Measuring Innovation The 3 rd Community Innovation Survey in Portugal Manuel João Bóia...

Measuring InnovationMeasuring Innovation The 3 The 3rdrd Community Innovation Survey in Portugal Community Innovation Survey in Portugal

Manuel João Bóia Manuel João Bóia

[email protected]@dem.ist.utl.pt

Innovation and Technology TransferInnovation and Technology Transfer

MSc Engineering DesignMSc Engineering Design

17 October 200317 October 2003

OutlineOutline

1.1. The Community Innovation SurveyThe Community Innovation Survey

2.2. Students PresentationsStudents Presentations

3.3. Results (CIS 3),Results (CIS 3),

Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the European ContextEuropean Context

Input vs. Output of Innovation in EuropeInput vs. Output of Innovation in Europe

Some Innovation CharacteristicsSome Innovation Characteristics

Other Strategic and Organizational Important ChangesOther Strategic and Organizational Important Changes

Innovation SourcesInnovation Sources

Innovation BarriersInnovation Barriers

4.4. Lessons Learned and ConclusionsLessons Learned and Conclusions

CIS 3CIS 31.11.1

PortugalPortugal

Survey SampleSurvey Sample

• Initial Sample: Initial Sample: 47274727 firms stratified by firm size and sector firms stratified by firm size and sector (INE–1999 Data)(INE–1999 Data)

• Corrected sample: Corrected sample: 41274127 firms firms

Sectors SurveyedSectors Surveyed

• Mining and Quarrying, all Manufacturing, Utilities, Wholesale Trade and a Mining and Quarrying, all Manufacturing, Utilities, Wholesale Trade and a selection of industries in the Service Sectorselection of industries in the Service Sector

Survey Target PopulationSurvey Target Population

• All Manufacturing and Service firms with more than 10 employeesAll Manufacturing and Service firms with more than 10 employees

Innovation Definition Used:Innovation Definition Used:

• Market introductionMarket introduction of a product (Good or Service) of a product (Good or Service) new or significantly new or significantly

improvedimproved, or the introduction of new or significantly improved processes, , or the introduction of new or significantly improved processes,

based on new technological developments, new combinations of existing based on new technological developments, new combinations of existing

technologies or on the use of other type of knowledge acquired.technologies or on the use of other type of knowledge acquired.

The innovation should be The innovation should be new to the companynew to the company and not necessarily to the market. and not necessarily to the market.

CIS 3CIS 31.21.2

PortugalPortugal

QuestionnaireQuestionnaire

• Harmonized questionnaire (the same for Services and Manufacturing and Harmonized questionnaire (the same for Services and Manufacturing and other industries)other industries)

• Questions regarding:Questions regarding:

General InformationGeneral Information

Basic Economic InformationBasic Economic Information

Product and Process InnovationProduct and Process Innovation

Patents and Other Protection MethodsPatents and Other Protection Methods

Innovation Activities and ExpenditureInnovation Activities and Expenditure

Intramural R & DIntramural R & D


Effects of InnovationEffects of Innovation

Public FundingPublic Funding

Innovation Co-operationInnovation Co-operation

Sources of Information for InnovationSources of Information for Innovation

Hampered Innovation ActivityHampered Innovation Activity

Companies Characteristics

Innovation Extension

Companies Options

Systemic Characteristics

CIS 3CIS 31.31.3

PortugalPortugal

SurveySurvey

• Start date: October 2001Start date: October 2001

• Sample verification and validation (Name and Address) and identification of Sample verification and validation (Name and Address) and identification of a contact persona contact person

• Mailing of Questionnaire with innovations examples and a postage free Mailing of Questionnaire with innovations examples and a postage free envelope for replying (fax reply also accepted)envelope for replying (fax reply also accepted)

• Systematic phone reminders plus two fax reminders and an additional Systematic phone reminders plus two fax reminders and an additional questionnaire re-mailingquestionnaire re-mailing

• Support is provided on working days by phone, fax or e-mail by a Support is provided on working days by phone, fax or e-mail by a multidisciplinary team of 6 trained staff peoplemultidisciplinary team of 6 trained staff people

• End date --> 15End date --> 15thth April 2002 April 2002

CIS 3CIS 31.41.4

PortugalPortugal

Response RatesResponse Rates

ValidResp. Rate

ValidResp. Rate

ValidResp. Rate

Valid Resp. Rate

Mining and Quarring 10(12)-14 23 46,0% 22 52,4% 0 0,0% 45 47,87%Manufacturing 15-37 623 45,1% 455 45,2% 198 52,5% 1276 46,16%Electricity, Gas and Water Distribution 40-41 9 29,0% 8 57,1% 4 66,7% 21 41,18%Services 51, 60-67, 72-73, 74.2, 74.3 313 41,8% 158 48,9% 62 53,9% 533 44,90%

968 43,8% 643 46,4% 264 52,8% 1875 45,8%

Sector

All Sectors

CIS 3 PT Valid Answers and Response Rates by Sector and Size

Small Medium Large NACE

Sub-Total

Small Small – 10 to 49 Employees– 10 to 49 Employees

Medium Medium – 50 to 249 Employees– 50 to 249 Employees

Large Large - over 250 Employees- over 250 Employees

CIS 3CIS 31.51.5

PortugalPortugal

Lessons Learned from the CIS III Implementation:Lessons Learned from the CIS III Implementation:

• Unreliable Initial Sample (1999 Data)Unreliable Initial Sample (1999 Data)

• Non-Enforcement of the Policy regarding Non-Enforcement of the Policy regarding MandatoryMandatory Surveys Surveys

• Biased General perception of Innovation Definition (“Radical” Innovation)Biased General perception of Innovation Definition (“Radical” Innovation)

• Services misperception of Innovation Definition (Product = Service or Goods)Services misperception of Innovation Definition (Product = Service or Goods)

• Non-Disclosure Policy of Financial DataNon-Disclosure Policy of Financial Data

• Lack of Qualifications of the Questionnaire Filling Contact Person (“Cultural” Lack of Qualifications of the Questionnaire Filling Contact Person (“Cultural” bias towards Non Response or Non Innovation)bias towards Non Response or Non Innovation)

• Lack of correspondence between the surveyed data/indicators and Companies Lack of correspondence between the surveyed data/indicators and Companies data/indicators gathering.data/indicators gathering.

• Mergers and Acquisitions (Availability of Contact Person and Data)Mergers and Acquisitions (Availability of Contact Person and Data)

• Huge paperwork!Huge paperwork!

• In Data Processing,In Data Processing,High values of “Item Non-response” in some strata High values of “Item Non-response” in some strata (CAE 2 Digits*Dimension) of the realized sample for some variables,(CAE 2 Digits*Dimension) of the realized sample for some variables,

”Exports Sales”, “Innovation Expenditure”, “Level of importance in ”Exports Sales”, “Innovation Expenditure”, “Level of importance in Cooperation”, “Innovation Hampering Factors (partially)” and PatentsCooperation”, “Innovation Hampering Factors (partially)” and Patents

Unreliable missing values imputation methodology and routines provided by Unreliable missing values imputation methodology and routines provided by Eurostat, surpassed in cooperation with other member states.Eurostat, surpassed in cooperation with other member states.

4.14.1

Students PresentationsStudents Presentations

1.1. The Community Innovation SurveyThe Community Innovation Survey

2.2. Students Presentations Students Presentations

3.3. Results (CIS 3),Results (CIS 3),

Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the European ContextEuropean Context

Input vs. Output of Innovation in EuropeInput vs. Output of Innovation in Europe

Some Innovation CharacteristicsSome Innovation Characteristics


Innovation SourcesInnovation Sources

Innovation BarriersInnovation Barriers

4.4. Lessons Learned and ConclusionsLessons Learned and Conclusions

Results - Innovative Enterprises by Sector and Results - Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the European ContextCIS Trajectories in the European Context

Ireland

Austria

Germany

Netherlands

UK

Sweden

Norway

France

Luxemburg

Belgium

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Proportion of Manufacturing Innovating Enterprises

Proportion of Service

Innovating Enterprises

PortugalItaly

(1) For comparison with the data of 1995-1997 some Sub sectors (NACE 63, 73, 74.3 e 64 except 64.2) and the manufacturing companies in between 10 and 20 employees which were part of the CIS 3 survey are not considered

(2) Includes the results not considered in (1).Note: Final disaggregated and comparable results are not yet available for the other

participants in the exercise.

