J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 67
Dominan Logic and Ex e nal Collabo a ion: De e minan s o Inno a ion
in An Eme ging Economy and A De eloped Coun y
Alexand a Donado1,2*, Lina He nandez1, Ca los Al ea 1 Ignacio Cas o2
Abs ac : F om he cogni i e pe spec i e and ocusing on ex e nal collabo a ion, his s udy aims o show hei con ibu ion o inno a i e pe -
o mance, which usually di e s be ween eme ging and ad anced economies. Da abases on Science, Technology and Inno a ion ac i i ies o he
coun ies s udied a e used, oge he wi h CFA and SEM, o alida e he hypo heses. I is ound ha dominan logic and ex e nal collabo a ion enjoy
a posi i e ela ionship wi h inno a i e pe o mance. In Spain, he e u ns o esea ch and de elopmen a e g ea e . This may be due o he ac ha
cogni i e aspec s a e de e minan o le e aging collabo a i e ne wo ks, while in Colombia his needs o be s eng hened. In addi ion o con ibu-
ing heo e ically o he ope a ionalisa ion o dominan logic and ex e nal collabo a ion in inno a i e pe o mance, his esea ch con ibu es o
he li e a u e by p oposing ela ionships among he ac o s s udied, p o iding insigh s in o hei in luence in he inno a ion p ocess in a de eloped
and an eme ging coun y, which has no been add essed be o e.
Keywo ds: dominan logic; ex e nal collabo a ion; inno a ion
Submi ed: Jan 29 h, 2023 / App o ed: Ma 23 h, 2023
(1) Basic Sciences, Uni e sidad San iago de Cali, Cali, Colombia
(2) Uni e sidad de Se illa, Se illa, España
*Co esponding au ho : Alexand [email protected]
1. In oduc ion
The inno a ion pa adox s a es ha de eloping coun ies inno a e
much less han ad anced coun ies (Ci e a & Maloney, 2020). I is
somewha illogical ha al hough inno a ion p o ides po en ial gains
in company pe o mance and in economic de elopmen , he condi-
ions a e no in place o in es men o be equal ac oss all economies;
hence, he e is a di e ence in compe i i eness be ween eme ging and
de eloped coun ies. Rega ding hese di e ences, Ci e a & Maloney
men ion ha he e a e obs acles o he ee low o knowledge, such
as he low en ep eneu ial capaci y o inno a e by adding alue. Ac-
co ding o Su on and Kpen ey (2012), capabili ies a e he basic e-
sou ces ha he company mus iden i y and adop . Resou ces such as
knowledge, p ocesses, epu a ion, echnology, and ela ionships ha e
gained impo ance as globalisa ion, compe i ion, and echnology
ha e in ensi ied in he ma ke place (Liu e al., 2019). These esou ces,
known as in angibles due o hei alue, a eness, and hei di icul-
y in being imi a ed o ans e ed, ha e been s udied by academics
who ha e de e mined he exis ence o a posi i e ela ionship be ween
hese esou ces and business success (Fe ei a e al., 2020; Khan e al.,
2019). The e o e, acco ding o Nadka ni and Pe ez (2007), he mind-
se , also called dominan logic (DL), along wi h cogni i e mapping,
men al models, s a egic amewo ks, and belie s uc u es, cons i-
u es he knowledge s uc u es ha managemen eams use in hei
decision-making; he ein lies he impo ance o s udying DL wi hin
he ield o s a egic cogni ion. Dominan logic is de ined as he way
in which manage s concep ualise hei businesses and make c i ical
esou ce alloca ion decisions om a cogni i e pe spec i e; his is
applicable o echnologies, p oduc de elopmen , dis ibu ion, ad-
e ising, and e en human esou ces (P ahalad & Be is, 1986).
P e ious s udies on DL ha e been summa ised in he li e a u e e iew
by Engelmann e al. (2020). F om a inal co e o 94 pape s ha add es-
sed he opic explici ly om a business pe spec i e, 58 co espond o
empi ical s udies ha we e conduc ed be ween 1990–2018, wi h he
highes concen a ion o p oduc ion in 2015 wi h eigh s udies, and
a o al a e age o 2.5 a icles pe yea . The pa icula ly no ewo hy
a icle by Obloj e al. (2010) desc ibes he heo e ical basis o he
ope a ionalisa ion o DL o enable he measu emen o business pe -
o mance, whe eby he s udy o he concep is ecognised as being
heo e ically a ac i e, bu wi h ew empi ical s udies due o he lack
o a clea heo e ical amewo k and ope a ionalisa ion. Se e al s u-
dies ha ha e ope a ionalised DL a e wo hy o no e wi hin he sam-
ple: Co é e al. (1999) p o ided he p ocu emen managemen model
om he DL pe spec i e; Von K ogh, E a and Macus (Von K ogh e
al., 2000) measu ed DL om six dimensions om he ex e nal and
in e nal en i onmen ; and Obloj e al. (2010) desc ibed a sys em o
ou elemen s, namely, oppo uni y iden i ica ion, p oac i i y, lea -
ning, and ou ines.
The s udy by Engelmann (2020) enables six empi ical pieces o e-
sea ch o be iden i ied whe e he concep ela es o inno a ion:
Bouwen & F y (1991), S a egic Ac ions o Gene a e Business Inno-
a ions; Ellonen e al. (2015), DL Rela ionship and Dynamic Capabi-
li ies in Inno a ion P ocesses in he Publishing Indus y; Ga g, V.K.,
Wal e s, B.A. and P iem (2003), Company Pe o mance om In e nal
and Ex e nal En i onmen s wi h Emphasis on Inno a ion Func ions;
Hadida & Pa is (2014), Manage ial Cogni ion in he Digi al Music
Indus y; Von K ogh e al. (2000), Rela ionship be ween DL and Busi-
ness Pe o mance; and Wal e s e al. (2005), S a egic Func ions om
In e nal (Inno a ion s. E iciency) and Ex e nal En i onmen s.
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 68
Fu he mo e, se e al ecen empi ical s udies con i m an in e es in
he s udy o cogni ion (DL) in business pe o mance and inno a ion:
Su and Wang (2018), The Rela ionship be ween Con ol Sys ems
and En ep eneu ial O ien a ion om Cogni ion; Khan e al. (2019,
2020), The Impac o DL on he Pe o mance o China-SMEs; Palma-
Ruiz e al. (2020), The Key Elemen s o E alua ing DL in O ganisa-
ions; B and ne and F eiling (2021), DL as a Value o a Cons ain in
O ganisa ional Change; and Dwipayana e al. (2021), The In eg a i e
Model o DL in he Pu sui o Business Pe o mance.
In angible esou ces and ex e nal collabo a ion (EC) enable o ganisa-
ions o gene a e new knowledge; his has been widely s udied in he
ield o inno a ion managemen h ough empi ical s udies ha p o i-
de e idence o how his ac o inc eases he inno a i e pe o mance
(IP) o companies (Fındık & Beyhan, 2015). Business inno a ion as
a compe i i e ad an age s a egy, seeks in collabo a ion, addi ional
sou ces o esou ces, ob aining bene i s such as: complemen ing
hei business capabili ies, be e knowledge ans e , be e isk ma-
nagemen and sha ing R&D expenses (Fossas-Olalla e al., 2015).
Companies wan o sha e he isks o inno a ion, wo king oge he ,
ob aining esou ces and capabili ies ha complemen hei in e nal
s uc u e (Chesb ough e al., 2006).
F om he pe spec i e o open inno a ion (Chesb ough, 2003), colla-
bo a ion plays a e y impo an ole in he iden i ica ion and adop ion
o echnologies because he use o ex e nal ideas p omo es c ea i i y.
In he ield o inno a ion managemen , he opic is qui e ecognized,
e lec ed in he good numbe o publica ions ha add ess he subjec
(Boge s e al., 2017; Cheng & Huizingh, 2014; Lopes & de Ca alho,
2018). In o he wo ds, business inno a ion, has in collabo a ion a de-
e mining ac o , as i allows he exchange o knowledge and angible
and in angible esou ces wi h ex e nal ac o s, hus os e ing inno a-
ion (Fishe & Qualls, 2018; Randhawa e al., 2016). Collabo a ion
allows he c ea ion and cap u e o alue o he bene i o he o gani-
sa ion h ough he a ac ion o pa ne s and he s eng hening o he
links be ween hem (A anha & Ca alho, 2022).
Acco ding o he s udy by Mei eles e al, (2022), app oxima ely 42% o
he high impac scien i ic a icles, which ha e s udied he ela ionship
be ween open inno a ion and collabo a ion, highligh app oaches on
lea ning and knowledge managemen , heo ies ela ed o psychology
(indi idual) and collabo a i e ne wo ks. Mainly hese heo ies ocus
on he o ganisa ional le el, i.e., cha ac e is ics, capabili ies and skills
o i ms ha con ibu e o he s eng hening o in e -o ganisa ional
ela ionships equi ed o inno a e. The mos ecen a icles associa ed
wi h his le el ocus on he ypes o pa ne s, capabili ies, and needs
o pa ne s (Secundo e al., 2019), how s ong collabo a i e linkages
o i ms wi h o he pa ne s con ibu e o inno a ion, as well as he
na u e o hose linkages (Radziwon & Boge s, 2019) and how busi-
ness success may be de e mined by he s eng h o ne wo ks and how
knowledge lows h ough hose connec ions (Co al de Zubielqui e
al., 2019; Di Pie o e al., 2018). Ne wo ks wi hin he con ex o colla-
bo a ion, as a mechanism o exchange knowledge and s eng hen he
links be ween he di e en ac o s o an ecosys em, a e he main ac o
in he de elopmen o he inno a i e p ocess (Gu ié ez e al., 2021).
In summa y, mo e empi ical s udies a e needed o explain business
pe o mance h ough he ope a ionalisa ion o DL, especially hose
ha allow he managemen o inno a ion o be measu ed in com-
panies. On he o he hand, he collabo a ion ac o is con i med as
a de e minan o inno a ion h ough he equency o ela ionships
wi h ex e nal ac o s in an inno a ion ecosys em.
Based on he gap desc ibed, his s udy pu sues he ollowing objec-
i e: o con ibu e o he scien i ic li e a u e by p o iding empi ical
e idence ha suppo s he impo ance o DL in IP by answe ing he
ollowing ques ions: Does DL ha e a posi i e and signi ican ela ion-
ship wi h en ep eneu ial IP? Can simila i ies/di e ences in he ela-
ionship be ween DL and EC wi h espec o IP be iewed as e idence
be ween an eme ging coun y and a de eloped coun y? In o de o
answe hese ques ions, he e e ence amewo k o Obloj e al. (2010)
has been u ilised om wo pe spec i es The DL is as ollows: Rou i-
nes and in o ma ion il e s (cogni i e amewo k) and o ope a iona-
lise he EC, whe eby dicho omous a iables a e iden i ied in o de o
de e mine he deg ee o he ela ionship o companies wi h di e en
s akeholde s om he science, echnology, and inno a ion sys em o
he coun ies unde s udy. The main con ibu ion o his empi ical
s udy, in addi ion o con ibu ing heo e ically and me hodologically
o he ope a ionalisa ion o DL and EC, in ol es measu ing inno a-
i e business pe o mance, which implies ha hese ela ionships can
be expounded in an eme ging coun y, such as Colombia, and in a
de eloped coun y, such as Spain.
This a icle is s uc u ed as ollows: Sec ion 2 p esen s he heo e ical
amewo k o he s udy and s a es he hypo heses. Sec ion 3 hen des-
c ibes he da a selec ion and he quan i a i e model used. Subsequen ly,
he esul s o he empi ical analysis a e discussed in Sec ion 4. The inal
sec ion, Sec ion 5, concludes wi h he con ibu ions o he a icle o he
ield o inno a ion managemen and p oposes u u e esea ch.
2. Theo e ical basis
The esou ce-based iew o o ganisa ional heo y desc ibes compa-
nies as en i ies o se s o angible and in angible esou ces ha de-
e mine he e ogenei y among companies (Pe e a & Ba ney, 2003).
Howe e , he mos ecen li e a u e on his heo y a gues ha in an-
gible esou ces a e a majo sou ce o compe i i e ad an age (Obloj e
al., 2010). Tha is o say, knowledge, asks, epu a ion, echnology, and
ela ionships ha e become mo e impo an since globalisa ion, com-
pe i ion, and echnology ha e all in ensi ied in he ma ke place (Liu
e al., 2019). Fu he mo e, inno a ion has become a majo pa o
compe i i eness and o ganisa ion sus ainabili y and gene a es com-
pe i i e ad an ages by way o de eloping new o imp o ed p oduc s/
p ocesses (Danneels, 2002). Inno a ion ac i i ies allow companies o
imp o e hei pe o mance h ough he use o in angible esou ces,
since hey a e unique and di icul o imi a e o subs i u e (Ba ney,
1991), al hough such ac i i ies should enable o ganisa ions o be
p oac i e wi hou limi ing hei possibili ies.
