|
|
|
| Impact of Institutions and Cooperative Environment on the Open Innovation Path of Enterprises: A Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis Based on 26 Chinese and American Enterprises |
| Ma Xiaofei,Du Zhongwen |
| (School of Economics and Management，Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications，Beijing 100876，China ) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract At present, due to the impact of COVID-19, enterprises are facing a more complex and changeable innovation environment, and the risk of open innovation is greatly increased. At the same time, dual-cycle development pattern also provides opportunities for enterprises to reconstruct the path of open innovation. In this context, it is critical to choose the appropriate open innovation path to adapt to the new changes in the external environment, and then improve the open innovation performance.Open innovation in the United States started earlier, but there is still a lack of comparative research on the open innovation paths of Chinese and American enterprises. Therefore, this paper makes a comparative analysis on the open innovation paths of Chinese and American enterprises, which can provide certain reference significance for Chinese enterprises. The existing open innovation research mostly focuses on the impact of internal factors of enterprises on their open innovation performance, leaving the impact of external environmental factors of enterprises and the influence of different combinations of factors untapped. In fact, the success of open innovation of enterprises is the complex result of the combined action of various factors. Therefore, from the perspective of configuration, this paper makes an in-depth study on the synergistic effects of various external environmental factors in the process of open innovation.#br#The institutional logic theory and social network theory believe that the behavior of enterprises will be affected by the complex institutional environment and cooperative network, and the key innovation resources needed by enterprises for open innovation widely exist in them. Thus, it is necessary to study what kind of institutional environment elements and cooperation environment can constitute the path of high open innovation performance of enterprises. On the basis of these two theories, this study constructs a framework for studying enterprise open innovation performance from six aspects, including government subsidies, intellectual property protection, foreign direct investment, outward foreign direct investment, cooperation depth and cooperation breadth. Meanwhile, the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis method(fsQCA) is used to explore the synergistic mechanism of multiple factors in the complex institutional environment. Thus, this study selects 26 typical enterprises from the Internet and manufacturing industries of China and the United States, then adopts the fuzzy set method to analyze their different paths to achieve high open innovation performance.#br#Research results show that the open innovation behavior of enterprises is the result of the joint action of multiple factors, and there is no single core condition that can directly contributes to high open innovation performance of enterprises. The core conditions for achieving high open innovation performance are intellectual property protection and cooperation breadth. For both Chinese and American enterprises, there are different conditional paths to obtain high open innovation performance. What these paths have in common are that they have multiple ways to obtain key external innovation resources and all have the core conditions for open innovation performance. On the contrary, the core conditions of those non-high open innovation performance paths are all in a state of absence, and the paths to obtain external innovation resources are also insufficient. These findings indicate that there are multiple ways for enterprises to achieve high open innovation performance. They can choose the open innovation path suitable for their own development according to the actual situation of external environment. By comparing the performance paths of high open innovation between China and the United States, it is found that Chinese enterprises mainly rely on foreign direct investment or outward foreign direct investment to acquire external innovation resources. However, in the long run, this is not conducive to the sustainability of China's open innovation, and weakens China's independent innovation ability.#br#The contributions of this paper are as follows. Firstly, from the perspective of institutional environment and cooperative environment, this paper studies the influence of the external environment of enterprises on their open innovation performance, and proposes that the synergistic effect of various external environments is more conducive to the enterprises to obtain higher open innovation performance. Secondly, this paper uses QCA fuzzy-set analysis method to reveal the relationship between the external environment factors and enterprise open innovation, and find out the core conditions and multiple paths to improve enterprise open innovation performance，which provides a variety of options for enterprises to obtain high open innovation performance.#br#
|
|
