ARTICLE
In e na ional Jou nal o Enginee ing Business Managemen
App oaches o Inno a ion P ocess
Assessmen : Complex Resul s om
an Explo a o y In es iga ion
Regula Pape
Ond ej Zizla sky1*
1 B no Uni e si y o Technology, B no, Czech Republic
*Co esponding au ho (s) E-mail: [email p o ec ed]
Recei ed 20 July 2015; Accep ed 26 No embe 2015
DOI: 10.5772/62052
© 2015 Au ho (s). Licensee InTech. This is an open access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License
(h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/3.0), which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he
o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
Abs ac
Managing inno a ion is i al o many en e p ises o
su i e in a compe i i e and dynamic en i onmen . Thus,
decision-make s ha e always been in ol ed in he chal‐
lenge o inding he igh pe o mance measu es o he
inno a ion p ocess. This pape ackles he issue o inno a‐
ion pe o mance measu emen and managemen . I s main
goal is o p esen complex esul s ob ained om he Czech
manu ac u ing indus y wi hin he esea ch p ojec
“Inno a ion P ocess Pe o mance Assessmen : A Manage‐
men Con ol Sys em App oach among Czech Small- and
Medium-sized En e p ises” inanced by he Czech Science
Founda ion – 13-20123P. The esul s e eal many posi i e
aspec s o he in es iga ed issue. Czech companies a e
awa e o he impo ance o inno a ion and engage in i in
a ious o ms. Mo eo e , he as majo i y o he espond‐
en s also e alua ed he implemen ed inno a ions no ma e
he size o he company. Small- and medium-sized en e ‐
p ises (SMEs) and la ge companies di e in e ms o hei
inno a ion pe o mance measu emen s and managemen
con ol echniques and me hods. Howe e , bo h g oups
adop adi ional measu emen ools a he han mode n
echniques. He e, he gap be ween global and Czech
companies is no ed. The e o e, his pape is supposed o
mo i a e esea che s o conduc mo e la ge-scale s udies in
he a ea o inno a i e pe o mance measu emen sys ems
and hei implemen a ion in di e en business sec o s and
a eas.
Keywo ds Inno a ion P ocess, Managemen Con ol,
Pe o mance Measu emen , Czech Manu ac u ing Indus‐
y
1. In oduc ion
Inno a ion is he d i ing o ce o g ow h. I ensu es
compe i i eness and o e s oppo uni ies o di e en ia‐
ion. The e o e, inno a ion is o be ela ed o all ha has o
do wi h pe manen , subs an ial cus ome bene i s and a
pe cei able compe i i e edge: he de elopmen o new,
success ul business models. Hence, he en ep eneu ial
challenge lies in he success ul managemen o inno a ions.
As such, he ques ion is no one o whe he o no o
inno a e bu a he o how o do so success ully [1]. Ye
wi hou he e alua ion and con inual e iew o inno a ion
p ojec s as a whole, imp o emen s will no occu and
lessons will no be lea n .
This pape in es iga es how Czech manu ac u ing compa‐
nies measu e and manage he pe o mance o hei inno‐
1
In J Eng Bus Manag, 2015, 7:25 | doi: 10.5772/62052
a ion p ocess. Wi h ega d o he iden i ied objec i e o
he esea ch p ojec ( o lea n and s udy he cu en issues
o he managemen and con ol o inno a ions and hei
pe o mance measu emen as hese a eas a e cu en ly
being app oached in Czech indus y, as well as he o eign
expe li e a u e and he p ac ices o inno a i e Czech
manu ac u ing companies) he ollowing esea ch hypo h‐
eses we e de ined:
Hypo hesis 1: Inno a ion is mainly pe o med by medium-
and la ge-sized companies in he Czech business en i on‐
men who ha e su icien esou ces.
Hypo hesis 2: La ge companies pe o m inno a ion
egula ly – i is a pa o hei business model.
Hypo hesis 3: La ge companies end o in es g ea e sums
o money in inno a ion (measu ed by he pe cen age o he
annual budge ).
Hypo hesis 4: La ge companies end o e alua e hei
inno a i e ac i i ies mo e equen ly han SMEs.
Hypo hesis 5: La ge companies end o ha e implemen ed
hei inno a ion managemen con ol sys ems o longe
han SMEs.
Hypo hesis 6: La ge companies implemen mode n
echniques o inno a ion managemen con ol.
The s udy in es iga es he co ela ion be ween inno a ion
managemen con ol sys ems (MCSs - including R&D
expendi u e, app oaches o he e alua ion o inno a ion
p ojec s, he me hods u ilized, he ools used, he pe iod o
implemen a ion, e c.) and company size as he mos
impo an con ingen ac o . The e o e, as i s explo a o y
aim, his s udy in es iga es he ole o company size in he
implemen a ion o inno a ion MCSs.
The pape consis s o h ee pa s. The i s pa b ie ly
poin s ou he impo ance o he opic ( o mo e on inno‐
a ion managemen con ol’s s a e o he a , see, e.g., [2-5])
as well as he esea ch aim and he s a ed ini ial hypo heses.
I is ollowed by a b ie li e a u e e iew. The co e sec ion
consis s o he in e p e a ion o he o iginal esea ch design
and p ocedu e, including he de e mina ion o he sample
size. The nex pa p esen s he complex esul s o he
empi ical in es iga ion o he Czech manu ac u ing
indus y and hei discussion. The esea ch was conduc ed
unde he p ojec “Inno a ion P ocess Pe o mance
Assessmen : A Managemen Con ol Sys em App oach
among he Czech Small- and Medium-sized En e p ises”.
The au ho o ha pape is also he au ho o he p esen
esea ch p ojec .
2. Li e a u e e iew
The old adage s a es: “You canno manage wha you do no
measu e”. This is especially ue o inno a ion, whe eby i
is necessa y o ensu e ocus, in elligibili y and discipline,
pa icula ly wi h ega d o he ini ial, in en i e phase o
he inno a ion p ocess. Inno a ion is a con inuous p ocess.
Companies a e con inually making changes o hei
p oduc s and p ocesses and a e always ga he ing new
knowledge. Measu ing such a dynamic p ocess is much
mo e complex han is he case wi h a s a ic ac i i y [6].
The e o e, measu ing pe o mance and he con ibu ion o
he alue o inno a ion has become a undamen al conce n
o manage s and execu i es in ecen decades [7].
P e ious esea ch on inno a ion pe o mance measu e‐
men has mainly ocused on how manage s choose hei
managemen con ol mechanisms [e.g., 8-11], on he e ec s
o indi idual con ol mechanisms on speci ic ou comes
[e.g., 9, 12-14], on how hese e ec s may be mode a ed [e.g.,
15, 16] and on how hey pay o in he inno a ion p ocess
[e.g., 17].
In addi ion, many esea che s ha e conduc ed s udies o
de e mine he deg ee o which inno a ion eally imp o es
a company’s pe o mance [e.g., 18-24]. The p o essional
li e a u e p o ides he ollowing:
•A posi i e co ela ion [e.g., 22-28].
•A nega i e co ela ion [e.g., 29-31].
•A U-shaped co ela ion [e.g., 32-33].
•No clea co ela ion [e.g., 34-37].
Despi e he abundance o books and publica ions w i en
o e he pas ew yea s in he ield o pe o mance meas‐
u emen , he p oblem o de ining a igo ous model o
measu ing inno a ion and i s impac on a company’s
inancial pe o mance has no been sol ed [38, 39], al‐
hough some no able and in e es ing a emp s ha e
ecen ly been published [e.g., 40-43]. The mos ypical
indica o used comp ises R&D expenses [44-46].
Howe e , unlike mos o he p e ious s udies on inno a‐
ion, in his s udy inno a ion is no measu ed h ough R&D
expendi u e alone. The e a e se e al well-known limi a‐
ions o hese measu emen s [47]. The impo ance o o he
dimensions o inno a ion, such as manage ial o o ganiza‐
ional change, in es men in design o skills, and he
managemen o he inno a ion p ocess i sel , is inc easing‐
ly acknowledged [48]. The e o e, his s udy deals wi h
economic indica o s. Fo cla i y, hey a e di ided in o
inancial and non- inancial me ics in he esea ch (see
Sec ion 7).
3. Resea ch p ocedu e
This sec ion p o ides an o e iew o he da a used o his
s udy and he main cha ac e is ics o he esea ch sample.
A e ex ensi ely examining he p e ious ele an and
ela ed li e a u e and esea ch in inno a ion, managemen
con ol, pe o mance measu emen and ela ed opics [2-6,
49], he ield s udy was begun in 2014. Th ee ypes o da a
we e collec ed o his s udy: a ques ionnai e and in e ‐
iews, company da a and public in o ma ion (da a om a
su ey conduc ed e e y wo yea s by he Czech S a is ical
O ice we e conside ed).
2In J Eng Bus Manag, 2015, 7:25 | doi: 10.5772/62052
As conce ns he me hodological app oach, ollowing
ecen examples [50-55], a ques ionnai e-based su ey was
implemen ed o ga he in o ma ion and de e mine he eal
s a e o any sol ed issues o he managemen con ol o
inno a ion ac i i ies. The su ey me hod is o en used o
collec sys ema ic da a since i is ime- and cos -e icien and
allows he ca ying ou o a s a is ical analysis [56]. In
addi ion, he eplica ion o ques ions is possible and hus i
p esen s a compa ison o he esul s and a pa e n analysis.
The i s s ep was o de ine he esea ch sample. Be o e he
esea ch commenced, he ci cle o esponden s was duly
conside ed. The esea ch could be limi ed based on
company size, he ield and he dis ibu ion o companies
in he Czech Republic (CR). I was decided o ca y ou he
esea ch ia a andom selec ion o a ious-sized inno a i e
companies om he manu ac u ing indus y in he CR.
This choice is ela ed o he ac ha manage ial ools
p ima y o igina ed - and we e subsequen ly de eloped - in
manu ac u ing companies. The second ea u e is he ac
ha he manu ac u ing indus y is conside ed o be he
mos signi ican indus y in he de elopmen o he Czech
economy because i is he la ges sec o . This allows o a
su icien numbe o companies o be con ac ed o pa ici‐
pa e in he s udy. I is es ima ed ha he a ge popula ion
consis s o o e 11,000 manu ac u ing companies.
Acco ding o Czech S a is ical O ice and i s 2012 su ey,
51% o 5,449 inno a i e companies belong o he manu ac‐
u ing indus y. Mo eo e , hese companies con ibu ed
e enues comp ising 45.4% o he o al o he Czech
economy in 2012 [53, p. 15].
In o de o es ablish inno a ion success, i is i s necessa y
o decide a wha le el he p ocess will ake place. Inno a‐
ion e ec s can be measu ed a : i) he mac o le el (dis in‐
guishing na ional and sec o le els), ii) he meso le el ( he
le el o he company’s p oduc amily) and iii) he mic o
le el ( he le el o inno a ion p ojec s).
A he mac o le el, he e is a wide ange o known and
sophis ica ed means o measu ing inno a ion po en ial and
pe o mance, such as, in Eu ope, he Inno a ion Union
Sco eboa d [57] and he Regional Inno a ion Sco eboa d
[58], while in he CR inno a ion su eys a e egula ly
pe o med by he Czech S a is ical O ice. The mac o le el
has been he subjec o abundan esea ch and s udies in
ecen decades [e.g., 59-65]; he e o e, he p esen s udy
does no in es iga e his le el and bases i s conside a ions
on he indings o he a o emen ioned s udies.
Howe e , he e a e se e al easons o analysing he link
be ween inno a ion and p oduc i i y a he i m mic o-
le el. Fi s , i is companies ha inno a e, no coun ies o
indus ies. Second, agg ega e analysis hides a lo o
he e ogenei y. The pe o mance o companies and hei
cha ac e is ics di e bo h be ween coun ies and wi hin
indus ies; coun ies‘ inno a ion sys ems a e cha ac e ized
by mixed pa e ns o inno a ion s a egies which ha e an
impac on companies‘ beha iou ; mo eo e , companies
may adop mul iple pa hs o inno a ion, including non-
echnological ones. The ad an age o mic o-le el analysis
is ha i a emp s o model he channels h ough which
companies‘ speci ic knowledge asse s o channels can ha e
an impac on hei p oduc i i y, and he e o e i sheds ligh
on he ole ha inno a ion inpu s, ou pu s and policies play
in economic pe o mance [48].
The key was o app oach as many esponden s as possible
and so o acqui e a su icien ly la ge da a-scale ac o o
he e alua ion o he p ima y esea ch. The inqui y i sel
p o ided quan i a i e as well as semi-quali a i e da a on
he cu en s a e o he issue in ques ion. Simplici y and he
ela i e b e i y o he ques ionnai e - he eby a ec ing he
esponden ‘s willingness o ill i ou - we e impo an
ac o s when c ea ing i . The ollowing ypes o ques ions
we e used:
•Those wi h selec able answe s and he op ion o selec
jus one.
•Those wi h selec able answe s and he op ion o selec
se e al answe s.
•Those wi h p e-de ined answe s wi h an e alua ion
scale.
•Some ques ions had he op ion o ill in answe s eely.
The ques ionnai e was s uc u ed in o wo pa s. The i s
pa consis s o gene al in o ma ion abou he company,
whe eas he second pa ocuses on inno a ion measu e‐
men and managemen and applied managemen con ol
ools and me hods.
The s uc u ed ques ionnai e also enables addi ional
commen s. As such, he esponden s could exp ess hei
opinion on ce ain ques ions ega dless o he deg ee o
hei own inno a ion. The da a acqui ed a e p esen ed in
ables and g aphs ha a e summa ized in he ollowing
sec ion.
