–305. Washington DC: The National Academy Press. Google Scholar
Louçã, F [2014] The elusive concept of innovation for Schumpeter, Marschak and the early econometricians. Research Policy, 43, 1442–1449. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Marques, JPC [2014] Do firms in incubation innovate too? Evidence from Portugal. International Review of Management and Business Research, 3, 498–507. Google Scholar
Marques, JPC, JMG Caraça and H Diz [2010] Do business incubators function as a transfer technology mechanism from University to Industry? Evidence from Portugal. The Open Business Journal, 3, 15–29. Crossref, Google Scholar
Marschak, J. [1940] Review of business cycles. Journal of Political Economy, 48, 889–894. Crossref, Google Scholar
Marx, K and F Engels (1848). O Manifesto Comunista, Tradução Portuguesa, Ridendo Castigat Mores. Google Scholar
McGrath, R [2013] Transient advantage. Harvard Business Review, 91, 62–70. Google Scholar
Naidoo, V [2010] Firm survival through a crisis: The influence of market orientation, marketing innovation and business strategy. Industrial Marketing Management, 39, 1311–1320. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Nair, A and D Ahlstrom [2003] Delayed creative destruction and the coexistence of technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 20, 345–365. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
OECD (2005). OSLO Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3, OECD/Eurostat. Google Scholar
Phillips, R [2002] Technology business incubators: How effective as technology transfer mechanisms. Technology in Society, 24, 299–316. Crossref, Google Scholar
Robertson, PL, GL Casali and D Jacobsen [2012] Managing open incremental process innovation: Absorptive capacity and distributed learning. Research Policy, 41, 822–832. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Rosenbusch, N, J Brinckmann and A Bausch [2011] Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs, Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 441–457. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Rothaermel, F and M Thursby [2005] University–incubator firm knowledge flows: Assessing their impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy, 34, 305–320. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Sanchez-Famoso, V, A Maseda and T Iturralde [2014] The role of internal social capital in organisational innovation: An empirical study of family firms. European Management Journal, 32, 950–962. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Santoro, MD and S Gopalakrishnan [2001] Relationship dynamics between university research centers and industrial firms: Their impact on technology transfer activities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 163–171. Crossref, Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J [1941] Prefacio a teoria del desarrollo economico. Fondo de Cultura Economica, 9–15. Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J [1942] Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Mcgraw-Hill. Google Scholar
Shefer, D and A Frenkel [2005] R&D, firm size and innovation: An empirical analysis. Technovation, 25, 25–32. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar