Innovation in Micro Firms Builders of Machine Tool? Effects of T-KIBS on technological and non-technological innovations

Abstract

Purpose -This study aims to evaluate the effects of KIBS on innovation outcomes in micro firms that build machine tools according to the categories of KIBS. Theoretical framework -This article not only contributes to the theory on the innovation process by reinforcing the arguments that micro firms can achieve innovations, but also to the idea that KIBS have a positive influence on technological and non-technological innovation in manufacturing firms. Design/methodology/ approach -To achieve the objective of the study, the Mann-Whitney U Test was used as the analysis technique. A survey was carried out to collect data from 40 micro firms that build machine tools located in the Basque Country (Spain) and Emilia-Romagna (Italy). Findings -The results suggest that KIBS have positive effects on innovations in manufacturing firms. However, there are differences according to the categories of KIBS. For instance, T-KIBS favour technological innovation, while P-KIBS and C-KIBS affect non-technological innovation. In addition, ICT services also have a positive relationship with non-technological innovation. We conclude by highlighting the importance of T-KIBS to confront the challenges of Industry 4.0 and the need for further research to determine the role of KIBS in the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Practical & social implications of the research -Micro firms need to enhance their absorptive capacity by increasing ICT and R&D investments, to confront the challenges of Industry 4.0, and given the fact that industry is beginning to incorporate more and more codified sciencebased knowledge. Perhaps hiring T-KIBS would be an appropriate decision for micro firms. Originality/value -This study contributes to the advancement of research involving different category of KIBS and their effects on manufacturing firms' innovation, especially in micro firms that build machine tools.

The impact of financing efficiency in defense industry base on non‐technological innovation: Evidence from China

“…For manufacturing industry, the opposite is true, and technological innovation has a greater impact on productivity (Diego & Paula, 2016). Seclen-Luna et al (2022) Khan et al (2021) argued that companies in developing markets are still plagued by limited credit channels, especially bank financing. It is proved that financial friction hinders the possibility of enterprises introducing technological innovation and soft forms (such as organizational management and marketing innovation) and the impact of financing constraints decreases with the decrease of innovation radicalness.…”

“…For manufacturing industry, the opposite is true, and technological innovation has a greater impact on productivity (Diego & Paula, 2016). Seclen‐Luna et al (2022) used the data of 40 micro‐machine tool manufacturers in Spain and Italy to study the impact of KIBS (knowledge‐intensive business services) on the technological and non‐technological innovation of manufacturing enterprises. Their results show that T‐KIBS (technology‐based KIBS) is conducive to technological innovation while P‐KIBS (knowledge‐based KIBS) and C‐KIBS (culture‐based KIBS) affect non‐technological innovation.…”

Innovation and performance in Peruvian manufacturing firms: does R&D play a role?

“…In that sense, one way to understand innovation outcomes is by distinguishing between technological and non-technological innovations (Álvarez-Coque, Mas-Verdú, & Roig-Tierno, 2017; Geldes, Felzensztein, & Palacios, 2017; Mothe & Nguyen, 2010). Even though the literature also recognizes complementarities between them (Del Carpio Gallegos & Miralles, 2021; Seclen-Luna, Moya-Fernández, Barrutia, & Ferruci, 2022). Technological innovations are defined as product and process innovations (Martínez-Ros, 2019), while non-technological innovations are associated with organizational and marketing innovations (Mothe & Nguyen, 2010).…”

A configurational approach to innovation performance: The role of creativity

“…The third line of research considers innovation as an output. Firms possessing heterogeneous innovative resources can adopt different innovation paths to configure their innovation portfolio based on four strategies: product, process, organizational, and marketing innovation (Seclen-Luna et al, 2022) or by distinguishing between TI and NTI (Geldes et al, 2017;Mothe and Nguyen-Thi, 2010). Therefore, most research has been devoted to understanding how companies can stimulate and promote TI (Henao-García and Cardona Montoya, 2021).…”

“…However, determining the essential factors that affect firms' innovation performance remains an open question (Ayalew et al, 2019). Regarding TI and NTI, several authors have focused on only one input, such as cooperation (Geldes et al, 2017), technical and administrative human resources (Henao-García and Cardona Montoya, 2021), and different types of knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS; Seclen-Luna et al, 2022). Others have combined several inputs and analyzed their direct or indirect impacts on TI and NTI.…”