Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.737717
Title: Innovation in middle-income and high-income countries : a comparative study of Indonesia and UK manufacturing firms
Author: Hartono, Arif
ISNI:       0000 0004 7223 990X
Awarding Body: University of Warwick
Current Institution: University of Warwick
Date of Award: 2017
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
This PhD thesis aims to investigate innovation activities in developing and developed countries and it comprises three papers. More specifically, it compares innovation activities between manufacturing firms in Indonesia and in the UK. The first paper (Chapter 2) aims to identify and compare the variations in the knowledge sourcing strategies (KSS) employed, and innovation barriers faced, by manufacturing firms in high-income (HI) and middle-income (MI) countries by using global innovation data derived from the UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS). The paper shows that manufacturing firms in HI and MI income countries have different types and levels of KSS. Knowledge from internal R&D is sourced more frequently by manufacturing firms in HI countries than by their counterparts in MI countries. While external knowledge from government or public research institutes; conference, trade fairs and exhibitions; scientific journals and trade/technical publications are sourced more frequently by manufacturing firms in MI countries. This paper also reveals that manufacturing firms in MI countries face greater innovation barriers internally and externally than those in HI countries. Internally, manufacturing firms in MI countries face greater obstacles related to costs/funding and knowledge. Externally, firms in MI countries face greater constraints related to costs/funding, knowledge, the market and other reasons in regard to not innovating than their counterparts in HI countries. Lastly, innovation policy implications are drawn from this paper. The second paper (Chapter 3) investigates and models the innovation value chain (IVC) that encompasses knowledge sourcing, transformation, and exploitation activities among Indonesian manufacturing firms by using data from the Indonesia Innovation Survey (IIS) 2011. This paper is different from the previous IVC studies in a number of ways. First, in this study a range source of knowledge (i.e. R&D activities, informal interactions with various external actors, and formal cooperation with various external partners) is tested. Second, the relationship between a wide range of innovation barriers and the IVC, which to date has received little attention, is also investigated. Lastly, wider innovation (i.e. organisational and marketing innovation) is assessed. The study finds the existence of a synergistic relationship between internal and external sources of knowledge as well as among external sources of knowledge in the first link of the IVC. In terms of the second link of the IVC, internal R&D plays an important role that positively influences knowledge transformation into all types of innovation and innovation success. External knowledge that has a similar pattern in shaping innovation mainly comes from market/commercials (i.e. customers and competitors), open sources (i.e. events) and formal cooperation with suppliers. Scientific institutions tend to contribute to innovation in a negative manner, and few positive impacts on process innovation are observed from government R&D and non-profit R&D institutions. The study also finds that informal knowledge is more strongly associated with innovation and innovation success than formal knowledge. Both informal knowledge and formal cooperation are more likely to influence traditional innovation (i.e. product and process innovation) than wider-innovation (i.e. organisational and marketing innovation). In general, the hampering factors with regard to innovation are financial and knowledge factors. Striking findings in the last link of the IVC are innovation new to the market, innovation new to the firm, and innovation success do not lead to the firms’ performance. Lastly, relevant innovation policies are drawn from this paper. The third paper (Chapter 4) compares the IVC which consists of knowledge sourcing, transformation, and exploitation performed by Indonesian and UK manufacturing firms. This study is worthwhile for the following reasons. First, despite comparative studies on the IVC not being new to the literature, it is interesting to understand and compare the IVC between developing and developed economies as up to now, this has not been done. This study provides a new insight on a micro-level analysis of the IVC comparison between developing and developed countries by modelling which specific knowledge is sourced by firms, the impact of the sourced knowledge on innovation, and the impact of innovation on firms’ performance. Second, this study investigates a broader source of knowledge that is classified into R&D activities, informal knowledge and formal cooperation. Third, implementing traditional innovation in isolation has been criticised, and hence, in this study the impact of knowledge transformation on both traditional and wider innovation as well as the exploitation of both types innovation on firms’ performance is tested. In terms of the first link in the IVC, for both countries, synergistic relationships exist within and between each group source of knowledge (i.e. R&D, informal knowledge and formal cooperation). However, the nature of these complementarities tends to differ across the two countries. In regard to the second link in the IVC, in UK firms, both internal and external R&D appear to have a direct impact on innovation. While for Indonesia, the positive and significant impact of internal R&D on diverse types of innovation is stronger than that of external R&D; informal knowledge sourced from market/commercials makes a greater contribution to innovation and innovation success for Indonesian firms than UK firms. By contrast, formal cooperation provides a greater contribution to innovation for the UK than for Indonesia. However, such cooperation is more likely to be conducted with market/commercials network. In terms of the last link in the IVC, there is no single positive and significant contribution in terms of the link between product innovation (including new to the market and firm innovations) and firms’ performance, or between innovation success and firm performance in either country. In addition, for both countries, different types of innovation affect firms’ performance differently. For Indonesian firms, both traditional and wider innovation positively and significantly impact firms’ performance, while for UK firms only traditional innovation that has such effect.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan ; Pusat Penelitian Perkembangan Iptek (Indonesia) ; Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia‏
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.737717  DOI: Not available
Keywords: HD Industries. Land use. Labor
Share: