International market diversification of innovative European SMEs - what role do various innovation strategies play?

Abstract

El presente artículo de revisión bibliográfica tuvo como objetivo; analizar la influencia de los factores internos diferenciales en las MiPyme en Colombia, mediante una revisión sistemática. Las pequeñas empresas a nivel general son las que potencian la economía de un país, es necesario que, a nivel interno, el liderazgo fortalezca la actitud de todos los empleados para un buen desempeño y rendimiento productivo con calidad. Autores como Barrero (2020), Porter (2011), Mazzucato, (2018), Solis et al. ( 2021) entre otros. Aportaron fundamentos útiles para el desarrollo del presente análisis. La metodología fue en base a una revisión sistemática, donde se incluyeron 44 estudios y se seleccionaron en el Flujograma de datos prisma 35 artículos para dar respuesta a los objetivos planteados. En los resultados de la revisión se encontró, que las MiPymes siguen siendo en este momento la forma generadora de mayores posibilidades de empleo para la población colombiana, sigue proporcionando el 80% de empleos en la nación, de acuerdo a los datos proporcionados por el DANE-Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística (2021). En el segundo trimestre del presente año hubo un aumento del 9,5% de micronegocios, aumentando en 8,5% la ocupación laboral gracias a este repunte de las medianas, pequeñas y microempresas. Concluyendo, que es necesario que estas empresas se mantengan en el mercado con el apoyo de la fidelidad de los clientes, obteniendo así una plena solidez financiera aportando al país alternativas en productos y servicios, además de generación de empleos y pagos de impuestos.

Innovation and exports: different markets, different outcomes

“…Product innovation favors the introduction of new and/or differentiated products (higher quality, new characteristics) in international markets, allowing for higher revenues (although in some cases may report higher costs). Process innovation favor lower costs, allowing for better competitive conditions, ceteris paribus (Greenan and Guellec, 2000; Hauser et al , 2013; Hervas-Oliver et al , 2014; Hidalgo, Klinger, Barabási and Hausmann, 2007; Monreal-Pérez et al , 2012). Some studies find a stronger effect of product over process innovations on the probability of exporting in a subsequent period, and even more when both product and process innovations, occur at the same time (Kannebley et al , 2010; Papalia et al , 2018).…”

“…In this case, innovation (associated with productivity) precedes exports. Several studies show positive empirical evidence in this line, especially for developed economies (Caldera, 2010;Ganotakis and Love, 2011;Hauser et al, 2013;Lachenmaier and Wößmann, 2006).…”

“…Foreign firms must overcome higher barriers than the local firms due to the “distance” between their home base and the host country. This concept, first introduced by Hymer (1976) dealing with foreign direct investment processes, result from cultural and language differences, economic and political regulations and higher information and communication costs due to the geographical and psychic distance between their home base and the host or destination countries (Hauser, 2013; Hymer, 1976; Zaheer, 1995; Johanson and Vahlne, 2009). This conceptual framework underlies the debate about the link between innovation and exports at the firm level, particularly in developing economies.…”

“…This is particularly the case of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) from developing countries which confront restrictions in financial and human resources that limit their strategic choices, particularly to build absorptive capacity needed to innovate and internationalize. In fact, given their limited resources, SMEs are forced to focus either on innovation or export activity (Golovko and Valentini, 2011; Hauser et al , 2013; Kafouros et al , 2008; Neves et al , 2016). The main issue they face may be set out as an option between: is innovation necessary to be more efficient and, in this way, access export markets (Melitz, 2003) or is the participation in export markets the way firms access to new knowledge that enable further innovation (Grossman and Helpman, 1991).…”

A Bitter Pill? Institutional Corruption and the Challenge of Antibribery Compliance in the Pharmaceutical Sector

“…While managerial and leadership qualities are of great importance to preventing bribery and corruption, some authors focus on putting preventive governance measures into place. Using supporting evidence regarding how corruption payments made by foreign subsidiaries was considered ordinary and necessary to business (Pacini et al, 2002) and that these payments were tax deductible (Richers & Weber, 2013), Hauser et al (2013) have argued that organizational practices play an important role in preventing bribery and corruption. Taking the case of Switzerland, the authors argue that multinational firms are not proactive about taking measures to avoid bribery and corruption and instead, the great majority of multinational firms tend to address corruption-related issues only in their international divisions and only when they are confronted with the issue.…”