(1)(2)

CIS III(Preliminary)

CIS II

Finland

3.13.1

Ireland

GermanyAustria

NetherlandsUK

Sweden

NorwayFrance

Finland

BelgiumPortugal

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0%

Expenditure in Innovating Activities as Share of Turnover

Po

rpo

rtio

n o

f In

no

va

tiv

e E

nte

rpri

se

s

Manufacturing Sector

CIS III(Preliminary)

CIS II

Results – Input vs. Output of Innovation in EuropeResults – Input vs. Output of Innovation in Europe3.23.2

Results – Some Innovation CharacteristicsResults – Some Innovation Characteristics3.33.3

Innovation is Firm Size dependent Innovation is Firm Size dependent (larger firms innovate more)(larger firms innovate more)

Innovation has sector specificitiesInnovation has sector specificities

The integration of the firm in a network The integration of the firm in a network (e.g., integration into a group) (e.g., integration into a group) increases the probability to innovateincreases the probability to innovate

The level of competition in a market influences a firm’s The level of competition in a market influences a firm’s probability to innovate probability to innovate (Highly competitive markets provide more innovative (Highly competitive markets provide more innovative firms)firms)

Results - Other Strategic and Organizational ChangesResults - Other Strategic and Organizational Changes

-

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Ch

an

gin

gE

nte

rpri

se's

Ma

rke

ting

Co

nce

pts

/Str

ate

gie

s

Ad

van

ced

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

Te

chn

iqu

es

Sig

nifi

can

tA

est

he

tics'

Ch

an

ge

Ne

w C

orp

ora

teS

tra

teg

ies

Ch

an

ge

dO

rga

niz

atio

na

lS

tru

ctu

res

Ch

an

gin

gE

nte

rpri

se's

Ma

rke

ting

Co

nce

pts

/Str

ate

gie

s

Ad

van

ced

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

Te

chn

iqu

es

Sig

nifi

can

tA

est

he

tics'

Ch

an

ge

Ne

w C

orp

ora

teS

tra

teg

ies

Ch

an

ge

dO

rga

niz

atio

na

lS

tru

ctu

res

Non-Innovators Innovators

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f En

terp

rise

s (%

)

Manufacturing Services

3.43.4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

With

in the E

nte

rprise

Clie

nts

Oth

er

Ente

rprises

with

in the E

nte

rprise

Gro

up

Fairs a

nd E

xhib

itions

Supplie

rs

Com

petit

ors

Pro

fessio

nal

Confe

rences,

meetin

gs a

nd jo

urn

als

Univ

ers

ities a

nd o

ther

Hugher

Educatio

nIn

stit

utio

ns

Govern

ment or

Private

non-p

rofit

instit

ute

s

Innovatin

g E

nte

rprises w

ith H

ighly

import

ant S

ourc

es (

%)

1995-1997 Europe Average 1995-1997 1998-2000

Results - Innovation Sources of Highly Importance for ManufacturingResults - Innovation Sources of Highly Importance for Manufacturing3.53.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Qualifi

ed P

erso

nnel

Organ

isatio

nal R

igidit

ies

Inno

vatio

n Cos

ts

Sourc

es o

f Fina

nce

Info

rmat

ion o

n Te

chno

logy

Econo

mic

Risks

Info

rmat

ion o

n M

arke

ts

Regula

tions

and

Sta

ndar

ds

Custo

mer

Res

pons

ivene

ss

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f En

terp

rise

s (5

)

Manufacturing Non-Innovators Manufacturing Innovators Services Non-Innovators

Services Innovators CIS II 1995-1997 CIS II EU Average

Results - Innovation Barriers of Highly ImportanceResults - Innovation Barriers of Highly Importance3.63.6

Results - Innovation Barriers of Highly ImportanceResults - Innovation Barriers of Highly Importance

MSc Engineering Design CIS III PerspectiveMSc Engineering Design CIS III Perspective3.73.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Q

ualif

ied

Per

sonn

el

Org

anis

atio

nal

Rig

iditi

es

Inno

vatio

n C

osts

Sou

rces

of

Fin

ance

Info

rmat

ion

onT

echn

olog

y

Eco

nom

ic R

isks

Info

rmat

ion

onM

arke

ts

Reg

ulat

ions

and

Sta

ndar

ds

Cus

tom

erR

espo

nsiv

enes

s

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f En

terp

rise

s (%

)

CIS III MSc Engineering Design CIS III CIS II CIS II EU Average

Lessons Learned and Conclusions:Lessons Learned and Conclusions:

1.1. The CIS is a The CIS is a good evolving instrument for benchmarkinggood evolving instrument for benchmarking and follow up of and follow up of

the best practices, although incomplete in what concerns the systemic the best practices, although incomplete in what concerns the systemic

characteristics of innovation.characteristics of innovation.

2.2. A A significant increase in the innovation extension andsignificant increase in the innovation extension and in the firms in the firms

innovation expenditureinnovation expenditure was achieved for Portugal in CIS III compared to was achieved for Portugal in CIS III compared to

CIS II.CIS II.

3.3. In the innovation process, In the innovation process, both sources and barriers to innovation profiles both sources and barriers to innovation profiles

remain consistent with the CIS II dataremain consistent with the CIS II data, where the most relevant are , where the most relevant are

respectively “Within the Enterprise” and financial constraints. respectively “Within the Enterprise” and financial constraints.

