SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar Dergisi / 2011 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 555

The state of Izmir SME’s with respect to R&D and innovation

Ar-Ge ve inovasyon açısından İzmir KOBİ’lerinin durumu

Serdal TEMEL
R. Cengiz AKDENİZ
Fazilet Vardar SUKAN
Pages
83–92
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Main conclusion of the research is; SMEs in Izmir not innovation ori- ented, accordingly they have low value added product portfolio and more com- peting products on the market.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:One of the major drivers of economic development of countries is sustainable and effective university-industry cooperation and converting knowledge into pro- duct with the help of the university-industry cooperation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this research, the cur- rent situation of R&D, innovation and university-industry cooperation are analy- zed and data are gathered via face to face questionnaire from 74 SMEs in Izmir.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Main conclusion of the research is; SMEs in Izmir not innovation ori- ented, accordingly they have low value added product portfolio and more com- peting products on the market.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

One of the major drivers of economic development of countries is sustainable and effective university-industry cooperation and converting knowledge into pro- duct with the help of the university-industry cooperation. In this research, the cur- rent situation of R&D, innovation and university-industry cooperation are analy- zed and data are gathered via face to face questionnaire from 74 SMEs in Izmir. As a result, from 2007 to 2008, SMEs have increased share of R&D from 4,58% to 5,51%. In addition, SMEs export only 27,30% of total product and 72,70% of total products consumed in domestic market. One of the main findings is also long product life cycle. Results prove that SMEs are not paying enough attention to innovation and R&D, and subsequently they have average 11 years product life cycle. Main conclusion of the research is; SMEs in Izmir not innovation ori- ented, accordingly they have low value added product portfolio and more com- peting products on the market. Finally, research results emphasize that govern- ment haven’t create adequate environment for R&D and innovation for SMEs.

Özet

Ülkelerin ekonomik gelişmesinde en önemli unsurlardan birisi de, Üniversite- Sanayi arasında etkin ve sürdürülebilir işbirliğinin sağlanması ve bu yolla bil- ginin ekonomik değere dönüştürülmesidir. Bu çalışmada İzmir’de faaliyet gös- teren KOBİ’lerin Ar-Ge ve İnovasyon açısından mevcut durumu ve Üniversite- Sanayi işbirliği arayışları, 74 KOBİ ile yüz yüze anket çalışması yoluyla incelen- miştir. Yapılan araştırmada KOBİ’lerin, 2007 yılında %4,58 olan toplam cirodaki Ar-Ge harcamaları payının 2008 yılında %5,51’e yükseldiği, toplam satışlarının %72,70’inin iç pazara ve %27,30’unun ise dış pazarlara sunulduğu ve ihracatta Avrupa pazarı payının düşük olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bununla birlikte, işletmele- rin aynı ürünü uzun yıllardır ürettikleri ve yeniliğe önem vermedikleri, ürün yaşam süresinin çok uzun olduğu ortaya koyulmuştur. Elde edilen veriler, KOBİ’lerin ço- ğunlukla inovasyon çalışmaları yapmadığını, bunun sonucu olarak katma değeri düşük ve çok sayıda ikamesi olan ürünleri ürettikleri belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, kamu kurumları tarafından İzmir’de faaliyet gösteren KOBİ’lere Ar-Ge ve inovasyon için gerekli ve yeterli ortamın sağlanamadığı da belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEMEL, S., AKDENİZ, R. C., SUKAN, F. V. (2011). The state of Izmir SME’s with respect to R&D and innovation. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar Dergisi, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 555, 83–92. https://ajindex.com/articles/224093

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. AMOS, Stephanie; (1987), University-Industry Collaboration in the Continuing Education of Scientist and Engineers, Proceeding of Workshop, Toronto, November 1987.
  2. BOSKIN, Michael; (1996),
  3. Macroeconomic, Technology, and Economic Growth: An Introduction to Some Important Issues, The Sum of Positive Strategy, pp: 33-57
  4. BROWN, Shona. L, Kathelen Eisenhard; (1995), "Product Development - Past Research, Present Findings, And Future-Directions". Academy Of Management Review, 20(2), pp: 343-378.
  5. CHESBROUGH, Henry; (2003) Open innovation. The imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
  6. COOPER, Robert G; (1985), "Selecting Winning New Product Projects - Using The Newprod System", Journal Of Product Innovation Management, 2(1), pp: 34-44.
  7. COOPER, Robert G; (1992), "The Newprod System - The Industry Experience" Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(2), pp: 113-127.
  8. COOPER, Robert G; (1999), The invisible Success Factors in Product Innovation, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16, pp: 115-133.
  9. DABEK, F.; (1997)
  10. The Tech, MIT-the Impact of Innovation, MIT's oldest and Largest Newspaper, (117) 12, pp:1, EDGETT, Scott J., Elko J. Kleinschmidt; (1999), "New product portfolio management: Practices and performance" Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(4), pp: 333-351.
  11. ERNST, Holger; (2002), "Success factors of new product development: a review of the empirical literature", International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(1), pp: 1-40.
  12. FURTUIN Frances, Marteen Battrink, Onno Omta; (2007), "Key Success Factors of Innovation in Multinational Agrifood Prospector Companies", International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, (10) 4, pp:1-15.
  13. GRIFFIN, Abbie; (1997), "PDMA research on new product development practices: updating trends and benchmarking best practices", Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 14, pp: 429-458.
  14. JAMROG, Jay J; (2006), "The Quest for Innovation: A Global Study of Innovation Management. Tampa, FL: Human Resource Institute, University of Tampa, pp; 2006-2016
  15. KİPER, M., (2004), "Teknoloji Transfer Mekanizmaları ve Bu Kapsamda Üniversite-Sanayi İşbirliği", TEKNOLOJİ içinde, TMMOB 50. Yıl Yayınları,
  16. Ankara,
  17. Mayıs. KİPER, M., (2010), Dünyada ve Türkiye'de Üniversite - Sanayi İşbirliği ve Bu Kapsamda Üniversite-Sanayi Ortak Araştırma Merkezleri Programı (ÜSAMP), TTGV, Ankara.
  18. LEE, Young S; (2000), "The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An