The moderating effect of a firm's internal climate for innovation on the impact of public R&D support programmes

This study investigates the influence of a firm's internal climate for innovation on the relationship between public R&D support and the innovation behaviour of the firm. We hypothesise that, if there is a positive relationship between public R&D support and a firm's innovation activities, this phenomenon is more likely to be observed in firms with an internal climate that promotes innovation, rather than in firms with a restrictive one. Based on a sample of 135 manufacturing firms in Singapore, we discover the significant moderating effect of a firm's internal climate for innovation on the impact of public R&D support on several measures of a firm's innovation input, output and collaboration behaviour. We identify two distinct dimensions of internal climate for innovation (organisational policies and individual attitudes), which exhibit different moderating effects.

[1]  Paul E. Tesluk,et al.  Influences of Organizational Culture and Climate on Individual Creativity. , 1997 .

[2]  Jiann-Chyuan Wang,et al.  Cooperative research in a newly industrialized country: Taiwan , 1994 .

[3]  C. B. Schoonhoven.  Problems with contingency theory: testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency "theory.". , 1981, Administrative science quarterly.

[4]  Linsu Kim,et al.  Technology policy for industrialization: An integrative framework and Korea's experience , 1992 .

[5]  K. E. Southwood.  Substantive Theory and Statistical Interaction: Five Models , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[6]  R. Veugelers.  Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing , 1997 .

[7]  Wesley M. Cohen,et al.  Empirical studies of innovation and market structure , 1989 .

[8]  E. von Hippel,et al.  Sources of Innovation , 2016 .

[9]  K. Arrow.  Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention , 1962 .

[10]  J. Dickson,et al.  R&D Work Climate and Innovation in Semiconductors , 1983 .

[11]  R. Rothwell.  Successful industrial innovation: critical factors for the 1990s , 1992 .

[12]  K. Kauko.  Effectiveness of R & D subsidies — a sceptical note on the empirical literature , 1996 .

[13]  Luke Georghiou,et al.  Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods , 2000 .

[14]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Investments in Technology: Corporate Strategies & Public Policy Alternatives , 1983 .

[15]  Mary Tripsas,et al.  Discouraging Opportunistic Behavior in Collaborative R&D: A New Role for Government , 1995 .

[16]  J. Hagedoorn,et al.  The effect of strategic technology alliances on company performance. , 1994 .

[17]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Science, Economic Growth, and Public Policy , 1996 .

[18]  A. Sánchez,et al.  Product Innovation Management in Spain , 1991 .

[19]  Rachel Cooper,et al.  The influence of government science and technology policies on new product development in the USA, UK, South Korea and Taiwan , 1998 .

[20]  A. Pearson.  Managing New Product Innovations. , 1989 .

[21]  W. Souder,et al.  THE STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: A REVIEW AND A MODEL , 1987 .

[22]  William H. Glick,et al.  Conceptualizing and Measuring Organizational and Psychological Climate: Pitfalls in Multilevel Research , 1985 .

[23]  Drew Fudenberg,et al.  Understanding Rent Dissipation: On the Use of Game Theory in Industrial Organization , 1987 .

[24]  Herbert A. Shepard,et al.  Innovation-Resisting and Innovation-Producing Organizations , 1967 .

[25]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Why should managers be thinking about technology policy , 1995 .

[26]  Peter J. Klenow,et al.  High Tech R&D Subsidies: Estimating the Effects of Sematech , 1994 .

[27]  W Vanrossum,et al.  The contribution of research institutes in eureka projects , 1995 .

[28]  Ernst Braun.  Industrial innovation and public policy , 1982 .

[29]  Mariko Sakakibara,et al.  Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how? , 1997 .

[30]  Zoran Sušanj,et al.  Innovative climate and culture in manufacturing organizations: differences between some European countries , 2000 .

[31]  Poh Kam Wong,et al.  Leveraging multinational corporations, fostering technopreneurship: the changing role of S&T policy in Singapore , 2001, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[32]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Do Subsidies to Commercial R&D Reduce Market Failures? Microeconomic Evaluation Studies , 1999 .

[33]  R. Langlois,et al.  Industrial Innovation Policy: Lessons from American History , 1983, Science.

[34]  Subhash Sharma,et al.  Identification and Analysis of Moderator Variables , 1981 .

[35]  Andrew A. Toole,et al.  Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence , 1999 .

[36]  R. Nelson.  The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research , 1959, Journal of Political Economy.

[37]  Benjamin Schneider,et al.  Managing climates and cultures: A futures perspective. , 1988 .

[38]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[39]  David J. Teece,et al.  Estimating the benefits from collaboration: The case of SEMATECH , 1996 .

[40]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. , 1982 .

[41]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. , 1985 .

[42]  D. Jorgenson.  The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. , 1963 .

[43]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[44]  David M. Blank,et al.  The Demand and Supply of Scientific Personnel. , 1958 .