Home Alone: Innovation and sales growth intentions among the sole self-employed. Research Paper No 59
Published: 12 July 2017
It is widely known that solo self-employed entrepreneurs enjoy non-pecuniary benefits from their employment status and earn less compared to those employed. They have greater ‘freedom and autonomy’ in running their business and as such they pursue their intrinsic commercial ambitions relying on their experience, abilities and exploiting the available opportunities from their external environment. In this paper we argue that solo self-employed entrepreneurs’ growth ambitions shape their future innovation strategy. We develop a theoretical framework and empirically analyse the relationship and the determinants of innovation and growth intentions using a large sample of UK self-employed entrepreneurs. In doing so we extend the theory of planned behaviour to incorporate the role of entrepreneurs’ past experience in innovation and growth in shaping their corresponding future intentions. Our empirical results suggest that past innovation performance and achieved growth rates shape future entrepreneurial intentions and ambitions through an adaptive learning process given the level of entrepreneurial capabilities and external environment opportunities.
Innovation and Exporting
Innovation has a recognised effect on survival. Undertaking more risky innovation may increase the risk of business failure, while incremental innovation may reduce the risk. This paper investigates how firms’ innovation strategy choices affect the relationship between innovation and firm survival. The research suggests the notion of “survival additionality”, i.e. firms receiving public support derive more persistent benefits from innovation than firms which did not receive public support.
Published: 24 February 2014
Assessing the business performance effects of receiving publicly-funded science, research and innovation grants – Research Paper No 61( Revised )
UK Research Councils spend around £1.7bn pa on supporting research. Here, we provide the first comprehensive assessment of these research grants on the performance of UK firms. Using data on funding and partnership from Gateway to Research on all funded projects by the UK Research Councils over the 2004 to 2016 period and business performance data from the Business Structures Database we have applied a difference-in-differences propensity score matching technique to evaluate the performance of UK firms who participated in publicly-funded research projects. Our analysis suggests five key conclusions. First, firms who participated in research projects funded by UK research councils grew their turnover and employment 5.8-6.0 per cent faster in the three years after the project, and 22.5-28.0 per cent faster in the six years after the project, than similar firms which did not receive support. Second, the impact of participating in projects is larger for firms in high-tech manufacturing and knowledge intensive services. Third, we find evidence that the impact of participating in projects is larger for small firms and those with lower starting productivity (turnover per employee). Growth impacts on firms in the top quartile of the productivity (turnover per employee) distribution are small. Fourth, support relevant to businesses is provided largely by EPSRC and Innovate UK. Participation in projects funded by both organisation increases both employment and turnover growth in the short and medium terms with only marginal differences in their impact. Fifth, the effects of grants vary depending on the size of the project. Participating in projects involving small and very large grants have smaller growth effects than medium-sized support packages. Our results have implications for the extent and targeting of future Research Council funding.
Our analysis is subject to a number of caveats. First, data limitations mean that we measure economic impacts using turnover and employment data rather than value added per worker or hour worked. Secondly, at this point we only consider the direct impacts on firms. Spillovers or multiplier effects may significantly enlarge these effects; displacement may reduce them. Both will be considered in a future study. Thirdly, data linking and the timing of some grant awards in recent years mean we are able to consider growth effects for only around two-thirds of firms which participated in publicly funded science and innovation projects.
Published: 6 September 2017
Firms’ innovation objectives and knowledge acquisition strategies: a comparative analysis . Research paper No 38
External partnerships play an important role in firms’ acquisition of the knowledge inputs to innovation. Such partnerships may be interactive – involving exploration and mutual learning by both parties – or non-interactive – involving exploitative activity and learning by only one party. Examples of non-interactive partnerships are copying or imitation. Here, we consider how firms’ innovation objectives influence their choice of interactive and/or non-interactive connections. We conduct a comparative analysis for the economies of Spain and the UK, which have contrasting innovation eco-systems and regulation burdens
Published: 25 February 2016
Enterprise Research Centre
Warwick Business School
University of Warwick
Coventry CV4 7AL
Enterprise Research Centre
Aston Business School
Birmingham B1 7ET
0121 204 5392