4.4. Innovation expenditure has reached a milestone above which innovation Innovation expenditure has reached a milestone above which innovation

effectiveness appears to be more correlated with factors of systemic effectiveness appears to be more correlated with factors of systemic

nature.nature.

5.5. Technological innovation appearsTechnological innovation appears to be strongly to be strongly correlatedcorrelated with with

Organizational Innovation and ChangeOrganizational Innovation and Change..

4.24.2

Measuring InnovationMeasuring Innovation The 3 The 3rdrd Community Innovation Survey in Portugal Community Innovation Survey in Portugal

Manuel João Bóia Manuel João Bóia

[email protected]@dem.ist.utl.pt

Innovation and Technology TransferInnovation and Technology Transfer

MSc Engineering DesignMSc Engineering Design

17 October 200317 October 2003

Additional SlidesAdditional Slides

1995-1997 1998-2000 (1) 1998-2000 (2) 1995-1997 1998-2000 (1) 1998-2000 (2) 1995-1997 1998-2000 (1) 1998-2000 (2)

Introduced Innovation 25.8 48.4 42.4 28 48.9 48.7 26.7 48.4 44.3 Product Innovation 15.1 31.1 26.8 - 31.9 31.6 - 30.9 27.9

Process Innovation 22.9 37.5 31.1 - 30.3 30.6 - 34.8 31.1were involved in Inovating Activities 28.5 50.7 44.8 35.6 50.1 50.1 31.4 50.3 46.4

Ongoing or Abandoned Innovating Activities 8.3 21.3 17.8 11.1 17.2 17.6 9.4 19.5 17.7

Introduced Innovation 90.4 95.5 94.6 78.7 97.5 95.7 85 96.3 95.5 Product Innovation 52.9 61.4 59.8 - 63.6 63.1 - 61.4 60.2

Process Innovation 80.3 73.9 69.4 - 60.5 61.2 - 69.1 67.1Ongoing or Abandoned Innovating Activities 29.2 42 40.4 31.1 34.3 35.2 30.1 38.7 38.1


(3) Includes also the results of Minning and Quarring (NACE 10 to 14) in (2) and Electricity, Gas and Water Distribution (NACE 40 and 41) in (1) and (2).

Note: in CIS 2 (1995-1997), by opposition to CIS 3 (1998-2000), two separate questionnaires were used for Manufacturing and Services. In the latter, a distinction between process and product was not asked, therefore these values are not available.

Proportion of the total of firms that were involved in Innovating Activities that:

Proportion of the total of firms that:

National (3)

(1) For comparison with the data of 1995-1998 some Service sub-sectors (NACE 63, 73, 74.3 and 64 except 64.2) and the Manufacturing firms in between 10 and 19 employees that were surveyed in 1998-2000 are not included.

Innovation Extension

(2) Includes the results not considered in (1).

Results - Innovation ExtensionResults - Innovation Extension

Results – Product and Process InnovationResults – Product and Process Innovation

Product Innovation

Product and

Process Innovation

Process Innovation

Results - Innovation by Firm SizeResults - Innovation by Firm Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1995-1997 1998-2000(1)

1998-2000(2)

1995-1997 1998-2000(1)

1998-2000(2)

1995-1997 1998-2000(1)

1998-2000(2)

Manufacturing Services National (3)

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f In

no

vatin

g E

nte

rpri

ses

(%)

Small Medium Large Manufaturing Total Services Total National Total

0102030405060708090

100

1995-1997 1998-2000(1)

1998-2000(2)

1995-1997 1998-2000(1)

1998-2000(2)

1995-1997 1998-2000(1)

1998-2000(2)

Manufacturing Services National (3)

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f In

no

vatin

g E

nte

rpri

ses

(%)