The ques ionnai e pa o he esea ch p ojec , i led
“Inno a ion P ocess Pe o mance Assessmen : A Manage‐
men Con ol Sys em App oach among Czech Small- and
Medium-sized En e p ises” and sponso ed by he Czech
Science Founda ion (GACR), was web-based so as o
acili a e access o a la ge numbe o esponden s.
Once d awn up, he ques ionnai e should be es ed on a
sample popula ion o de e mine whe he all he i ems a e
unde s andable and clea . The e o e, he ques ionnai e was
p e- es ed by a numbe o academics and hen sen o
se e al p ac i ione s o u he e iew. Mino adjus men s
in he wo ding and layou we e made in o de o u he
he unde s anding o he ques ionnai e. None o hese
esponden s conside ed he ques ionnai e o be di icul o
comple e. A e se e al i e a ions o i em edi ing and
e inemen , he ques ionnai e was adminis e ed o he ull
esea ch sample.
3
Ond ej Zizla sky:
App oaches o Inno a ion P ocess Assessmen : Complex Resul s om an Explo a o y In es iga ion
The su ey consis ed o 18 ques ions and was conduc ed
by sending a ully s anda dized ques ionnai e by e-mail o
each company (a link o he elec onic ques ionnai e was
included in he e-mail). The e-mail p o ided a b ie
in oduc ion cla i ying he pu pose and objec i es o he
esea ch p ojec . I was sen exclusi ely o CEOs, op
manage s, execu i e o ice s o else - in small companies -
di ec ly o he owne s. The su ey was anonymous, ook
app oxima ely 10 o 15 minu es o comple e, and was
conduc ed om Ap il o No embe 2014.
In addi ion, he su ey esponden s we e asked o indica e
whe he hey would be willing o pa icipa e in a ollow-
up in e iew. The aim o he ollow-up in e iews was o
analyse he ques ionnai e esponses in g ea e dep h. The
in e iews we e semi-s uc u ed and conduc ed wi h a
deg ee o lexibili y. A lis o he main ques ions was sen
in ad ance o acili a e he in e iews. Al hough he
ques ionnai e was semi-s uc u ed, he indi idual ques‐
ions we e unde s ood as opics o discussion. Nume ous
incen i es e ealed du ing he mee ing wi h businessmen
ook he o m o ex ended commen s in sec ion no. 5.
4. De e mining he sample size
The companies add essed we e hose ha , by hei p inci‐
pal ac i i ies, belong in he manu ac u ing indus y
(acco ding o CZ-NACE e . 2, di ision C, sec ion 10-33).
Da a on he o al numbe o companies in he a ge
popula ion o he su ey a e aken om he Czech S a is i‐
cal O ice. I is es ima ed ha he a ge popula ion consis s
o o e 11,000 manu ac u ing companies [53]. A selec i e
sample o hese companies was ob ained om he da abase
Technological P o ile o he Czech Republic (www. ech‐
p o il.cz). A andom sample o 2,877 inno a i e companies
was d awn om he basic sample.
In addi ion, he answe o he mos equen ly asked
ques ion conce ning sampling (“Wha sized sample do I
need?”) was gi en a he beginning o su ey. In gene al,
h ee c i e ia will usually need o be speci ied o de e mine
he app op ia e sample size: i) he le el o p ecision, ii) he
le el o con idence o isk, and iii) he deg ee o a iabili y
in he a ibu es being measu ed [66].
The e a e se e al app oaches o de e mining a sample size.
I is o en assumed ha he samples in su eys a e o en
la ge enough such ha an es ima e made om hem is
app oxima ely no mally dis ibu ed [67, p. 11]. Howe e ,
in he social sciences, he popula ions om which samples
a e d awn a e gene ally ma ked by a high deg ee o non-
no mali y.
Applying he cen al limi heo em as well as he scope and
a ge popula ion o he su ey, i can be assumed ha he
dis ibu ion o he acqui ed da a is app oaching a no mal
dis ibu ion. The e o e, he o al sample size equi ed o
his s udy is calcula ed using Coch an’s o mula [67] by
aking 5% as he es ima ed pe cen age p e alence o he
popula ion o in e es ,
2
02
Z pq
ne
=
whe e n0 is he equi ed sample size, Z2 is he abscissa o
he no mal cu e ha cu s o an a ea α a he ails (1-α
equals he desi ed con idence le el), e is he desi ed le el
o p ecision, p is he es ima ed p opo ion o an a ibu e
ha is p esen in he popula ion, and q is (1−p). The alue
o Z is ound in s a is ical ables, which con ain he a ea
unde he no mal cu e.
The e o e, he equi ed e u n sample size (n0) o his
s udy was compu ed as ollows:
22
02 2
1,96 0.5 0.05 385
0.05
Z pq
n esponden s
e
* *
= = =
5. Resea ch esul s
A e he i s pos ing a he beginning o Ap il 2014, he
non- esponding companies ecei ed a eminde a he end
o May o he beginning o June; a ollow-up was sen a ew
mon hs la e . A he end o No embe 2014, 354 comple ely
illed-in ques ionnai es we e collec ed. This numbe is e y
close o he calcula ed sample size. Hence, da a acqui ed
a e conside ed s a is ically signi ican .
The eal esponse a e o mo e han 12% (354 comple ed
ques ionnai es om 2,877 po en ial esponden s) can be
conside ed o be good because he esponse a es o mail-
back ques ionnai es a e usually less han 10%. The de‐
ailed s a is ics o he ques ionnai e inqui ies a e shown in
Table 1.
Basic sample Manu ac u ing en e p ises in he Czech Republic
Selec i e
sample
Inno a i e manu ac u ing en e p ises in he Czech
Republic
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250) To al
Response Numbe 63 94 123 74 354
% 10.08% 12.24% 12.60% 14.57%
Non- esponse Numbe 562 674 853 434 2,523
% 89.92% 87.76% 87.40% 85.43%
To al Numbe 625 768 976 508 2,877
% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Response a e % 10.08% 12.24% 12.60% 14.57% 12.30%
Table 1. O e all s a is ics and dis ibu ion o companies engaged by he
esea ch su ey. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
Mo eo e , using he Pea son chi-squa e es and da a om
Table 1, no s a is ically signi ican di e ence be ween he
wo g oups ( he sizes o he esponden s and he non-
esponden s) was ound. The null agmen al hypo hesis
FH0 will be es ed so ha any andom alues a e no
4In J Eng Bus Manag, 2015, 7:25 | doi: 10.5772/62052
dependen in compa ison wi h he al e na i e agmen al
hypo hesis FH1.
FH0: The size o he company and espondence a e no
ela ed o each o he .
FH1: The size o he company and espondence a e ela ed
o each o he .
