Approaches to Innovation Process Assessment: Complex Results from an Exploratory Investigation

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