Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회논문지)

The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Priority of Innovation Activity, Business Performance and Maximization Factors of SMEs.

중소기업의 혁신활동과 사업성과 극대화 요인의 우선순위 연구

  • Kim, Chi-Kook (Department of Business Consulting, Daejeon University)
  • 김치국 (대전대학교 융합컨설팅학과)
  • Received : 2017.10.19
  • Accepted : 2018.02.02
  • Published : 2018.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the priorities of innovation activities, business performance, and maximization factors of SMEs. Support programs for each government department are operated by various industries. Various supports, including subsidies, grants, marketing, planning, and education, are provided to each company. Therefore, this study aims to analyze and identify the priorities of innovation activities that have a positive effect on business performance. The efficacy of the proposed model and the psychometric properties of structure were analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The hierarchical structure of corporate innovation activities are composed of 'R&D' and 'government support', and 'Inside R&D, Outsourcing R &D, Consortium R&D'. As a result of analyzing companies that received more than one type of R&D government support, it can be seen that 'government support' (72.1%) is more important than 'research and development' (27.8%). In addition, this study found key sub-factors loadings including Assistant Support (30.1%), Tax Support (22.7%), Funding Support (18.8%), Inside R&D (10.8%), Outsourcing R&D (10.3%), and Consortium R&D (7.2%). Analysis results suggest that the priorities of detailed innovation activities of R&D and government support affect product innovation and process innovation, which in turn, influence business performance and maximization of SMEs. This implies that SMEs who want to participate in the government support project will be helpful in setting the direction of innovation activities. This study also suggests the importance of strategic priorities among the decision elements for CEOs.