The calcula ed es c i e ion o mic o companies:
(
)
Chi Squa e 3.662;
DF 1; P Value 0.056
63 comple e ques ionnai es and
562 po en ial esponden s
- =
= - =
The calcula ed es c i e ion o small companies:
(
)
Chi Squa e 0.004;
DF 1; P Value 0.949
94 comple e ques ionnai es and
674 po en ial esponden s
- =
= - =
The calcula ed es c i e ion o medium companies:
(
)
Chi Squa e 0.122;
DF 1; P Value 0.727
123 comple e ques ionnai es and
853 po en ial esponden s
- =
= - =
The calcula ed es c i e ion o la ge companies:
(
)
Chi Squa e 2.927;
DF 1; P Value 0.087
74 comple e ques ionnai es and
434 po en ial esponden s
- =
= - =
Fo a selec ed signi icance le el, α = 0.05 is de e mined o
be quan ile chi-squa e (1) = 3.841. Because he alue o he
es c i e ion was no ealized in he c i ical ield (3.662 <
3.841 and P-Value = 0.056 o mic o companies; 0.004 < 3.841
and P-Value = 0.949 o small companies; 0.122 < 3.841 and
P-Value = 0.727 o medium companies; 2.927 < 3.841 and
P-Value = 0.087 o la ge companies), he al e na i e
agmen al hypo hesis FH1 is ejec ed on a 5% le el o
signi icance and he null agmen al hypo hesis FH0 is
accep ed.
I is impo an o no e ha eminde s we e made o non-
esponding companies, and in many cases he esponden s
answe ed ha hey would no ill-in he ques ionnai e due
o: i) a lack o in e es in su eys o his kind, ii) bad
expe iences o analogous su eys, iii) a lack o ime, i ) he
exis ence o in e nal policies ela ed o non-pa icipa ion in
academic esea ch, o ) no a ge ing speci ic compe en
execu i es ( o he as majo i y o add esses lis ed in he
da abase). Thus, an impo an ac o may be he ac ha
many e-mails did no a i e a he app op ia e place. This
could be e idence o he di icul ies c ea ed by his kind o
esea ch as well as ha inno a ion is a s a egic issue o
such companies.
6. Gene al cha ac e is ics
Ques ions om he i s pa o he ques ionnai e we e
ela ed o he basic cha ac e is ics da a o each company,
such as he company‘s size, i s o igin, ma ke , e c. Compa‐
ny size is a adi ional con ingency ac o in economic
esea ch. Speci ically, his sec ion s udies he impac o one
ac o linked o company size, i.e., he numbe o employ‐
ees. Howe e , he e enue da a we e collec ed wi h he
help o he ques ionnai e as well. None heless, only he
numbe o employees is a ma e o conce n o mos
pa ame e s. In ac , his ac o is usually he basis o
company classi ica ion. The dis ibu ion o companies by
size is based on EU law and he Recommenda ion o he
Eu opean Commission 2003/361/EC o 6 May 2003 [68, p.
36]. This s anda d di ides in o ou g oups: mic o-, small-,
medium- and la ge-sized companies. Figu e 1 shows he
pe cen ages ob ained using he numbe o employees
indica o .
I is impo an o no e ha eminde s we e made o non- esponding companies, and in
many cases he esponden s answe ed ha hey would no ill-in he ques ionnai e due o: i)
a lack o in e es in su eys o his kind, ii) bad expe iences o analogous su eys, iii) a lack
o ime, i ) he exis ence o in e nal policies ela ed o non-pa icipa ion in academic
esea ch, o ) no a ge ing speci ic compe en execu i es ( o he as majo i y o add esses
lis ed in he da abase). Thus, an impo an ac o may be he ac ha many e-mails did no
a i e a he app op ia e place. This could be e idence o he di icul ies c ea ed by his kind
o esea ch as well as ha inno a ion is a s a egic issue o such companies.
6. Gene al cha ac e is ics
Ques ions om he i s pa o he ques ionnai e we e ela ed o he basic cha ac e is ics
da a o each company, such as he company‘s size, i s o igin, ma ke , e c. Company size is a
adi ional con ingency ac o in economic esea ch. Speci ically, his sec ion s udies he
impac o one ac o linked o company size, i.e., he numbe o employees. Howe e , he
e enue da a we e collec ed wi h he help o he ques ionnai e as well. None heless, only he
numbe o employees is a ma e o conce n o mos pa ame e s. In ac , his ac o is
usually he basis o company classi ica ion. The dis ibu ion o companies by size is based
on EU law and he Recommenda ion o he Eu opean Commission 2003/361/EC o 6 May
2003 [68, p. 36]. This s anda d di ides in o ou g oups: mic o-, small-, medium- and la ge-
sized companies. Figu e 1 shows he pe cen ages ob ained using he numbe o employees
indica o .
Figu e 1. Dis ibu ion o companies engaged in he esea ch su ey (n=354, numbe o employees)
Sou ce: Own esea ch.
The i s empi ical e idence o he su ey eme ged by way o desc ip i e s a is ics. I has
been no ed ia he analysis o ques ionnai es ha inno a ion is mos ly pe o med by SMEs
17.80%
26.55%
34.75%
20.90%
Mic o (1-9) Small (10-49) Medium (50-249) La ge (>250)
Figu e 1. Dis ibu ion o companies engaged in he esea ch su ey (n=354,
numbe o employees). Sou ce: Own esea ch.
The i s empi ical e idence o he su ey eme ged by way
o desc ip i e s a is ics. I has been no ed ia he analysis
o ques ionnai es ha inno a ion is mos ly pe o med by
SMEs (80.51% in o al), espec i ely by medium en e p ises
(44.63% o esponden s) ollowed by small en e p ises
(28.53% o esponden s) and la ge en e p ises (19.49% o
esponden s) and wi h mic o companies (7.34% o espond‐
en s) a he ail.
I can be assumed ha he companies we e awa e o he
h ea o losing hei compe i i eness such ha i could
po en ially lead o hei demise. While la ge en e p ises
ocused on ope a ional e iciency and cos s sa ings, SMEs
we e able o eac o changes in he en i onmen h ough
5
Ond ej Zizla sky:
App oaches o Inno a ion P ocess Assessmen : Complex Resul s om an Explo a o y In es iga ion

inno a ion. The bigge he company, he mo e o ganiza‐
ionally demanding any inno a i e changes a e, which is
why mainly smalle businesses wi h a lexible o ganiza‐
ional s uc u e inno a e p esen ly. La ge companies
na u ally s i e o suppo inno a ion as well, bu due o
hei mo e complica ed o ganiza ion, bu eauc a iza ion o
he inno a ion and decision-making p ocess inhibi s no
only in en i eness bu also slows he pace a which new
in en ions mo e h ough he co po a e sys em owa ds
ma ke . The impo ance o SMEs o he de elopmen o he
Czech economy is he e o e inc easing. This is also high‐
ligh ed by he Concep o Suppo o Small and Medium
En ep eneu s o he pe iod 2014–2020, ca ied ou by he
Minis y o Indus y and T ade o he Czech Republic.