Howe e , o companies in eme ging coun ies, angible esou ces
such as inancing, echnology, and logis ics sys ems emain limi ed
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 69
(B u on & Rubanik, 2002). The e o e, i is necessa y o o ganisa ions
o acqui e and exploi hei in angible esou ces and inco po a e
hem in a be e way han en ep eneu s do in de eloped coun ies
(Kno e al., 2003).
Among he in angible esou ces o an o ganisa ion a e he knowled-
ge s uc u es ha managemen eams employ o s a egic ac ions
(Nadka ni & Pe ez, 2007). This is he DL, which is he way manage s
concep ualise hei business and make c i ical esou ce-alloca ion de-
cisions, whe he wi h espec o echnologies, p oduc de elopmen ,
dis ibu ion, ad e ising, o human esou ces (P ahalad & Be is,
1986). These au ho s a gue ha he di icul ies o managing di e se
businesses a e no only due o he s uc u e o he indus y and di-
e si y o businesses, bu also due o he cogni i e s uc u es o o -
ganisa ions, which a e decided by he knowledge and expe ience o
he business managemen eam. Al hough hese cogni i e s uc u es
a e in isible, hey become isible in he company’s in as uc u e and
adminis a i e ools, ha is, he concep o DL co e s bo h in isible
(cogni i e) and isible aspec s (Engelmann e al., 2020).
Acco ding o Von K ogh e al. (2000), empi ical e idence shows ha
di e ences in DL lead o di e en s a egic eac ions o indus y de e-
lopmen s and, hus, esul in di e ences in pe o mance. A cons an ly
changing en i onmen will induce di e se po en ial s a egies wi hin
companies. The g ea e he DL in a company, he mo e success ul i s
eac ion is o subs an ial inc eases in en i onmen di e si y.
Al hough P ahalad and Be is (1986) de ine DL as a men al model
o he ope a ionalisa ion o business and managemen ools in o de
o achie e business goals and make decisions, Obloj (2010) p oposes
wo basic pe spec i es ha a ise om his de ini ion, ha is, DL as
ou ines and DL as in o ma ion il e s (cogni i e amewo k).
2.1 Dominan logic as ou ines
F om he pe spec i e o o ganisa ional ou ines, DL ocuses on he
p ocedu es and me hods o he s anda d ope a ions o companies;
his includes he iden i ica ion o oppo uni ies and h ea s. This iew
de e mines he in luence ha DL exe s on how companies exploi
hei exis ing esou ces (Obloj e al., 2013).
Lea ning can also be conside ed wi hin his pe spec i e (Cope, 2005),
gi en he ex en o which companies iden i y and selec epea able
s a egies and lea n hem, which leads o he c ea ion o change o
ou ines (Walsh, 1995).
2.2 Dominan logic as in o ma ion il e s
Be is and P ahald (1995) and Be is (2000) conside DL o be a
knowledge s uc u e ha is dynamic o e ime and depends on busi-
ness cha ac e is ics, c i ical asks ha de e mine success, pe o man-
ce measu es, and on he e olu ion o no ms and alues. These ac o s
wo k as a se o pe cep ual and concep ual il e s ha pu i y he in-
o ma ion coming om he en i onmen . In o he wo ds, i is a se o
dominan belie s (Nadka ni & Pe ez, 2007) ha enable o ganisa ions
o expand o limi hei op ions.
Acco ding o Obloj e al. (2010), he abo e pe spec i es should be
ela ed and DL should be p oposed as a sys em o ou elemen s. The
i s is P oac i e/ eac i e na u e, which is how he o ganisa ion ac s
s a egically and he speed o eac ion. The second is Ex e nal o ien-
a ion, which consis s o how companies pe cei e hei en i onmen ,
whe he as an oppo uni y o a h ea . Thi d is Lea ning, which e e s
o how companies ac in he ace o di icul ies. Las ly, he ou h ele-
men is Rou ine, which co esponds o he deg ee o which lea ning
becomes ou ine. In hei s udy, he au ho s associa e 22 ac o s o
i ems o measu e he ou elemen s, which ha e been used as a e e-
ence o ce ain s udies using o icial desc ip i e bases o explain DL.
O he ou abo e elemen s, p oac i i y is he app oach ha has been
he mos impo an in ecen yea s because o i s ela ionship o
he concep s o en ep eneu ial mindse and manage ial cogni ion.
P oac i i y is de ined as he indi idual's olun a y beha io o make
hings happen (Khan e al., 2020), ha is, o ake ac ions in a o o
some hing. Thus, and in acco dance wi h he limi a ion o his s u-
dy, by using da a om desc ip i e da abases o wo o ganisa ions o
he STI (Science, Technology, and Inno a ion) sys em in he s udy
coun ies o measu e he inno a i e pe o mance o companies, he
au ho s de e mined o e alua e only he p oac i i y dimension using
he ac o s p oposed by Obloj e al, (2010), in his dimension, hose
ha allowed ope a ionalising he DL acco ding o he a ailable a ia-
bles. In summa y, o his s udy, he emphasis lies on he p oac i e
na u e o companies o explain he DL.
Acco ding o Su & Wang (2018), p oac i i y in a company ocuses
on seeking new oppo uni ies ha may o may no be ela ed o he
cu en business model by in oducing new p oduc s and elimina ing
ope a ions ha no longe add alue o he company. Fu he mo e,
Co in and Sle in (1989) s a ed ha en ep eneu ial p oac i i y in
i sel en ails an e o o shape he en i onmen o one’s own bene-
i . Along hese lines, o his s udy, i is assumed ha a company is
p oac i e when i in es s in science, echnology, and inno a ion ac-
i i ies, hi es pe sonnel wi h ad anced deg ees in ields linked o e-
sea ch and de elopmen (R&D), and akes ad an age o go e nmen
incen i es ha p omo e in es men in STI ac i i ies. This assump ion
is made since, h ough he in o ma ion p o ided by he ex e nal en-
i onmen , he company il e s and iden i ies oppo uni ies o emain
ahead o i s compe i o s om a ma ke poin o iew and akes ac-
ions ha add o an enhanced IP.
3. Va iables ha measu e inno a i e pe o mance
S udies on business s a egy ha e ocused on explaining IP h ough a-
iables and hei ac o s. Acco ding o Becheikh e al. (2006), he e a e
in e nal a iables (company cha ac e is ics, global s a egies, company
s uc u e, moni o ing ac i i ies, o ganisa ional cul u e, wo k eams,
and unc ional asse s and s a egies) and en i onmen al a iables (in-
dus y, egion, ne wo king, knowledge/ echnology acquisi ion, public
policies, go e nmen , and cul u e) ha explain he dependen a ia-
ble “inno a ion.” Fu he mo e, an inno a i e p ocess can be measu ed
h ough speci ic indica o s ha , acco ding o he exis ing li e a u e,
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 70
a e di ided in o indi ec indica o s, such as pa en s and R&D budge s,
and di ec indica o s, namely he numbe o new p oduc ideas and
he pe cen age o po en ially ma ke able ideas (Dziallas & Blind, 2019;
Mo ei a e al., 2016). Klomp and Van Leeuwen (2001) highligh he e-
le ance o R&D expenses as he mos impo an inno a ion inpu , and
newly c ea ed o imp o ed p oduc s o p ocess inno a ion as he ou -
pu s o he inno a ion p ocess. Howe e , he Oslo Manual p epa ed by
he OECD and Eu os a desc ibes he possible indica o s o measu ing
inno a ion, while aking inno a i e ac i i ies in o conside a ion ha
enable e alua ion and in e na ional compa abili y. Thus, o his s udy,
wo bases a e used which ha e aken he Oslo manual as a e e ence
in o de o allow he su eys a ge ed a he companies o be desig-
ned; hese a e he su ey o echnological de elopmen and inno a ion
(EDIT) de ised by he Na ional Depa men o S a is ics o Colombia
(DANE), and he su ey o business s a egies o Spanish companies
(ESEE) de ised by he S a e Socie y o Indus ial Pa icipa ions (SEPI).
Bo h su eys a e o he manu ac u ing indus y, mos o which a e
small and medium-sized companies.
Howe e , i is impo an o no e ha he li e a u e on he measu e-
men o inno a i e pe o mance is ex ensi e. Acco ding o Dewangan
& Godse, (2014), wo app oaches a e p esen ed o classi y he au ho s'
discussions on his opic. The i s e e s o he weaknesses and s en-
g hs o pe o mance indica o s (numbe o pa en s, R&D en ies, new
p oduc launches, among o he s). The second app oach e e s o he
bes way o g oup inno a ion pe o mance indica o s and discusses
ela ed indica o s. In his ca ego y, he au ho s p esen 19 s udies,
including, as an example, he s udy by Coope & Kleinschmid ,
(1995), who desc ibe a leas 10 elemen s ha allow measu ing suc-
cess in he de elopmen o new p oduc s, ela ed o he impac on
sales, p o i abili y, and he achie emen o objec i es in hese wo di-
mensions.
Rega ding expo s, acco ding o Aghion e al. (2018), oppo uni ies
in la ge ma ke s inc ease incen i es o inno a e o all companies.
As in e na ional compe i ion inc eases, incen i es o inno a e o less
p oduc i e companies a e educed. On he o he hand, acco ding o
Ha is & Mo a (2011), he exis ing li e a u e has documen ed ha
a one-way ela ionship exis s be ween expo s and inno a ion, ha
is, inno a ion de e mines he exploi a ion o oppo uni ies in in e -
na ional ma ke s. Howe e , academics ha e shown ha he e may be
a causal ela ionship be ween expo s and inno a ion, since s onge
compe i ion in o eign ma ke s includes a lea ning p ocess, wi h ac-
cess o be e o eign knowledge and exposu e o echnology, c ea ing
he need o companies o in es in R&D and o inno a e.
Knowledge may encompass di e en ypes o ex e nal inno a ion
pa ne s, depending on hei ield o ac ion and expec ed alue. The
di e si y and combina ion o hese sou ces o inno a ion a e impo -
an in business s a egy. Sou ces include cus ome s, supplie s, uni-
e si ies and esea ch cen es, in ellec ual p ope y expe s, and pa -
ne ne wo ks (B unswicke & Vanha e beke, 2015).
Based on he abo e, he ollowing concep ual amewo k is p oposed
(Figu e 1), which illus a es he heo e ical ela ionships be ween DL,
EC, and IP.
Figu e 1. Concep ual F amewo k
Sou ce: P epa ed by he au ho .
The ollowing able lis s he ac o s ha ope a ionalise he unobse -
able a iables:
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 71
Table 1. Va iables o he concep ual model
Unobse able a iable Obse able a iable Desc ip ion
Dominan Logic –DL G.ID R&D To al expenses
FE3* Tax deduc ions
EA No. R&D jobs
Ex e nal collabo a ion - EC CP1* Collabo a ion wi h uni e si ies
CP2* Cus ome collabo a ion
CP3* Compe i o collabo a ion
CP4* Supplie collabo a ion
CP5* Technological coope a ion ag eemen s
CP6* Technology pa k collabo a ion
Inno a i e Pe o mance - IP PI0 No. P oduc inno a ions
NV Expo alue
DI2* P ocess inno a ion
DI3* Inno a ion in me hods
DI4* Inno a ion in ma ke ing echniques
Sou ce: P epa ed by he au ho .
No e: (*) Dicho omous a iables (yes/no).
4. Hypo heses
P oac i i y and Inno a ion
As men ioned abo e, i is assumed o his s udy, in acco dance wi h
he concep o p oac i i y, ha companies ake ac ion when hey iden-
i y oppo uni ies in he en i onmen ha can imp o e hei IP. These
ac ions include alloca ing esou ces o de elop in STI ac i i ies (R&D
o al expenses), iden i ying and app op ia ing sou ces o incen i es o
inno a e (Tax deduc ions), and hi ing and e aining o mal educa ion
(numbe o R&D jobs) o p omo e new o imp o ed p ocesses so ha
he o ganisa ion’s economic goals can become d i e s o inno a ion.
