SMEs’ Degree of Openness: The Case of Manufacturing Industries
Keywords:Open innovation, openness, external sources of information, SMEs, cluster analysis.
AbstractThis paper clusters SMEs based on their degree of openness. In addition, it explores both the internal and external determinants of the different clusters obtained. Based on a survey of 1214 firms in manufacturing industries and using both the dimensions of openness, breadth and depth, we find that SMEs could be clustered in four classes, depending on their degree of openness. We find that SMEs could adopt a closed, an open, an interactive or a user approach to innovation. With respect to the determinants of different classes of SMEs, the results of the logistic regression model, developed in this study, show variables such as national and regional proximities that account for explaining the likelihood that SMEs will be in a more open cluster rather than in a low open cluster. Also, this quantitative study shows that external obstacles to innovation may lead these SMEs from a closed approach to innovation to an interactive, user, or open approach to innovation. Finally, we find that the age of the firm is important in explaining the likelihood that SMEs will be in an open cluster rather than in a closed cluster.
ACS, Z. J. (1992). Small business economics: A global perspective. Challenge, 35 Nov./Dec., 38– 44.
ACS, Z. J. (Ed.). (2000). Regional Innovation, Knowledge and Global Change. New York: Pinter.
ACS, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. (1987a). Innovation, market structure and firm size. The Review of Economics Statistics, 69(4), 567–574.
ACS, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. (1987b). Innovation in large and small firms. Economics Letters, 23(1), 109–112.
ACS, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. American Economic Review, 78(4), 678– 690.
ALBEREIJO, I, O., Adegbite, S.A., IIori, M.O., Adeniyi, A.A., Aderemi, H.A. (2009). Technological Innovation Sources and Institutional Supports forcManufacturing Small and Medium Enterprises in Nigeria. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 4(2), 82-89.
ALDENDERFER, M. S., Blashfield, R. V. (1984). Cluster analysis. California: Sage Publications.
AMARA, N., Landry, R. (2005). Sources of information as determinants of novelty of innovation in manufacturing firms: evidence from the 1999 Statistics Canada innovation survey. Technovation, 25(3), 245-259.
BALDWIN, J., Lin, Z. (2002). Impediments to advanced technology adoption for Canadian manufacturers. Research Policy, 31(1), 1-18.
BLUMENTRITT, T., Danis, W., M. (2006). Business Strategy Types and Innovative Practices. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18(2), 274.
BOOMER, M., Jalajas, D. S. (2004). Innovation Sources of Large and Small Technology-Based Firms. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51(1), 13-18.
BORG, I., Groenen, P. J. F. (2005). Modern multidimensional scaling: Theory and applications. New York: Springer.
BROWN, J. S., Duguid, P. (2000). The social life of information. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
BROWN, J. S., Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198-213.
BURT, R. S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
CASSIMAN, B., Veugelers, R. (2002). R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium. The American Economic Review, 92(4), 1169-1184.
CHESBROUGH, H., Ed. (2003a). Open innovation. The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
CHESBROUGH, H. (2003b). The era of open innovation. Sloan Management Review, Summer, 35-41.
CHESBROUGH, H., Crowther, A. K. (2006). Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Management, 36(3), 229-236.
CHIANG, Y.-H., Hung, K.-P. (2010). Exploring open search strategies and perceived innovation performance from the perspective of inter-organizational knowledge flows. R&D Management, 40(3), 292-299.
CLOGG, C. C. (1995). Latent class models. In G. Arminger, C. C. Clogg, & M. E. Sobel (Eds.), Handbook of statistical modeling for the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 311–359). New York: Plenum.
COHEN, W. M., Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
DAHLANDER, L., Gann, D. M. (2010). How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39(6), 699-709.
DASGUPTA, P., David, P. A. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5), 487-521.
DE JONG, J. P. J., Marsili, O. (2006). The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms. Research Policy, 35(2), 213-229.
DOLOREUX, D. (2004). Regional networks of small and medium sized enterprises: evidence from the Metropolitan Area of Ottawa in Canada. European Planning Studies, 12(2), 173 - 189.
DYER, J. H., Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and Managing a High-Performance Knowledge-Sharing Network: The Toyota Case. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 345-367.
ENKEL, E., Gassmann, O., Chesbrough, H. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, 39(4), 311-316.
FIELD, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE publications Ltd.
FREEMAN, C., Soete, L. (1997). The economics of industrial innovation. London: Printer.
GALIA, F., Legros, D. (2004). Complementarities between obstacles to innovation: evidence from France. Research Policy, 33(8), 1185-1199.
GASSMANN, O., Enkel, E. (2004). Towards a theory of open innovation: three core process archetypes. Proceedings of the R&D Management Conference, Lisbon, Portugal.
HAIR, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. NJ: Prentice Hall.
HUIZINGH, E. K. R. E. (2011). Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 31(1), 2-9.
IDRISSI, M. O., Amara, N., Landry, R. (2010). The Complementarity of SME’s Openness to External Sources of Information: Evidence from the Manufacturing Sector. Paper presented at the VIII Triple Helix conference. Madrid-Spain, October 12-15 2010.
KATILA, R., Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1183-1194.
KEOGH, W., Evans, G. (1998). Strategies for growth and the barriers faced by new technology-based SMEs. Journal of small business and enterprise development, 5(4), 337-350. KEUPP, M. M., Gassmann, O. (2009). Determinants and archetype users of open innovation. R&D Management, 39(4), 331-341.