(80.51% in o al), espec i ely by medium en e p ises (44.63% o esponden s) ollowed by
small en e p ises (28.53% o esponden s) and la ge en e p ises (19.49% o esponden s) and
wi h mic o companies (7.34% o esponden s) a he ail.
I can be assumed ha he companies we e awa e o he h ea o losing hei
compe i i eness such ha i could po en ially lead o hei demise. While la ge en e p ises
ocused on ope a ional e iciency and cos s sa ings, SMEs we e able o eac o changes in
he en i onmen h ough inno a ion. The bigge he company, he mo e o ganiza ionally
demanding any inno a i e changes a e, which is why mainly smalle businesses wi h a
lexible o ganiza ional s uc u e inno a e p esen ly. La ge companies na u ally s i e o
suppo inno a ion as well, bu due o hei mo e complica ed o ganiza ion,
bu eauc a iza ion o he inno a ion and decision-making p ocess inhibi s no only
in en i eness bu also slows he pace a which new in en ions mo e h ough he co po a e
sys em owa ds ma ke . The impo ance o SMEs o he de elopmen o he Czech economy
is he e o e inc easing. This is also highligh ed by he Concep o Suppo o Small and
Medium En ep eneu s o he pe iod 2014–2020, ca ied ou by he Minis y o Indus y
and T ade o he Czech Republic.
Figu e 2. The a io o inno a i e en e p ises o he o al numbe o en e p ises engaging he CZSO
su eys by size (CZSO, 2010; 2012; 2014).
Howe e , hese esul s con as wi h s udies by he Czech S a is ical O ice [52, 53, 69] ha
conside la ge companies o be inno a ion leade s in he CR (see Figu e 2). P e ious s udies
conduc ed o e 2009-2011 unde he sponso ship o he In e nal G an Agency o he Facul y
o Business and Managemen B no Uni e si y o Technology ha e eached simila
con adic o y conclusions [70-72]. Thus, and o be e unde s anding, he classi ica ion
acco ding o u no e has been conside ed (see Figu e 3).
52.3%
63.5%
80.7%
46.7%
64.0%
78.6%
38.2%
57.6%
78.1%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
Small Medium La ge
CZSO 2010 CZSO 2012 CZSO 2014
Figu e 2. The a io o inno a i e en e p ises o he o al numbe o
en e p ises engaging he CZSO su eys by size (CZSO, 2010; 2012; 2014)
Howe e , hese esul s con as wi h s udies by he Czech
S a is ical O ice [52, 53, 69] ha conside la ge companies
o be inno a ion leade s in he CR (see Figu e 2). P e ious
s udies conduc ed o e 2009-2011 unde he sponso ship o
he In e nal G an Agency o he Facul y o Business and
Managemen B no Uni e si y o Technology ha e eached
simila con adic o y conclusions [70-72]. Thus, and o
be e unde s anding, he classi ica ion acco ding o
u no e has been conside ed (see Figu e 3).
Figu e 3. Dis ibu ion o companies engaged in he esea ch su ey (n=354, u no e ) Sou ce: Own
esea ch.
On he one hand, gi en a ce ain le el o inno a ion inpu s, la ge companies migh ha e
highe inno a i e sales in ensi y because hey can app op ia e inno a ion bene i s mo e
easily han SMEs and/o because o economies o scale. On he o he hand, SMEs migh use
inno a ion inpu s mo e e icien ly because o en ep eneu ial abili y o hei g ea e
lexibili y in he p oduc ion p ocess. P e ious e idence has indica ed ha al hough la ge
companies a e mo e likely o sell inno a i e p oduc s, his p obabili y inc eases less han
p opo iona ely wi h size, and ha among inno a i e companies he sha e o inno a i e
p oduc s among o al sales ends o be highe wi h smalle companies [e.g., 73].
A s udy by he OECD [48] also p o ides mixed esul s: size is posi i ely co ela ed,
nega i ely co ela ed o no co ela ed wi h u no e (sales) om inno a ions. Economies o
scope and scale and knowledge lows wi hin companies seem o play a ole in
comme cializa ion.
I is e y di icul o ei he alida e o in alida e Hypo hesis 1 (“Inno a ion is mainly
pe o med by medium- and la ge-sized companies in he Czech business en i onmen who ha e
su icien o esou ces.”) based on hese con a y esul s. Wha is he mos impo an om
manage ial poin o iew is he inding ha companies pe o m inno a ion. Howe e , hey
di e in e ms o he o m o inno a ion (see Table 5). The essen ial ques ion is no whe he
o inno a e o no , bu how o inno a e.
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250) To al
Czech Numbe 26 78 112 27 243
21.45%
22.87%
40.63%
15.05%
Mic o (1-9) Small (10-49) Medium (50-249) La ge (>250)
Figu e 3. Dis ibu ion o companies engaged in he esea ch su ey (n=354,
u no e ). Sou ce: Own esea ch.
On he one hand, gi en a ce ain le el o inno a ion inpu s,
la ge companies migh ha e highe inno a i e sales
in ensi y because hey can app op ia e inno a ion bene i s
mo e easily han SMEs and/o because o economies o
scale. On he o he hand, SMEs migh use inno a ion inpu s
mo e e icien ly because o en ep eneu ial abili y o hei
g ea e lexibili y in he p oduc ion p ocess. P e ious
e idence has indica ed ha al hough la ge companies a e
mo e likely o sell inno a i e p oduc s, his p obabili y
inc eases less han p opo iona ely wi h size, and ha
among inno a i e companies he sha e o inno a i e
p oduc s among o al sales ends o be highe wi h smalle
companies [e.g., 73].
A s udy by he OECD [48] also p o ides mixed esul s: size
is posi i ely co ela ed, nega i ely co ela ed o no
co ela ed wi h u no e (sales) om inno a ions. Econo‐
mies o scope and scale and knowledge lows wi hin
companies seem o play a ole in comme cializa ion.
I is e y di icul o ei he alida e o in alida e Hypo he‐
sis 1 (“Inno a ion is mainly pe o med by medium- and la ge-
sized companies in he Czech business en i onmen who ha e
su icien o esou ces.”) based on hese con a y esul s.
Wha is he mos impo an om manage ial poin o iew
is he inding ha companies pe o m inno a ion. Howe ‐
e , hey di e in e ms o he o m o inno a ion (see Table
5). The essen ial ques ion is no whe he o inno a e o no ,
bu how o inno a e.
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250) To al
Czech Numbe 26 78 112 27 243
% 100.00% 77.23% 70.89% 39.13% 68.64%
Czech wi h
o eign
pa icipa ion
Numbe 0 17 42 39 98
% 0.00% 16.83% 26.58% 56.52% 27.68%
Fo eign Numbe 0 6 4 3 13
% 0.00% 5.94% 2.53% 4.35% 3.67%
To al Numbe 26 101 158 69 354
% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 2. O igin o companies. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
The as majo i y o he companies add essed (68.64% o
esponden s) had Czech owne s, 27.68% o he companies
ha e o eign pa icipa ion, and only 3.67% had o eign
owne s (see Table 2).