P oac i i y in a company's R&D unc ion allows i o explo e new inno-
a ions when cu en knowledge loses i s alue, hus enewing i s exis ing
compe encies (Mudambi & Swi , 2011). I is alid o say ha a company
ha in es s in R&D, is because i akes ac ions o c ea e ad an ages o e
he compe i ion as he en i onmen changes. On he o he hand, i has
been s udied ha a ax deduc ion sys em encou ages en ep eneu s and
manage s o ake ac ions o in es in inno a i e solu ions (Walicka &
P ys om, 2015). Fu he mo e, companies equi e employees o ake ac-
ion based on hei cogni i e abili ies and pe sonal cha ac e is ics, and
also wi h a willingness o be inno a i e and con ibu e o he inno a i e
pe o mance o companies (Du ana e al., 2020). In sho , p oac i i y is
associa ed wi h ac ions in suppo o inno a ion.
Acco ding o Khan e al, (2020) a high le el o p oac i i y has a posi i e
ela ionship wi h business pe o mance, no only because o a apid es-
ponse capaci y o he dynamics o he en i onmen bu also because he
ac ions aken a e pa o he esea ch and he sea ch o oppo uni ies.
I is alid o say ha om he pe spec i e o open inno a ion, whe e an
exchange o knowledge and esou ces is sough , i o ces s akeholde s
o ha e a p oac i e beha io in he sea ch o he sou ces o such e-
sou ces. Knowledge becomes ac ions o ob ain signi ican esul s in he
inno a ion p ocess as a compe i i e ad an age s a egy.
Fi s , o al R&D expenses and inno a ion a e he main d i e s o
business de elopmen ; howe e , he li e a u e ha has s udied his
ela ionship is spli be ween hose ha conside he con ibu ion
o R&D o company pe o mance as posi i e, and hose ha con-
side i o be nega i e. This may be due o he ac ha he e u n
on R&D in es men is no immedia e. I is ue ha i c ea es a-
lue o he company, bu i is mo e di icul o es ima e i s impac
on company pe o mance in he sho e m. R&D expenses could
p oduce e y high-pe o mance cos s as a esul o ze o e u n on
in es men . Howe e , i b ings bene i s o he company, as i allows
hem o pe o m be e and main ain a be e posi ion in he ma ke
(Bouaziz, 2016). I could be said ha R&D ac i i ies imp o e o in-
c ease he company’s ma ke alue, esul ing in highe alues o he
inno a ion indica o s. This is p o ed by he la ge numbe o empi-
ical s udies ha con i m his posi i e and signi ican ela ionship,
such as Cheng e al. (2006), Connolly & Hi schey (1984), and Liang
& Zhang (2005).
Second, ax deduc ions a e an e ec i e ool o encou age in es men
in R&D ac i i ies, since hey allow compe i i eness o be p omo-
ed and high-impac esea ch o be ca ied ou bo h o companies
and o he coun y, wi h he p omo ion o ac ions in acco dance
wi h he oppo uni ies p o ided by he en i onmen (Guce i & Liu,
2017). Thus, go e nmen subsidies can sol e he p oblem o low IP,
and can enhance he esou ces alloca ed o inno a ion, educe un-
ce ain y, and mi iga e he isk o he company’s R&D in es men
(Lee & Cin, 2010). Con e sely, go e nmen subsidies ha e he abili-
y o imp o e companies’ ex e nal inancing capaci y, as well as en-
dogenous deb and equi y inancing. The e o e, i educes he o al
cos o inancing (Xu e al., 2021). Iden i ying go e nmen incen i-
es enables ac ions o be aken in a ou o business de elopmen
and inno a ion.
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 72
Howe e , acco ding o G an & Ash o d (2008), p oac i e employees
hink ahead and con ibu e o be e esul s and o he lea ning p o-
cess. In o he wo ds, hese indi iduals o en expe imen wi h he goal
o inding some hing new and new inno a i e means o ac ion. They
also seek o make a di e ence in hei en i onmen s, whe he wi hin
hei o ganisa ions, o o he people, o o hemsel es (Ba eman &
C an , 1993). Since employees a e a angible esou ce and hei alue
la gely depends on hei knowledge and skills, educa ion cons i u es
a majo ac o in imp o ing compe i i eness and gaining knowledge
(Ba o & Lee, 2001). The e o e, inno a ion in he o ganisa ion is a
knowledge-in ensi e o ganisa ional p ocess and he p o essional ai-
ning o employees helps achie e business goals and IP.
Based on he abo e, he ollowing hypo hesis is p oposed:
H1: A company’s le el o p oac i i y posi i ely and signi ican ly
a ec s he company’s inno a i e pe o mance (DL → IP).
Rela ionship be ween ex e nal collabo a ion and inno a ion
Ex e nal collabo a ion is an e ec i e s a egy employed o inc ease
companies‘ inno a i e capabili ies (Clausen, 2013). Companies colla-
bo a e wi h o he o ganisa ions o sha e he isk o inno a ions and/
o o inc ease hei e iciency. These ne wo k-like collabo a i e ela-
ionships con ibu e owa ds inc easing he inno a i e capabili ies o
companies, since companies can gain new knowledge, apid access
o esou ces, and enable g ea e capaci y in he ans e o knowled-
ge (Powell & G odal, 2005). Hence, acco ding o Findik & Beyman
(2015), EC in IP is c ucial because companies gain access o knowled-
ge, which allows hem o imp o e o ganisa ional lea ning and hus
inno a ion capabili ies. Tha is o say, knowledge o inno a ion is
dis ibu ed among di e en sou ces, whe he hese a e s akeholde s
o o ganisa ions, such as use s, supplie s, uni e si ies, consul an s
and esea ch ins i u es (Edquis , 2005; Von Hippel, 2006). Empi ical
s udies ha e con i med he exis ence o a posi i e ela ionship be -
ween IP and in e -o ganisa ional collabo a ion (Faems e al., 2005;
Huang & Yu, 2011; Un & Asakawa, 2015).
Based on he a o emen ioned e idence, he ollowing hypo hesis is
p oposed:
H2: Ex e nal collabo a ion posi i ely and signi ican ly in luences
companies’ inno a i e pe o mance (EC → IP).
Ex e nal collabo a ion and dominan logic
The p oac i e pe sonali y, de ined by Ba eman and C an (1993) as
he pe sonali y o hose who can change hei en i onmen by aking
ac ion h ough iden i ying oppo uni ies, p esen s an impo an ehi-
cle o inno a ion acco ding o Esc ig-Tena e al. (2018). This is con-
sis en wi h he DL heo y pu o wa d by Be is & P ahalad (1995),
which is hei in o ma ion- il e ing pe spec i e.
Acco dingly, companies and employees wi h p oac i e pe sonali ies
end o ake mo e isks and lea n om ailu e. Ex e nal collabo a-
ion is an ac i i y ha adds g ea e isk o inno a ion, such as he
isk o sha ing sensi i e in o ma ion (G indley & Teece, 1997; Veu-
gele s, 1998) and c ea ing dependency on ex e nal knowledge (Doz,
1996), bu i hese isks a e no aken, hen companies canno manage
success and ailu e o become mo e compe i i e (B e el & Cle en,
2011). F om he pe spec i e o new p oduc inno a ion, he li e a u e
e e s o posi i e in e ac ions o companies when collabo a ing wi h
cus ome s (B ockho , 2003; Salomo e al., 2003; Von Hippel, 1986),
uni e si ies and esea ch cen es (Hise e al., 1980; San o o & Be s,
2002), and wi h consul an s and independen esea ch ins i u es (Bes-
san & Rush, 1995; Te he & Taja , 2008), bu no wi h compe i o s,
wi h whom ela ionships can be e y isky,(McGill, 2007).
Hence, he ollowing hypo hesis is p oposed:
H3: The e is a di ec ela ionship be ween ex e nal collabo a ion and
a company’s p oac i i y (EC~~ DL).
5. Me hodology
As men ioned abo e, his compa a i e s udy uses desc ip i e da a o
measu e, h ough di e en indica o s, he STI ac i i ies o companies
in he indus ial sec o in Colombia and Spain. The Colombian da a-
se is public, while he Spanish da ase comp ises da a om su eys
conduc ed by a p i a e en i y, since he in o ma ion p oduced by he
Spanish Na ional Ins i u e o S a is ics (INE) is una ailable o he pu-
blic. The Colombian da ase con ains 7,529 eco ds o he pe iod 2017-
2018, while he Spanish da ase has in o ma ion om 1,808 eco ds in
2016. F om each o he da ase s, he companies ha had o al R&D
expenses g ea e han ze o we e selec ed, which led o a o al o 732
i ems o da a o Colombia and 602 o Spain being ob ained. The yea s
o s udy co espond o he la es da a a ailable o each o he da ase s.
In acco dance wi h he concep ual amewo k in Figu e 1, IP, DL, and
EC we e he de e minan s selec ed.
5.1 Dependen a iable
IP was conside ed as he dependen a iable, de e mined by i e a-
iables, namely, he numbe o p oduc inno a ions, expo alue, and
he dicho omous a iables o new p ocesses, me hods and ma ke ing
echniques, and in o ma ion con ained in he s udy da abases. These
a iables we e selec ed acco ding o he heo e ical e idence men io-
ned in he co esponding sec ion.
5.2 Independen a iables
In o de o ope a ionalise he DL as a non-obse able a iable, he
s a ing poin is gi en by Obloj e al. (2010), who desc ibe he heo y
as an “in o ma ion il e ” con aining wo di e en dimensions ( il e
and ex e nal o ien a ion) and “lea ning ou ines”. Subsequen ly, he
ac o s desc ibed in he au ho ’s s udy associa ed wi h he p oac i-
i y dimension a e employed o de e mine he measu able a iables
o his cons uc : hese ac o s mean ha is possible o associa e he
a ailable a iables wi h he heo y, as e idenced in he s udy by Khan
e al. (2020). In addi ion, six dicho omous a iables we e iden i ied o
de e mine he deg ee o ela ionship o he companies s udied wi h
di e en s akeholde s o he STI sys em o bo h coun ies, which was
labelled EC.
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 73
In o de o alida e he p oposed hypo heses, he s uc u al equa ion
modelling (SEM) me hodology was p oposed, which was implemen-
ed using s a is ical so wa e R (Team, 2020). The SEM is a amily o
s a is ical models used o explain ela ionships among mul iple a ia-
bles (Hai e al., 2010). This ype o model examines he s uc u e o
in e ela ionships exp essed in a se ies o equa ions simila o mul i-
ple eg ession equa ions. These equa ions ep esen all he ela ions-
hips among cons uc s (la en o unobse able a iables) in ol ed in
he analysis ha a e cons uc ed as ac o s in ac o analysis.
Fo he implemen a ion o his echnique in he da a se s desc ibed
abo e, i is impo an o bea in mind ha mos o he a iables in-
ol ed, bo h in Colombia and in Spain, a e dicho omous in na u e.
This is no a limi a ion o he model, bu i is impo an o ake i in o
accoun when compu ing co ela ions (which would no be Pea son
co ela ions bu polycho ic) o choosing he es ima ion me hod o
he model (in his case, Weigh ed leas squa e mean and a iance ad-
jus ed o WLSMV). I is also possible o comp omise he calcula ion
o some indica o s.
6. Resul s
The ollowing sec ions show he esul s o each coun y, s a ing
wi h he co ela ion ma ix (Pea son be ween nume ics, polyse ial
be ween nume ics-o dinals, and polyco ich be ween o dinals) along
wi h basic desc ip i e s a is ics (mode o ac o s and mean and s an-
da d de ia ion o nume ics). Subsequen ly, he p elimina y esul s
o he explo a o y ac o analysis a e shown wi hou sugges ing a mo-
del, since he p oposed ac o model was based on heo y. Finally, he
esul s o he con i ma o y ac o analysis and he eg ession model
wi h he ac o s a e shown o comple e he SEM.
Colombia
Table 2 shows he co ela ions be ween he a iables s udied. The e-
sul s sugges ha all he ela ionships a e posi i e, and ha he s on-
ges ela ionship is be ween CP2 and CP3.
