SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 58

THE ROLE OF FIRM DYNAMICS IN INNOVATION AND GROWTH RELATIONSHIP: EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE TOP R&D INVESTOR FIRMS

FİRMA DİNAMİKLERİNİN İNOVASYON VE BÜYÜME İLİŞKİSİNDEKİ ROLÜ: EN YÜKSEK AR-GE YATIRIMCISI FİRMALAR ÜZERİNE AMPİRİK KANITLAR

Ekrem ERDEM
Ahmet KÖSEOĞLU
Pages
265–300
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

According to the results of the analysis, it has been concluded that the impact of innovation to be realized by the relatively smaller sized, young, fast-growing and innovative “superstar” firms on firm growth will be much larger than others.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The main purpose of this study is to determine the role of firm dynamics such as technological intensity and growth rate of firms in the relationship between innovation and growth.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In line with this purpose, the relationship between innovation and growth was empirically tested by applying panel quantile regression and system-generalized method of moments (GMM) estimators covering the period of 2005-2016 for the sample of 302 firms.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results of the analysis, it has been concluded that the impact of innovation to be realized by the relatively smaller sized, young, fast-growing and innovative “superstar” firms on firm growth will be much larger than others.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005-2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to determine the role of firm dynamics such as technological intensity and growth rate of firms in the relationship between innovation and growth. Moreover, in this study it is aimed to determine the most appropriate firm structure in terms of sustainable growth considering the effects of variables such as firm size and firm age on growth. In line with this purpose, the relationship between innovation and growth was empirically tested by applying panel quantile regression and system-generalized method of moments (GMM) estimators covering the period of 2005-2016 for the sample of 302 firms. These 302 firms were selected from the database of the EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard among World’s 2500 top R&D investors. Innovation efficiency scores calculated from data envelopment analysis for each sample and year were used as an innovation indicator in the analysis. According to the results of the analysis, it has been concluded that the impact of innovation to be realized by the relatively smaller sized, young, fast-growing and innovative “superstar” firms on firm growth will be much larger than others.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, firmaların sahip olduğu teknoloji yoğunluğu ve büyüme hızıgibi dinamiklerin inovasyon ve büyüme ilişkisinde oynadığı rolün tespit edilmesidir. Ayrıca, firmabüyüklüğü ve firma yaşı gibi değişkenlerin büyüme üzerinde yaratacağı etkiler de dikkate alınarak,sürdürülebilir büyüme açısından en uygun firma yapısının hangisi olacağının belirlenmesiamaçlanmaktadır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda inovasyon ve büyüme arasındaki ilişki, AB EndüstriyelAr-Ge Yatırım Skorbordu veri tabanında yer alan, dünya genelindeki en yüksek 2500 Ar-Geyatırımcısı firma arasından seçilen 302 firmanın, 2005-2016 dönemini kapsayan verileri üzerinepanel kantil regresyon ve sistem-genelleştirilmiş momentler metodu (GMM) tahmincisi kullanılarakampirik olarak test edilmiştir. Analizde inovasyon göstergesi olarak veri zarflama analiziyle her birörneklem ve yıl için hesaplanan inovasyon etkinliği skorları kullanılmıştır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre,nispeten daha küçük ölçekli, genç, hızlı büyüyen ve yenilikçi “süperstar” firmalar tarafındangerçekleştirilecek inovasyonun firma büyümesi üzerindeki etkisinin diğerlerine kıyasla çok dahabüyük olacağı sonucuna varılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERDEM, E., KÖSEOĞLU, A. (2022). THE ROLE OF FIRM DYNAMICS IN INNOVATION AND GROWTH RELATIONSHIP: EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE TOP R&D INVESTOR FIRMS. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 58, 265–300. https://ajindex.com/articles/503393

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Abrevaya, J., & Dahl, C. M. (2008). The effects of birth inputs on birthweight: Evidence from quantile estimation on panel data. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 26(4), 379–397.
  2. Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323–351.
  3. Akcigit, U., & Kerr, W. R. (2018). Growth through heterogeneous innovations. Journal of Political Economy, 126(4), 1374–1443.
  4. Alvarez, R., & Crespi, G. (2003). Determinants of technical efficiency in small firms. Small Business Economics, 20(3), 233–244.
  5. Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29– 51. Arundel, A., & Kabla, I. (1998). What percentage of innovations are patented? Empirical estimates for European firms. Research Policy, 27(2), 127–141.
  6. Bache, S. H. M., Dahl, C. M., & Kristensen, J. T. (2013). Headlights on tobacco road to low birthweight outcomes: Evidence from a battery of quantile regression estimators and a heterogeneous panel. Empirical Economics, 44(3), 1593–1633.
  7. Baltagi, B. H. (2013). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (Fifth Edit). West Sussex: Wiley. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092.
  8. Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115–143.
  9. Bottazzi, G., Dosi, G., Lippi, M., Pammolli, F., & Riccaboni, M. (2001). Innovation and corporate growth in the evolution of the drug industry. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19(7), 1161–1187.
  10. Brouwer, E., Kleinknecht, A., & Reijnen, J. O. N. (1993). Employment growth and innovation at the firm level: An empirical study. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 3(2), 153–159.
  11. Cass, D. (1965). Optimum growth in an aggregative model of capital accumulation. Review of Economic Studies, 32(3), 233–240.
  12. Cefis, E., & Marsili, O. (2005). A matter of life and death: Innovation and firm survival. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(6), 1167–1192.
  13. Chamberlain, G. (1982). Multivariate regression models for panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 18(1), 5–46.
  14. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.
  15. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1981). Evaluati