He e, 55.93% o he inqui ed companies a e engaged in
inno a i e business wi hin he CR, o which 12.99%
ope a e on he domes ic ma ke wi hin he whole CR,
42.94% ope a e on egional ma ke s only wi hin he CR,
30.79% do business in EU membe and candida e coun‐
ies, and he emaining 13.28% do business a ound he
wo ld (see Table 3).
The majo i y o he esponden s (76.55%) ca ied ou
inno a ion i egula ly and andomly, i.e., as a consequence
o in ui i e and immedia e decisions, o e e se he
nega i e de elopmen . Only 23.45% o he esponden s
execu ed inno a ion egula ly, i.e., as a s anda d pa o
hei businesses which is sys ema ically managed.
6In J Eng Bus Manag, 2015, 7:25 | doi: 10.5772/62052
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250) To al
Regula ly Numbe 2 17 29 35 83
% 7.69% 16.83% 18.35% 50.72% 23.45%
I egula ly Numbe 24 84 129 34 271
% 92.31% 83.17% 81.65% 49.28% 76.55%
To al Numbe 26 101 158 69 354
100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 4. Pe iod o inno a ion. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
He e, Hypo hesis 2 (“La ge companies pe o m inno a ion
egula ly – i is a pa o hei business model.”) will be es ed.
Again, he chi-squa e es was applied. Fo his pu pose,
Ques ion 5 “O e wha pe iod does you company ealize
inno a ion” is used. The null agmen al hypo hesis FH0
will be used o es whe he he andom alues a e no
dependen in compa ison wi h he al e na i e agmen al
hypo hesis FH1:
FH0: The size o he company and he pe iod o inno a ion a e
no ela ed o each o he .
FH1: The size o he company and he pe iod o inno a ion a e
ela ed o each o he .
The calcula ed es c i e ion o la ge companies is as
ollows:
Chi Squa e 35.531;
DF 1; P Value 0.000
- =
= - =
Fo a selec ed signi icance le el, α = 0.05 is de e mined o
a quan ile chi-squa e (1) = 3.841. Because he alue o he
es c i e ion was ealized in he c i ical ield (35.531 > 3.841
and P-Value = 0.000), he agmen al null hypo hesis FH0
is ejec ed on a 5% le el o signi icance and he al e na i e
agmen al hypo hesis FH1 is accep ed. This means ha he
andom alues a e dependen and ha he ela ion be ween
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250) To al
Czech egional
ma ke
Numbe 5 16 21 4 46
% 19.23% 15.84% 13.29% 5.80% 12.99%
Czech na ional
ma ke
Numbe 14 49 62 27 152
% 53.85% 48.51% 39.24% 39.13% 42.94%
EU ma ke Numbe 6 31 49 23 109
% 23.08% 30.69% 31.01% 33.33% 30.79%
Global ma ke Numbe 1 5 26 15 47
% 3.85% 4.95% 16.46% 21.74% 13.28%
To al Numbe 26 101 158 69 354
% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 3. Ma ke o ien a ion. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
he size o he company and he pe iod o ealizing an
inno a ion was demons a ed.
Nex , he esponden s answe ed he ques ion abou wha
inno a ions had been implemen ed by he company du ing
he las h ee yea s, while wha impo ance hey had o he
company ep esen ed ano he pa o he esea ch. They
could selec om ou p ede ined answe s (see he inno a‐
ion classi ica ion acco ding o he Oslo Manual 2005 [46]).
The ques ionnai e included a lis o examples o each ype
o inno a ion. Since he esponden s we e able o selec
mo e answe s o his ques ion, a ecalcula ion had o be
ca ied ou whe eby he ela i e equency was de e mined
as a pe cen age o he numbe o selec ed answe s ou o
he o al numbe o esponden s in he g oup. Some o he
key esea ch indings a e summa ized in Figu e 4.
Nex , he esponden s answe ed he ques ion abou wha inno a ions had been
implemen ed by he company du ing he las h ee yea s, while wha impo ance hey had
o he company ep esen ed ano he pa o he esea ch. They could selec om ou
p ede ined answe s (see he inno a ion classi ica ion acco ding o he Oslo Manual 2005
[46]). The ques ionnai e included a lis o examples o each ype o inno a ion. Since he
esponden s we e able o selec mo e answe s o his ques ion, a ecalcula ion had o be
ca ied ou whe eby he ela i e equency was de e mined as a pe cen age o he numbe o
selec ed answe s ou o he o al numbe o esponden s in he g oup. Some o he key
esea ch indings a e summa ized in Figu e 4.
Figu e 4. Implemen ed inno a ions (n=354).
The mos -pe o med inno a ion ype was p oduc inno a ion (38.42% o esponden s),
ollowed by p ocess inno a ion (29.38% o esponden s) and ma ke ing inno a ion (20.90%
o esponden ). O ganiza ional inno a ion is a he ail, wi h 11.30% o esponden s. These
balanced esul s highligh he ac ha p oduc inno a ions o en equi e p ocess
inno a ions (e.g., in he o m o acqui ing new p oduc ion echnologies), and in o de o
hese p oduc inno a ions o be success ul on he ma ke and b ing he company highe
alue, i is o en necessa y o seek new dis ibu ion channels ia ma ke ing inno a ions.
Mo eo e , many o he inno a o s in he manu ac u ing indus y implemen ed bo h
p oduc and p ocess inno a ion.
The measu emen ins umen used in he ques ionnai e o es ima e he impo ance o
inno a ion was e alua ed ia a i e-i em Like scale: 1 – e y impo an , 2 – impo an , 3 –
neu al, 4 – no impo an , 5 – comple ely unimpo an . In he summa y o he pe cen age
a io o posi i e answe s, namely he alues 1 ( e y impo an ) and 2 (impo an ), he o de
o indi idual possibili ies was de e mined. The e o e, he esul s show ha he esponden s
see he impo ance o inno a ions o hei company in he ollowing o de : inno a ion o
p oduc s, p ocesses, ma ke ing and o ganiza ion. The e alua ion o he impo ance o
38.42%
29.38%
11.30%
20.90%
P oduc inno a ion P ocess inno a ion
O ganisa ional inno a ion Ma ke ing inno a ion
Figu e 4. Implemen ed inno a ions (n=354)
The mos -pe o med inno a ion ype was p oduc inno a‐
ion (38.42% o esponden s), ollowed by p ocess inno a‐
ion (29.38% o esponden s) and ma ke ing inno a ion
(20.90% o esponden ). O ganiza ional inno a ion is a he
ail, wi h 11.30% o esponden s. These balanced esul s
highligh he ac ha p oduc inno a ions o en equi e
p ocess inno a ions (e.g., in he o m o acqui ing new
p oduc ion echnologies), and in o de o hese p oduc
inno a ions o be success ul on he ma ke and b ing he
company highe alue, i is o en necessa y o seek new
dis ibu ion channels ia ma ke ing inno a ions. Mo e‐
o e , many o he inno a o s in he manu ac u ing indus y
implemen ed bo h p oduc and p ocess inno a ion.