KOSTOPOULOS, K., Papalexandris, A., Papachroni, M., Ioannou, G. (2011). Absorptive capacity, innovation, and financial performance. Journal of Business Research. 64(12), 1335-1343.
LANE, P. J., Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477.
LAURSEN, K., Salter, A. (2004). Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy, 33(8), 1201-1215.
LAURSEN, K., Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131-150.
LEANA, C. R., Buren, H. J. V. III. (1999). Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538-555.
LEE, S., Park, G., Yoon, B., Park, J. (2010). Open innovation in SMEs--An intermediated network model. Research Policy, 39(2), 290-300.
LEGLER, H., Frietsch, R. (2007). Neuabgrenzung der Wissenswirtschaft. Forschungsintensive Industrien und wissensintensive Dienstleistungen (NIW/ISI Listen 2006). Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem, Nr. 22. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF).
LEIPONEN, A., Helfat, C. E. (2009). Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth. Strategic Management Journal, 31(2), 224-236.
LICHTENTHALER, U. (2008). Open innovation in practice: an analysis of strategic approaches to technology transactions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(1), 148-157.
MACQUEEN, J. (1967). Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. Proceedings of the Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, 1(287-297), Berkeley: University of California Press.
MAJOR,E.J.,Cordey-Hayes,M.(2003).Encouraginginnovation in small firms through externally generated knowledge. In L. V. Shavinina (Dir.), The International Handbook on Innovation (pp. 667-679). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
MANDARA, J. (2003). The typological approach in child and family psychology: a review of theory, methods, and research. Clinical Child & Family Psychology Review, 6(2), 129-146.
MASKELL, P., Malmberg, A. (1999). Localised learning and industrial competitiveness. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(2), 167-185.
MCINTYRE, R. M., Blashfield, R. K. (1980). A nearest- centroid technique for evaluating the minimum-variance clustering procedure. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 15(2), 225-238.
MENARD, S. W. (1995). Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
MILLIGAN, G. W., Sokol, L. M. (1980). A two-stage clustering algorithm with robust recovery characteristics. Educational and Psychological Measurement,40(3),755-759.
MOWERY, D. C., Oxley, J. E., Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77-91.
NUNALLY, J. C. (1967). Psychometric Theory. First edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
OCASIO, W. (1997). Towards An Attention-Based View of The Firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (S1), 187-206.
OCDE. (1997). OECD Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data: Oslo Manual. Paris: OCDE. (3rd ed. ).
OCDE. (2005). Oslo Manual, Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data. Paris: OCDE and Eurostat.
OGAWA, K. (1987). An Approach to Simultaneous Estimation and Segmentation in Conjoint Analysis. Marketing Science, 6(1), 66-81.
OZMAN, M. (2011). Modularity, Industry Life Cycle and Open Innovation. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 6(1), 26-37.
PAVITT, K., Robson, M., Townsend, J. (1987). The Size Distribution of Innovating Firms in the UK: 1945-1983. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(3), 297-316.
PUNJ, G., Stewart, D. W. (1983). Cluster Analysis in Marketing Research: Review and Suggestions for Application. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 134-148.
RADAS, S., Bozic, L. (2009). The antecedents of SME innovativeness in an emerging transition economy. Technovation, 29(6-7), 438-450.
ROBINS, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A. (1998). The typological approach to studying personality. In Cairns, R. B., Bergman, L. R., & Kagan, J. (Eds.), Methods and models for studying the individual (pp. 135-157). London: Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: Sage Publications.
ROMIJN, H., Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research Policy, 31(7), 1053-1067.
ROSENBERG, N. (1982). Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
ROTHWELL, R. (1991). External networking and innovation in small and medium-sized manufacturing firms in Europe. Technovation, 11(2), 93-112.
ROTHWELL, R., Zegveld, W. (1982). Innovation and the Small and Medium Sized Firm. London: Frances Pinter.
SAVITSKAYA, I., Pekka, S; Marko, T. (2010). Barriers to Open innovation : Case China. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 5(4), 10-21.
SCHUMPETER, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper.
SIMON, H. A. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations.The American Economic Review,69(4),493-513.
SINGH, J. (1990). A typology of consumer dissatisfaction response styles. Journal of Retailing, 66(1), 57-99.
SPANOS, Y. E., Voudouris, E. (2009). Antecedents and trajectories of AMT adoption: the case of Greek manufacturing SMEs. Research Policy, 38(1), 144-155.
STOREY, D. J. (1994). Understanding the small business sector. London: Routledge.
TIDD, J., Bessant, J. R., Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing innovation: integrating technological, market and organizational change. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
VAN DE VRANDE, V., de Jong, J. P. J., Vanhaverbeke, W., de Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6-7), 423-437.
VEUGELERS, R., Cassiman, B. (1999). Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 28(1), 63-80.
VON EYE, A. (2002). Configural frequency analysis: Methods, models, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
VON HIPPEL, E. (1976). The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Research Policy, 5(3), 212-239.
VON HIPPEL, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
VON HIPPEL, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
WARD JR, J. H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American statistical association, 58(301), 236-244.
WOLFF, J. A., & Pett, T. L. (2006). Small-firm performance: modeling the role of product and process improvements. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(2), 268-284.
ZAHRA, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review, 27(2), 185-203.
ZAHRA, S. A., & Nielsen, A. P. (2002). Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization. Strategic Management Journal, 23(5), 377-398.
ZENG, S. X., Xie, X. M., & Tam, C. M. (2010). Relationship between cooperation networks and innovation performance of SMEs. Technovation, 30(3), 181-194.
How to Cite
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).