Table 2: Co ela ion Ma ix and desc ip i e s a is ics
G.ID PI0 DI2 DI3 DI4 FE3 CP1 CP2 CP3 CP4 CP5 CP6 NV EA
G.ID 1.00
PI0 0.11 1.00
DI2 0.04 0.09 1.00
DI3 0.05 0.11 0.36 1.00
DI4 0.06 0.17 0.26 0.29 1.00
FE3 0.13 0.23 0.31 0.22 0.12 1.00
CP1 0.14 0.35 0.19 0.26 0.21 0.40 1.00
CP2 0.07 0.22 0.11 0.12 0.09 0.27 0.57 1.00
CP3 0.08 0.27 0.26 0.16 0.17 0.24 0.61 0.74 1.00
CP4 0.12 0.21 0.20 0.32 0.12 0.28 0.61 0.68 0.63 1.00
CP5 0.12 0.25 0.22 0.31 0.17 0.35 0.61 0.44 0.58 0.51 1.00
CP6 0.07 0.19 0.29 0.26 0.42 0.13 0.70 0.45 0.52 0.39 0.53 1.00
NV 0.19 0.14 0.02 0.11 0.04 0.14 0.14 0.08 0.14 0.11 0.23 0.04 1.00
EA 0.36 0.24 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.24 0.29 0.05 0.18 0.21 0.28 0.19 0.44 1.00
Mean* 191 2 7,561 8
SD* 810 3 21,254 11
Mode 56% 68% 71% 88% 79% 73% 68% 96% 84% 98%
YNNNNNNNNN
Sou ce: P epa ed by au ho . No e: (*) G.ID and NV a e exp essed US Dolla housand. Y (Yes). N (No).
The con enience o a ac o analysis was in es iga ed h ough he
Kaise -Maye -Olkin measu e (KMO) and Ba le 's es o sphe ici y
es (Aldas & Jimenez, 2017), bo h o which sugges ha he echni-
que is adequa e. Fo he KMO a alue o 0.76 was ob ained and he-
e o e exceeds he h eshold o 0.5 (Kaise , 1970), while he Ba le 's
es (χ²=3900.2, p<0.0001, d =91) sugges s ha he co ela ion ma ix
p esen s signi ican co ela ions among a leas some o he obse -
able a iables. To e alua e he in e nal consis ency o he a iables
conside ed, C onbach's Alpha (0.82) was calcula ed. Alphas we e also
compu ed conside ing he elimina ion o each a iable, inding a-
lues be ween 0.79 and 0.83, all abo e he accep able minimum o 0.7
(Nunnally, 1978). Wi h his, i is concluded ha he se o a ailable
a iables is su icien ly ela ed o a ac o analysis and he e o e also
a SEM.
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 74
In o de o e i y he sui abili y o he p oposed measu emen mo-
del om Figu e 1, a con i ma o y ac o analysis (CFA) was un in
R which included se e al co a iance ela ionships, o which he
associa ion be ween he alue o expo s and R&D Employmen
(NV~~EA) was conside ed since, acco ding o Aghion e al. (2018)
and Ha is & Mo a (2011), he e is a con i med ela ionship be -
ween inno a ion and expo s, whe e he ocus o collabo a o s on
R&D ac i i ies is necessa y o boos expo p ocesses. Mo eo e , he
ela ionship be ween coope a ion wi h cus ome s and compe i o s
(CP2~~CP3) was also aken in o accoun since hei ela ionship may
occu gi en ha hey cons i u e sou ces o ex e nal knowledge highly
demanded by companies, al hough compe i o s may be a e y isky
sou ce, acco ding o McGill (2007).
The esul s indica e ha he model success ully achie ed he i c i-
e ia as de ined by Hai e al. (2010) and Hu and Ben le (1999). I is
he e o e concluded ha he p oposed model i s well and is accep a-
ble: (CFI = 0.980, TLI = 0.975, SRMR = 0.081, and RMSEA = 0.081).
Fu he mo e, all loadings and co a iance ela ionships we e ound o
be signi ican .
Ha ing e i ied ha he measu emen model is sui able, he s uc u-
al model was hen adjus ed in o de o es he p oposed hypo he-
ses, and he ollowing esul s we e ob ained o he i indices: CFI
= 0.989, TLI = 0.986, SRMR = 0.085, and RMSEA = 0.069. I is once
again concluded ha he model is accep able.
Table 3: SEM Resul s o Colombia
Rela ionship Es ima ion S anda d
E o
S anda d
Es ima ion p- alue
DL -> IP 0.105 0.059 0.163 0.023
EC -> IP 0.318 0.060 0.694 <0.001
EC ~~ DL 0.385 0.008 0.727 <0.001
Sou ce: P epa ed by he au ho .
Table 3 shows he SEM esul s using he WLSMV me hod, which
con i ms he posi i e e ec o bo h DL (β = 0.163, p = 0.023) and
EC (β = 0.694, p < 0.001) on IP. This conclusion is compa ible wi h
Hypo heses H1 and H2, espec i ely. Simila ly, i can be concluded
ha he e is a di ec ela ionship be ween EC and dominan logic
( = 0.727, p < 0.001), which suppo s Hypo hesis H3.
In summa y, he coe icien and he p- alue con i m he posi i e ela-
ionship o he DL om he ac ions aken by he companies o in es in
R&D ac i i ies, also o he use o incen i es such as ax deduc ions o
imp o e hei capaci y o in es in such ac i i ies, as well as he ac ions
o in es in p o essionals wi h capabili ies and pe sonal cha ac e is ics o
inno a e. In his o de o ideas, he mo e ac ions companies ake on hese
inno a ion d i e s, he be e hei inno a i e pe o mance will be.
Compa a i ely, he ela ionship is mo e posi i e and signi ican be -
ween EC and IP. S ong ela ionship is obse ed be ween cus ome s
and compe i o s. Cus ome -o ien ed companies end o seek sou ces
o in o ma ion and knowledge ha s imula e he de elopmen o new
p oduc s o mee cus ome demands, wo king collabo a i ely (Di-
done e al., 2016). Complemen a ily, companies ha a e o ien ed o
cus ome s a e also o ien ed o compe i o s, seeking o mee cus ome
demands in a be e way han he compe i ion (Tsio sou, 2010). This
ela ionship is de e minan o he inno a i e pe o mance o i ms.
The decision-making p ocess and he selec ion o quali ied pe sonnel
(ac ions) a e de e minan s in he inno a i e p ocess. When compa-
nies ocus on hi ing new knowledge and skills, hey s imula e in e -
o ganisa ional and in a-o ganisa ional collabo a ion (Radziwon &
Boge s, 2019). In o he wo ds, hese skilled pe sonnel may ha e a
g ea e p opensi y o pa icipa e in business ecosys ems, ans e ing
knowledge in bo h di ec ions. This makes p oac i e ( ake ac ion) em-
ployees a e y impo an d i e o open inno a ion.