The measu emen ins umen used in he ques ionnai e o
es ima e he impo ance o inno a ion was e alua ed ia a
i e-i em Like scale: 1 – e y impo an , 2 – impo an , 3
– neu al, 4 – no impo an , 5 – comple ely unimpo an .
In he summa y o he pe cen age a io o posi i e answe s,
namely he alues 1 ( e y impo an ) and 2 (impo an ), he
o de o indi idual possibili ies was de e mined. The e‐
o e, he esul s show ha he esponden s see he impo ‐
ance o inno a ions o hei company in he ollowing
o de : inno a ion o p oduc s, p ocesses, ma ke ing and
o ganiza ion. The e alua ion o he impo ance o indi id‐
ual ypes o inno a ion o companies is shown in Table 5.
7
Ond ej Zizla sky:
App oaches o Inno a ion P ocess Assessmen : Complex Resul s om an Explo a o y In es iga ion
C onbach’s alpha coe icien o pa icula ypes o inno‐
a ion is abo e 0.97, and he o e all C onbach’s alpha is
0.9828, which is highe han he commonly used bench‐
ma k alue 0.70. This means s ong in e nal consis ency
and good eliabili y o scale.
The main mo i es leading o he commencemen o such
inno a ion ac i i ies a e g ow h o e enues/p o i s,
eac ion o demand, inc eased quali y, inc eased ma ke
sha e and, las bu no leas , inspi a ion by compe i o s. The
mo i es o inno a ion ac i i ies ep esen a s a ing poin
o inno a ion s a egies. S a egic ma ke ing and esea ch
- wi h a nomina ion by op managemen - a e also in ol ed
in s a egy p oposal and o mula ion. The objec i e o
e e y inno a ion s a egy es s on achie ing a compe i i e
ad an age, leading o he company‘s imp o ed posi ion on
he ma ke ; any o he objec i es a e de i a i e [53, 74].
Inno a ion expendi u e includes all expenses o bo h in-
house and ex e nally pu chased ac i i ies ha aim a he
de elopmen and in oduc ion o inno a ions, ega dless
o whe he hese inno a ions ha e been in oduced ye .
They comp ise cu en expendi u e (e.g., labou cos s,
ex e nally pu chased goods o se ices, e c.) and capi al
expendi u e (e.g., machine y, ins umen s, in angible
asse s, e c.).
Inno a ion expendi u e is an impo an me ic o de e ‐
mine he quan i y o esou ces ha a company p o ides o
ca ying ou inno a ion ac i i ies. To o e come he
unwillingness o he esponden s o ansmi con iden ial
in o ma ion, ou ca ego ies we e p ede ined: inno a ion
expendi u e based on ac ual needs up o 5% o an annual
budge , 5-10% o an annual budge and mo e han 10% o
an annual budge (see Table 6).
The mos equen inno a ion expendi u e in ol ed up o
5% o an annual budge , especially in SMEs. SMEs in es
in inno a i e ac i i ies acco ding o ac ual needs. The
la ges con ibu ion in his ega d is made by mic o
companies (65.38% o esponden s), ollowed by small
(38.61% o esponden s) and medium companies (36.08%
o esponden s). In con as , he in e se is obse ed o
expendi u e o 5-10%, anging om 11.54% o mic o
companies o 34.78% o la ge companies. La ge companies
(23.19% o esponden s) de o e mo e han 10% o hei
annual budge o inno a ion, while mic o companies
in es in o inno a ion acco ding ac ual need (65.38% o
esponden s). In o he wo ds, he la ge he company, he
highe he expendi u e, he mo e egula ly planned i is,
and he g ea e he amoun ha is annually spen on
inno a ion.
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250) To al
Ac ual needs Numbe 17 39 57 9 122
% 65.38% 38.61% 36.08% 13.04% 34.46%
Up o 5% o
annual budge
Numbe 6 37 75 20 138
% 23.08% 36.63% 47.47% 28.99% 38.98%
5-10% o annual
budge
Numbe 3 21 23 24 71
% 11.54% 20.79% 14.56% 34.78% 20.06%
Mo e han 10%
o annual
budge
Numbe 0 4 3 16 23
0.00% 3.96% 1.90% 23.19% 6.50%
To al Numbe 26 101 158 69 354
% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 6. Inno a ion expendi u es. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
In wha ollows, esea ch Hypo hesis 3 (“La ge companies
end o in es g ea e sums o money in inno a ion (measu ed by
he pe cen age o he annual budge ).”) will be es ed. The chi-
squa e es was used. The FH0 pa ial null hypo hesis,
s a ing ha andom quan i ies a e independen , was es ed
agains he FH1 pa ial al e na i e hypo hesis. Fo his
pu pose, Ques ion 8 “Es ima e he o al amoun o expen‐
di u e on inno a ion by pe cen age o he annual budge ”
is used. The null agmen al hypo hesis FH0 will be es ed
as o whe he he andom alues a e no dependen in
compa ison wi h he al e na i e agmen al hypo hesis
FH1:
FH0: The size o he company and he pe cen age o he annual
budge in es ed in inno a ion a e no ela ed o each o he .
FH1: The size o he company and he pe cen age o he annual
budge in es ed in inno a ion a e ela ed o each o he .
The calcula ed es c i e ion o la ge companies is as
ollows:
Chi Squa e 59.624
DF 1; P Value 0.000
- =
= - =
1
Ve y impo an
2
Impo an
3
Neu al
4
No impo an
5
Unimpo an C onbach's Alpha
No % No % No % No % No %
P oduc inno a ion 103 29% 85 24% 67 19% 42 12% 57 16% 0.9761
P ocess inno a ion 96 27% 78 22% 67 19% 64 18% 49 14% 0.9730
Ma ke ing inno a ion 62 18% 99 28% 85 24% 69 19% 39 11% 0.9798
O ganiza ion inno a ion 57 16% 81 23% 79 22% 60 17% 77 22% 0.9794
Table 5. Impo ance o pa icula inno a ion ypes o companies. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
8 In J Eng Bus Manag, 2015, 7:25 | doi: 10.5772/62052
Fo a selec ed signi icance le el, α = 0.05 is de e mined o
a quan ile chi-squa e (1) = 3.841. Because he alue o he
es c i e ion was ealized in a c i ical ield (59.624 > 3.841
and P-Value = 0.000), he agmen al null hypo hesis FH0
is ejec ed on a 5% le el signi icance and he al e na i e
agmen al hypo hesis FH1 is accep ed. This means ha he
andom alues a e dependen and ha he ela ion be ween
he size o he company and he pe cen age o he annual
budge in es ed in inno a ion was demons a ed. Mo e‐
o e , he esul o his es co esponds wi h he ea lie
Hypo hesis 1 - “Inno a ion is mainly pe o med by medium-
and la ge-sized companies in he Czech business en i onmen
who ha e su icien esou ces.”