10 to 19 20 to 49 50 to 99 100 to 249 250 to 499

More than 500 Manufacturing Total Services Total National Total

CIS3 Final data - All Sectors ( % ) Share Innov. Proportion of Turnover Share Expenditure/ of due to New of Turnover Turnover Innovating or Improved due to Novel Innovation NACE Breakdown Enterprises Products Products Intensity Mining & Quarring 37.2 1.2 1.1 2.6 Manufacturing 42.4 15.5 11.4 2.9 Small 35.3 7.4 2.8 3.4 Medium 62.2 9.0 5.7 2.5 Large 72.0 23.1 18.8 2.9 Food products; Beverages and tobacco 47.8 6.4 2.6 2.2 Textiles and leather 31.1 7.7 4.6 2.2 Wood, pulp & publishing 36.1 5.8 2.6 6.0 Coke and chemicals 66.0 8.7 5.9 2.0 Rubber & other non-metallic 47.9 11.8 8.0 2.3 Basic metals and fabricated metal products 53.3 12.4 6.0 1.9 Machinery and equipment NEC 50.4 19.7 13.2 4.5 Electrical and optical equipment 49.2 29.3 21.1 3.1 Transport equipment 50.3 46.6 44.7 2.4 Manufacturing NEC and recycling 51.0 21.8 14.4 3.2 Electricity, Gas & Water Sup. 70.3 39.6 39.5 0.5 Services 48.7 12.3 7.3 2.7 Small 44.0 9.4 4.4 1.2 Medium 72.2 13.9 11.6 1.3 Large 76.9 12.7 6.2 4.0 Wholesale Trade 46.1 10.4 7.6 0.9 Transport & Storage 41.1 12.2 2.2 12.3 Post & Telecommunications 92.7 9.7 5.9 2.8 Financial Intermediation 70.5 12.4 5.9 2.6 Computer & related Activity 74.1 60.9 59.0 6.3 Research & Development 100.0 - - 3.8 Engineering Services 61.1 23.4 16.9 4.7 Test and Analysis 42.9 16.5 16.3 5.3

CIS 3CIS 3PortugalPortugal

Results – Innovation by Technological Intensity (Manufacturing)Results – Innovation by Technological Intensity (Manufacturing)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Co

ke a

nd

Ch

em

ica

ls

Ma

chin

ery

an

dE

qu

ipm

en

tN

EC

Tra

nsp

ort

Eq

uip

me

nt

Ele

ctri

cal a

nd

Op

tica

lE

qu

ipm

en

t

Ba

sic

Me

tals

an

dF

ab

rica

ted

Me

tal

Ru

bb

er

an

dO

the

r N

on

-M

eta

llic

Ma

nu

fact

uri

ng

NE

C a

nd

Re

cycl

ing

Fo

od

pro

du

cts;

Be

vera

ge

sa

nd

To

ba

cco

Wo

od

, Pu

lpa

nd

Pu

blis

hin

g

Te

xtile

s a

nd

Le

ath

er

High and Medium-High Medium-Low Low

Technological Sectors

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f In

no

vatin

g E

nte

rpri

ses

(%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

With

in th

eE

nter

pris

e

Clie

nts

Oth

erE

nter

pris

esw

ithin

the

Ent

erpr

ise

Gro

up

Sup

plie

rs

Com

petit

ors

Fai

rs a

ndE

xhib

ition

s

Pro

fess

iona

lC

onfe

renc

es,

mee

tings

and

jour

nals

Uni

vers

ities

and

othe

r Hug

her

Edu

catio

nIn

stitu

tions

Gov

ernm

ent o

rP

rivat

e no

n-pr

ofit

inst

itute

s

Inno

vatin

g E

nter

pris

es w

ith H

ighl

y im

porta

nt S

ourc

es (%

)

1995-1997 Europe Average 1995-1997 1998-2000

Results - Innovation Sources of Highly Importance for ServicesResults - Innovation Sources of Highly Importance for Services

5.3

7.5

3.6

5.7

1.92.9

9.9

4.2

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Non-Innovators Innovators Non-Innovators Innovators


Pro

po

rtio

n o

f E

nte

rpri

ses

(%)

Enterprise applied for at least a Patent to Protect Inventions

Enterprise possess Valid Patents at the end of 2000

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Non-Innovators

Innovators Non-Innovators

Innovators


Number of Patent Applications for Goods/Services/Processes

Number of Patent Applications for goods/Services

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Non-Innovators


Innovators


Number of Valid Patents at the end of 2000 for Goods/Services/Processes

Number of Valid Patents at the end of 2000 for Goods/Services

Clear characteristic: the Portuguese companies ignore or do not choose to use patenting as a protection tool

Results - PatentingResults - Patenting

-

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Non-Innovators


Innovators NonInnovators

Innovators

Manufacturing Services National

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f En

terp

rise

s P

rote

ctin

g

Inn

ova

tion

s (%

)

Registration of Design Patterns Trademarks

Copyright Secrecy

Complexity of Design lead-time advantage over competitors

Results – Other Protection Methods UsedResults – Other Protection Methods Used

Measuring Innovation The 3 rd Community Innovation Survey in Portugal Manuel João Bóia...

Documents

Transcript of Measuring Innovation The 3 rd Community Innovation Survey in Portugal Manuel João Bóia...