Rega ding he eliabili y and alidi y o he model, he composi e e-
liabili y (CR) index was used since acco ding o Fo nell & La cke ,
(1981), he con e gen alidi y and composi e eliabili y o a cons-
uc can be concluded om his measu e, since he AVE is usua-
lly much mo e conse a i e. In his case he alues ound we e 0.87
(EC), 0.60 (DL) and 0.53 (IP), whe e he i s wo a e g ea e han he
minimum ecommended acco ding o Hai e al, (1998) and he e o e
i is concluded ha he cons uc s comply wi h eliabili y and alidi y.
Howe e , al hough he alue o IP does no exceed he minimum
de ined, i is close enough, since e alua ing i s in e nal consis ency
based on C onbach's Alpha (0.56) i is g ea e han 0.5 and acco ding
o (Side idis, 2018) can be conside ed accep able.
Spain
Table 4 shows he co ela ions be ween he a iables s udied. The e-
sul s sugges ha mos o he ela ionships a e posi i e, he s onges
being be ween CP1 and CP3.
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 75
Table 4: Co ela ions Ma ix and desc ip i e s a is ics
G.ID PI0 DI2 DI3 DI4 FE3 CP1 CP2 CP3 CP4 CP5 CP6 NV EA
G.ID 1.00
PI0 0.03 1.00
DI2 0.32 0.44 1.00
DI3 0.30 0.14 0.54 1.00
DI4 0.03 0.35 0.41 0.55 1.00
FE3 0.23 0.10 0.11 0.24 0.22 1.00
CP1 0.13 0.04 0.13 0.18 0.01 0.26 1.00
CP2 0.40 -0.02 0.13 0.26 0.05 0.47 0.48 1.00
CP3 0.17 0.12 0.25 0.26 0.20 0.31 0.69 0.54 1.00
CP4 0.10 0.19 0.23 0.43 0.24 0.36 0.19 0.48 0.19 1.00
CP5 0.11 0.17 0.17 0.23 0.14 0.46 0.25 0.50 0.33 0.66 1.00
CP6 0.08 -0.02 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.17 0.01 0.25 0.15 0.33 0.18 1.00
NV 0.33 0.00 0.14 0.11 0.05 0.16 0.04 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.10 -0.04 1.00
EA 0.53 0.05 0.42 0.33 0.12 0.11 0.21 0.41 0.24 0.26 0.30 0.19 0.18 1.00
Mean* 2,146 2 77,232 8
SD* 13,600 5 352,031 43
Mode 60% 64% 70% 60% 54% 90% 57% 94% 89% 96%
YNNNNNYNNN
Sou ce: P epa ed by au ho . No e: (*) G.ID and NV a e exp essed US Dolla housand. Y (Yes). N (No).
In his case, he esul o Ba le ’s es o sphe ici y (χ²=3128,
p<0.0001, d =91) sugges signi ican co ela ions among he a iables
while he esul o he KMO es was 0.68, which exceeds he accep-
able minimum o 0.5. Wi h espec o C onbach’s Alpha, in his case
he alue was 0.8, while o he alphas conside ing he elimina ion o
each a iable he alues we e be ween 0.78 and 0.81, also exceeding
he minimum accep able o 0.7. Thus, as in Colombia, he da a su-
gges ha he implemen a ion o a ac o analysis is sui able.
Rega ding he e i ica ion o he sui abili y o he measu emen mo-
del, a CFA was implemen ed by aking in o conside a ion he co a-
iance ela ionships be ween inno a ion in ma ke ing echniques
wi h he numbe o p oduc inno a ions (DI4~~PI0), alue o ex-
po s (DI4~~NV), and inno a ion in me hods (DI3~~DI4) since i
is known ha he e is a di ec ela ionship,. Acco ding o co a iance
ela ionships, he ac ions associa ed wi h inno a ions in ma ke ing
echniques a e ela ed o he oppo uni ies p o ided by expo ma -
ke s. When i ms access in e na ional ma ke s, hey imp o e hei
capabili ies, accessing in o ma ion abou mo e sophis ica ed ma ke s
and inc easing he p opensi y o in oduce echnological inno a ions
(Almeida & Fe nandes, 2008; Ci e a & Maloney, 2020; Cle ides e al.,
1998; Ma ins & Yang, 2009; Sil a e al., 2012).
Finally, he ela ionship be ween collabo a ion wi h uni e si ies and
ha o compe i o s (CP1~~CP3) was also included, since i could be
said ha his di ec ela ionship is c ea ed by he popula i y o uni e -
si ies and esea ch cen es in he exchange o knowledge wi h di e-
en playe s o he inno a ion sys em.
Based on he i c i e ia conside ed (CFI = 0.976, TLI = 0.969,
SRMR = 0.120, and RMSEA = 0.069), i is concluded ha he model
i is accep able. Addi ionally, all cos s and co a iance ela ionships
we e ound o be signi ican .
Ha ing e i ied ha he measu emen model is sui able, he SEM was
adjus ed, he eby ob aining he ollowing esul s o he i indices:
CFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.977, SRMR = 0.120, and RMSEA = 0.076. I is
concluded once again ha he model is accep able.
Table 5: SEM Resul s o Spain
Rela ionship Es ima ion S anda d
E o
S anda d
Es ima ion p- alue
DL -> IP 0.278 0.046 0.353 <0.001
EC -> IP 0.623 0.137 0.458 <0.001
EC ~~ DL 0.225 0.023 0.518 <0.001
Sou ce: P epa ed by he au ho .
Table 5 shows he SEM esul s, om which i can be concluded ha
he e is a posi i e e ec o DL on IP (β = 0.353, p < 0.001), hus con-
i ming Hypo hesis H1. Simila ly, i is possible o s a e ha he e is a
posi i e e ec o EC on IP (β = 0.458, p < 0.001), he eby con i ming
Hypo hesis H2. Finally, i can be concluded ha he e is a di ec e-
la ionship be ween EC and DL ( = 0.518, p < 0.001), which suppo s
Hypo hesis H3.
J. Technol. Manag. Inno . 2023. Volume 18, Issue 1
ISSN: 0718-2724. (h p://jo mi.o g)
Jou nal o Technology Managemen & Inno a ion © Uni e sidad Albe o Hu ado, Facul ad de Economía y Negocios. 82