7. Inno a ion managemen con ol
Well-managed inno a ions success ully comme cialized in
he ma ke a e a ool ha companies can use o win
compe i i e ad an ages ha will allow hem o p ospe
e en unde such condi ions as he ecen ecession. I is a
mode n end o seek o inno a e, bu inno a ions mus be
implemen ed p uden ly and in a a ge ed manne . Mo e‐
o e , inno a i e ac i i ies a e e y cos ly and hey can ie
a subs an ial pa o a company’s a ailable esou ces o a
signi ican pe iod o ime. The e o and esou ces expend‐
ed mus be ecouped i he company is o s and a chance o
su i ing in a s ongly compe i i e en i onmen . The need
o an MCS is c ucial o inno a ion.
The e o e, a key a ea o he su ey was he issue o he
e alua ion o and esponsibili y o inno a i e ac i i ies –
namely how he key decisions a e made and how i is
decided whe he a gi en inno a ion is iable. When asked
whe he hey had e alua ed he implemen ed inno a i e
p ojec s, he as majo i y (79.38% o esponden s) an‐
swe ed a i ma i ely. On he o he hand, wha is somewha
disquie ing is he ac ha his a ea was neglec ed by 20.62%
o he esponden s, e en hough inno a ions had been
implemen ed by hem (see Table 7).
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250)
To al
Yes Numbe 5 23 49 24 101
% 19.23% 22.77% 31.01% 34.78% 28.53%
Somewha yes Numbe 11 62 72 35 180
% 42.31% 61.39% 45.57% 50.72% 50.85%
Somewha no Numbe 8 9 21 8 46
% 30.77% 8.91% 13.29% 11.59% 12.99%
No Numbe 2 7 16 2 27
7.69% 6.93% 10.13% 2.90% 7.63%
To al Numbe 26 101 158 69 354
% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 7. E alua ion o inno a ion p ojec s. Sou ce: Own esea ch (n=354).
Based on hese da a, Hypo hesis 4 (“La ge companies end o
e alua e hei inno a i e ac i i ies mo e equen ly han
SMEs.”) is es ed. Independence s a is ical es ing o wo
quali a i e cha ac e s is ca ied ou o s a is ical depend‐
ency e i ica ion. Fo his pu pose, Ques ion 9 “Has you
company implemen an R&D managemen con ol sys‐
em?” is used. The null agmen al hypo hesis FH0 will be
es ed as o whe he he andom alues a e no dependen
in compa ison wi h he al e na i e agmen al hypo hesis
FH1.
FH0: The size o he company and he e alua ion o inno a ion
a e no ela ed o each o he .
FH1: The size o he company and he e alua ion o inno a ion
a e ela ed o each o he .
Calcula ed es c i e ion o la ge companies is as ollows:
Chi Squa e 1.967
DF 1; P Value 0.161
- =
= - =
Fo a selec ed signi icance le el, α = 0.05 is de e mined o
a quan ile chi-squa e (1) = 3.841. Because he alue o he
es c i e ion was no ealized in a c i ical ield (1.967 < 3.841
and P-Value = 0.161), he agmen al al e na i e hypo hesis
FH1 is ejec ed on a 5% le el signi icance and he null
agmen al hypo hesis FH0 is accep ed. In o he wo ds,
SMEs a e awa e o he impo ance o inno a ion e alua ion
and hey pe o m i as well as la ge companies. On he o he
hand, SMEs use di e en echniques o managemen
con ol o la ge companies (see Table 11).
Fo hose en e p ises which esponded a i ma i ely o he
abo e ques ion (281 in o al), he pe iod since he company
had implemen ed an inno a ion MCS was examined.
Ca ego y
(Numbe o employees)
Mic o
(1-9)
Small
(10-49)
Medium
(50-249)
La ge
(>250)
To al
Less han 5 yea sNumbe 12 29 25 8 74
% 57.14% 35.80% 20.00% 14.81% 26.33%
F om 5 o 10
yea s
Numbe 7 33 56 25 121
% 33.33% 40.74% 44.80% 46.30% 43.06%
F om 11 o 15
yea s
Numbe 2 14 36 15 67
% 9.52% 17.28% 28.80% 27.78% 23.84%
Mo e han 15
yea s
Numbe 0 5 8 6 19
0.00% 6.17% 6.40% 11.11% 6.76%
To al Numbe 21 81 125 54 281
% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 8. Pe iod o inno a ion MCS implemen a ion. Sou ce: Own esea ch
(n=281).
Hypo hesis 5 (“La ge companies end o ha e implemen ed hei
inno a ion managemen con ol sys ems o longe han
SMEs”) will be es ed. Independence s a is ical es ing o
9
Ond ej Zizla sky:
App oaches o Inno a ion P ocess Assessmen : Complex Resul s om an Explo a o y In es iga ion
Inno a es. Ha a d Business School P ess. Bos on,
MA; 2008; p. 320.
[81] Tzokas, N., Hu link, E.J., Ha , S. Na iga ing he
new p oduc de elopmen p ocess. Indus ial
Ma ke ing Managemen . 2004; 33: 619-626.
[82] Hul ink, E.J., Robben, H.S.J. Measu ing new
p oduc success: The di e ence ha ime pe spec‐
i e makes. Jou nal o P oduc Inno a ion Manage‐
men . 1995; 12: 392–405.
[83] Da ila, A., Fos e , G., Li, M. Reasons o manage‐
men con ol sys ems adop ion: Insigh s om
p oduc de elopmen sys ems choice by ea ly-s age
en ep eneu ial companies. Accoun ing, O ganiza‐
ions and Socie y. 2009; 34(3-4): 233-347.
[84] Chiesa, V., F a ini, F. E alua ion and pe o mance
measu emen o esea ch and de elopmen .
Edwa d Elga Publishing. Chel enham; 2009; p. 301.
DOI 10.4337/9781849801942.
[85] Hend icks, K., Ho a, M., Meno , L., Wiedman, C.H.
Adop ion o he balanced sco eca d: A con ingency
a iables analysis. Canadian Jou nal o Adminis‐
a i e Sciences. 2012; 29(2): 124-138.
[86] Rigby, D. Execu i e Guide - Managemen Tools
2007. Bain and Company Publishing. Bos on, MA;
2007; p. 74.
[87] Kaplan, R.S., No on, D.P. The s a egy- ocused
o ganiza ion: How balanced sco eca d companies
h i e in he new business en i onmen . Ha a d
Business Re iew P ess. Bos on, MA; 2000; p. 416.
[88] Kaplan, R.S., No on, P.D. The balanced sco eca d:
T ansla ing s a egy in o ac ion. Ha a d Business
School P ess. Bos on, MA; 1996; p. 336. DOI 10.1016/
s0024-6301(97)80925-9.
16 In J Eng Bus Manag, 2015, 7:25 | doi: 10.5772/62052