Received: 15 June 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] D'ATTOMA I, IEVA M. Determinants of technological innovation success and failure: does marketing innovation matter[J]. Industrial Marketing Management,2020,91(1):64-81.[2] 杨震宁,侯一凡,李德辉，等.中国企业“双循环”中开放式创新网络的平衡效应——基于数字赋能与组织柔性的考察[J].管理世界,2021,37(11):184-205,12.[3] ETZKOWITZ H,LEYDESDORFF L. The triple helix-university-industry-government relations: a laboratory for knowledge based economic development[J]. Easst Review,1995,14(1):14-19.[4] 杨磊,刘海兵.创新情境、吸收能力与开放式创新共演路径——基于华为、海尔、宝洁的跨案例研究[J].中国科技论坛,2020,36(2):36-45,53.[5] WU H, HAN Z, ZHOU Y. Optimal degree of openness in open innovation: a perspective from knowledge acquisition & knowledge leakage[J]. Technology in Society,2021,67(11):1-15.[6] GAO Y, GAO S, ZHOU Y, et al. Picturing firms' institutional capital-based radical innovation under China's institutional voids[J]. Journal of Business Research,2015,68(6):1166-1175.[7] 罗颖,王腾,易明.开放式创新与产业集群创新绩效的关联机理研究[J].管理学报,2017,14(2):229-234.[8] BRONZINI R, PISELLI P. The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation[J]. Research Policy,2016,45(2):442-457.[9] 王锋正,刘宇嘉,孙玥.制度环境、开放式创新与资源型企业转型[J].科技进步与对策,2020,37(5):114-123.[10] WIRSICH A, KOCK A, STRUMANN C, et al. Effects of university-industry collaboration on technological newness of firms[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management,2016,33(6):708-725.[11] FRIEDLAND R, ALFORD R. Bringing society back in: symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions[J]. Chicago University of Chicago,1991,232-263.[12] ZOBEL A K, LOKSHIN B, HAGEDOORN J. Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: the role of openness and innovativeness[J]. Technovation,2017,59(5):44-54.[13] LOVE J H,ROPER S,VAHTER P.Learning from openness: the dynamics of breadth in external innovation linkages[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2014,35(11):1703-1716.[14] 郭海,韩佳平.数字化情境下开放式创新对新创企业成长的影响:商业模式创新的中介作用[J].管理评论,2019,31(6):186-198.[15] LUNDVALL B A. National innovation systems—analytical concept and development tool[J]. Industry and Innovation, 2007,14(1): 95-119.[16] BOUBAKRI N, COSSET J C,SAFFAR W.Political connections of newly privatized firms[J]. Journal of Corporate Finance,2008,14(5):654-673.[17] 倪自银,张益明.影响开放式创新的政府行为及政策环境研究[J].华东经济管理,2015,29(1):148-152.[18] MO J, LEE W, MORTARA L. Do government R&D subsidies stimulate collaboration initiatives in private firms [J]. Technological Forecasting & Social Change,2020,151: 119840.[19] 马永军,李毅凡.政府研发补贴、制度环境与战略性新兴产业创新绩效[J].技术经济,2021,40(8):1-8.[20] 杨浩,孙建.双向投资对技术进步、环境的影响——基于面板门限模型分析[J].科技管理研究,2019,39(12):103-109.[21] 徐一平,蒋伏心.开放式创新背景下制造业创新绩效提升路径——技术标准与政府支持视角的研究[J].管理现代化,2021,41(3):25-31.[22] CALOFFI A, ROSSO F, RUSSO M. What makes SMEs more likely to collaborate? analysing the role of regional innovation policy[J]. European Planning Studies,2014,23(7):1-20.[23] WANG D. Will increasing government subsidies promote open innovation? a simulation analysis of China's wind power industry[J]. Sustainability,2021,13(23):441-452.[24] 王钰,胡海青.知识产权保护与新创企业绩效——创业导向与社会责任的中介效应[J].科技进步与对策,2021,38(4):62-69.[25] GRIMALDI M, GRECO M, CRICELLI L. A framework of intellectual property protection strategies and open innovation[J]. Journal of Business Research,2021,123(2):156-164.[26] 李政,杨思莹,何彬.FDI抑制还是提升了中国区域创新效率——基于省际空间面板模型的分析[J].经济管理,2017,39(4):6-19.[27] 周荣军.知识产权保护、FDI技术溢出对企业创新绩效影响[J].统计与决策,2020,36(2):179-182.[28] POTTERIE B P, LICHTENBERG F. Does foreign direct investment transfer technology across borders[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics,2001,83(3):490-497.[29] CHESBROUGH H W. Open innovation：the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology[M]. Boston, MA: Harard Business School Press,2003.[30] SHINKLE G A, MCCANN B T. New product deployment: the moderating influence of economic institutional context[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2014,35(7):1090-1101.[31] LIU Q, TANG J, TIAN G G. Does political capital create value in the IPO market? evidence from China[J]. Journal of Corporate Finance,2013,23:395-413.[32] PAOLA C,VALERIA P, FERNANDA R. University technology transfer and manufacturing innovation: the case of Italy[J]. Review of Policy Research,2015,32(3):297-322.[33] SCHARFFER V,OCALAN-OZEL S, PENIN J.The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university-industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach[J]. The Journal of Technology Transfer,2020,45(1):31-55.[34] 蒋樟生.开放式创新对制造业企业研发投入的影响——政府补助与市场竞争的调节作用[J].科技进步与对策,2021,38(9):100-108.[35] ZAHRA S A, SAPIENZA H J, DAVIDSSON P. Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2006,43(4):917-955.[36] LAURSEN K, SALTER A. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK Manufacturing Firms[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2006,27(2):131-150.[37] WYNARCZYK P, PIPEROPOULOS P, MCADAM M. Open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises: an overview[J]. International Small Business Journal,2013,31(3):240-255.[38] GUAN J C, YAM R C M, MOK C K, et al. A study of the relationship between competitiveness and technological innovation capability based on DEA models[J]. European Journal of Operational Research,2006,170(3):971-986.[39] MARINO M, LHUILLERY S, PARROTTA P, et al. Additionality or crowding-out? an overall evaluation of public R&D subsidy on private R&D expenditure[J]. Research Policy,2016,45(9):1715-1730.[40] 赵奇伟,李露琦. 制度环境质量变动下政治关联对企业技术创新的影响——基于数字新媒体行业民营上市公司的实证考察[J]. 珞珈管理评论,2020(4):16-33.[41] 吴超鹏,唐菂.知识产权保护执法力度、技术创新与企业绩效——来自中国上市公司的证据[J].经济研究,2016,51(11):125-139.[42] 何彬,范硕.对外直接投资是否影响企业创新效率——基于上市公司微观数据的因果检验[J].学习与探索,2019,41(12):148-155.[43] 李昕,杨皎平.FDI对企业创新绩效的影响研究——兼论网络位置的调节作用[J].技术经济与管理研究,2021,42(1):7-12.[44] 刘斐然,胡立君,范小群.产学研合作对企业创新质量的影响研究[J].经济管理,2020,42(10):120-136.[45] 林斌,廖友亮. 企业所得税优惠、高管团队组织认同与创新投入[J]. 财会月刊,2021(23):105-112.[46] 王桂军,张辉.“一带一路”与中国OFDI企业TFP:对发达国家投资视角[J].世界经济,2020,43(5):49-72.[47] 王然,燕波,邓伟根.FDI对我国工业自主创新能力的影响及机制——基于产业关联的视角[J].中国工业经济,2010,28(11):16-25. |
|
|
|