본 연구의 목적은 중소기업의 혁신활동과 사업성과 극대화 요인의 우선순위에 대한 연구이다. 각 정부부처별 지원사업이 다양한 산업별로 운영되고 있으며, 각 기업에 보조금, 지원금 및 마케팅, 기획, 교육등의 다양한 지원이 이루어지고 있고 각 기업들 또한 이에 참여하게 된다. 따라서 본 연구는 정부지원사업의 참여요인 즉, 기업혁신활동에 따라 사업성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 혁신활동의 우선순위를 AHP기법을 이용해 분석하고 활용하는데 목적이 있다. 기업혁신활동의 계층구조는 '연구개발'과 '정부지원'으로 하였으며, '내부R&D, 외부R&D, 공동R&D'를 연구개발의 하위요인으로, '자금지원, 금융지원, 조세지원'을 정부지원의 하위요인으로 설정하였다. R&D정부지원을 1회 이상 받아 본 기업대상 분석결과, 정부지원(72.1%)이 연구개발(27.8%)에 비해 중요함을 알 수 있으며, 하위요인의 경우 자금지원(30.1%), 조세지원(22.7%), 금융지원(18.8%), 내부R&D(10.8%), 외부R&D(10.3%), 공동R&D(7.2%)의 순으로 나타났다. 이러한 분석결과는 중소기업의 사업성과 극대화에 영향을 미치는 요인중 연구개발과 정부지원의 세부혁신활동 우선순위가 제품혁신 및 공정혁신에 영향을 미치고 있다는 사실을 시사한다. 이러한 시사점은 정부지원사업에 참여하고자하는 중소기업들의 혁신활동 방향설정에 도움이 될 것으로 판단되며, 본 연구에서는 기업혁신을 효율적으로 추진하고자 하는 CEO들에게 결정요소간 전략적 우선순위를 제안하여 효율적으로 기업을 혁신하는데 도움을 주고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Conceicao, P., D. Hamill, and P. Pinheiro, "Innovative Science and Technology Commercialization Strategies at 3M: A Case Study", Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 25-38, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0923-4748(01)00044-3
  2. W. H. Kim, W. I. Choi, "A theoretical study on the relationship between strategy type, dimension of innovation and performance", Management Information Research, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 103-122, 2000.
  3. S. W. Choi, "Strategic management for SME technology, management innovation and competitive advantage -Focusing on cost reduction and increase in sales-", Management Information Research, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 169-186, 2001.
  4. Hoffman, K., M. Parejo, J. Bessant, L. Perren, "Small Firms, R&D, Technology and Innovation in the UK: A Literature Review", Technovation, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39-55, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(97)00102-8
  5. Birchall, D. W., J. J. Chanaron, K. Soderquist, "Managing Innovation in SMEs: A Comparison of Companies in the UK, France and Portugal", International Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 291-305, 1996.
  6. Cohen, W. M., "Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: the case of process and product R&D", The review of Economics and Statistics. pp. 232-243, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2109925
  7. D. H. Go, H. S. Moon, S. M. Lee, "A Study on the Effectiveness of Government Support on Innovation Activities in the Enterprise", Journal of Business Research, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 1325-1344, 2015.
  8. J. K. Song, H. J. Kim, "An Analysis of the Effect of Financial Support Policy for Promoting R & D Investment", Technology Innovation Research, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1-48, 2009.
  9. Korea Business Innovation Survey, STEPI, 2016.
  10. S. B. Choi, K. L. Ha, "A Study on Technology Innovation and Management Efficiency Analysis", Journal of the Korean Operations Research Society, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1887-1908, 2011.
  11. J. I. Kim, S. Y. Park, "The Effects of Innovation Activities and Government Support on Innovative Performance of Firms", Korean Business Association, pp. 255-280, 2013.
  12. J. S. Kim, Y. J. Yoon, "Mediating Effects of Revenue and Profitability on Impact of Technology Innovation Activities on Default Risk", Journal of Technology Innovation, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 715-739,2009.
  13. Leyden, D. P., Link, A. N., "Why are Governmental R&D and Private R&D Complements?", Applied Economics. vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 1673-1681, 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849100000132
  14. Serrano-Bedia, A. M., M. C. Lopez-Fernandez, "Complementarity between innovation activities and innovation performance: Evidence from Spanish innovative firms", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 557-577, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381211234408
  15. Vega-Jurado, J., A Gutierrez-Gracia, Fernande -de-Lucio, I., "Does external knowlodge sourcing matter for innovation? Evidence from the Spanish manufacturing industry", Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 637-670, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtp023
  16. Tung, J., "A Study of Product Innovation o Firm Performance", The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 84-97, 2012.
  17. Barney, J. B., "Firm Resources and Sustainable Competitive Advantage", Journal of Management, vol. 17, pp. 99-120, 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  18. Dewar, R. D., Dutton, J. E., "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence", Research Policy. vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 1422-1433, 1986.
  19. Tushman, M., Nadler, D., "Organizing for Innovation.", California Management Review, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 74-92,1986. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/41165203
  20. Schumpeter, J. A. Capitalism, "Socialism, and Democracy", Harper & Row, New York, 1934.
  21. Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., Holbek, J., Innovation and Organizations, New York, Wiley.
  22. Papinniemi, J., "Creating a Model of Process Innovation for Reengineering of Business and Manufacturing", Production Economics, vol. 60-61, no. 20, pp. 95-101, 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00146-7
  23. Koski, Heli, "Public R&D subsidies and employment growth : Micro economic evidence form Finnish firms", ETLA discussion paper, pp. 1143, 2008.
  24. J. K. Shin, J. I. Cho, "Relationship between R&D innovation capability and firm performance : Comparative analysis between strategic and non-strategic industries in Daegu", Management and Information Studies, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 211-235, 2011.
  25. H. Piekkola, "Public Funding of R&D and Growth: Firm-Level Evidence from Finland", Economics of Innovation & New Technology, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 195-210, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590600661897
  26. H. L. Yoo, S. J. Park, "A Study on the Performance Analysis of Supporting Policy for SMEs R&D", Focusedon the Industry-University-Institute Consortium Program, Korean Public Administration Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 1, 2007.
  27. J. l. Lee, C. J. Kim, "The Econometric Evaluation of the Impact of R&D Incentive on Technological Outcomes", Journal of Korea technology innovation society, vol. 10, no. 1, 2007.
  28. Xulia Gonzalez, Jordi Jaumandreu, Consuelo Pazo, "Barriers to innovation and subsidy effectiveness. Forth coming in the Rand", Journal fo Economics, 2005.
  29. J. K. Kim, K. T. Hwang, "A Study on the Factors Affecting Technological Innovation of Innovative IT SMEs.", Journal of Digital Convergence, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 216, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2016.14.11.201
  30. D. S. Sohn, J. S. Lee, Y. B. Kim, "The Effects of Government Support and Regulation on SMEs Technology Innovation", Journal of Digital Convergence, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 121-122, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2017.15.4.117
  31. J. K. Kim, Tony, D. H. Ahn, "Effects of the fitness among Entrepreneurship, Dynamic capabilities and Innovation activities on Business performance", Journal of Digital Convergence, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 164, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2017.15.1.163