INNOVATION STRATEGIES IN SMEs. SOME EVIDENCE FROM THE CASE OF PODKARPACKIE, POLAND

The aim of this paper is to provide a detailed account of the strategy for growth through innovation of the SME’s sector in Podkarpackie Voivodship in Poland. In analyzing this case, we raise the following two questions: (1) what are the types, structure, and quality of innovation strategies of SMEs in Podkarpackie?; (2) what are the key factors and dynamics leading and limiting to innovation activity, as well as to the growth of this innovation strategy?

Generally, there are three theoretical types of innovation strategies: a. creation, b. interaction and c. reaction. In the first case innovation is a natural and internal type of thinking about company development. Interaction describes innovation as strategic resource of the company. The ‘reaction’ type is for these companies that treat innovation as external compulsion. The type of innovation strategy is determined by quantity and quality of innovations implemented: numerous and original innovations indicate the strategy we call “creation” while the opposite results in quantity and quality are more likely typical for “reaction” type.

The empirical bases for the analyses are derived from various sources: historical documents, statistical data, and in-depth interviews with key individuals in SME’s. The analysis presented in this article is the result of CATI carried out among 419 out of 820 enterprises researched in the project.

Full text (pdf)

1. Acs, Z. J. and D. B. Audretsch: Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis, The American Economic Review, Vol. 78, No. 4, 1988, pp. 678-690.
2. Anderson, M. & Johansson, B.: Innovation Ideas and Regional Characteristics: Product Innovations and Export Entrepreneurship by Firms in Swedish Regions, Growth and Change, Vol. 39, 2008, pp. 193-224.
3. Audretsch, D. and Vivarelli, M.: Small Firms and R&D Spillovers: Evidence from Italy, CEPR Discussion, Paper No. 927, 1994.
4. Bhaskaran, S.: Incremental innovation and business performance: Small and medium-size food enterprises in a concentrated industry environment, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 44, 2006, pp. 64–80.
5. Baldwin, J. R. and J. Johnson, J.: “Entry, innovation and firm growth.” In Are small firms important? edited by Z. J. Acs. Kluwer, 1999.
6. Bottazzim, L. and Peri, G.: Innovation and spillovers in regions: Evidence from European patent data, European Economic Review, Vol. 47, 2003, pp. 687–710.
7. Cornett, A. P.: Aims and strategies in regional innovation and growth policy: A Danish perspective, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 21, No. 4, 2009, pp. 399-420.
8. Doloreux, D., and S. Dionne: Is regional innovation system development possible in peripheral regions? Some evidence from the case of La Pocatière, Canada, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 2, 2008, pp. 259-283.
9. DiPietro, W. R. and Anoruo, E.: Creativity, innovation, and export performance, Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 28, 2006, pp. 133–139.
10. González-Pernía, J. L., Peña-Legazkue, I. and Vendrell-Herrero F.: Innovation, entrepreneurial activity and competitiveness at a sub-national level, Small Business Economics, Vol. 39, 2012, pp. 561-574.
11. Hansen, J. A.: Innovation, Firm Size, and Firm Age, Small Business Economics, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1992, pp. 37—44.
12. Heunks, F. J.: Innovation, Creativity and Success, Small Business Economics, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1998, pp. 263–272.
13. Kaufmann, A., and F. Tödtling. 2000. Science-industry interaction in the process of innovation: The importance of boundary-crossing between systems. Paper presented at the 40th Congress of the European Regional Science Association, August 29–September 1, Barcelona.
14. Lewandowska, A. and Stopa, M.: Innovation Quality. Qualitative Perspective of Innovation Leaders in Podkarpackie Region, Poland, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, No. 81, Rome 2013, pp. 1049-1055.
15. Niedzielski, P., Jaźwiński I.: Absorpcja i dyfuzja innowacji jako czynnik intensyfikujący rozwój regionalny, Zeszyty Naukowe WSZ „Oeconomicus” PTE w Szczecinie „Gospodarka – rozwój i zmiany” 2002, No. 2. 
16. OECD & Eurostat, Oslo Manual: The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities, Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data. OECD Publications Service, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/61/2367580.pdf [dostęp: 5 marca 2012].
17. Petrariu, I. R., Bumbac, R., and Ciobanu, R.: Innovation: a path to competitiveness and economic growth. The case of CEE countries,  Theoretical and Applied Economics, Vol. 20, No. 5, 2013, pp. 15-26.
18. Pinto, H. and Rodrigues, P.: Knowledge Production in European Regions: The Impact of Regional Strategies and Regionalization on Innovation, “European Planning Studies” 2010, Vol. 18, No. 10, pp. 1731-1748.
19. Prange, H.: Explaining varieties of regional innovation policies in Europe, European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2008, pp. 39-52.
20. Priede, J. and Pereira, E. T.: Innovation as a key factor in the international competitiveness of the European Union, European Integration Studies, No. 7, 2013, pp. 212-221.
21. Smith, H. L. and Waters, R.: Scientific Labour Markets, Networks and Regional Innovation Systems, Regional Studies, Vol. 45, No. 7, 2011, pp. 961-976.
22. Sternberg, R. and Arndt, O.: The firm or the region: What determines the innovation behavior of European firms?, Economic Geography, Vol. 77, 2001, pp. 364–382.
23. Vaona, A., and M. Pianta: Firm Size and Innovation in European Manufacturing, Small Business Economics, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2008, pp. 283–299.
24. Woźniak, L., Lewandowska, A., Pater, R., Stopa, M., and Chrzanowski, M.: Po co nam innowacyjność? Problem innowacyjności w regionie peryferyjnym na przykładzie woj. podkarpackiego. Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Rzeszowskiej, Rzeszów 2015.