Measuring the Impact of Innovation Intermediaries: A Case Study of Tekes

Innovation intermediaries are believed to have a beneficial influence on innovation processes, but as there are no universally accepted metrics of intermediary performance it is difficult for these organisations to provide the evidence of their contributions. We present a general-purpose methodology for measuring the impact of innovation intermediaries that applies across all types of intermediaries. We demonstrate the methodology by assessing the impact of the Global Access Program (GAP), which is made available to Finnish firms through Tekes, an intermediary organisation whose mission is to enhance Finnish industry through technology and innovation. Our findings show that the GAP program has had an impact on the performance of participating firms in terms of revenue growth, exports, new international customers, and employment growth. Consistent with our expectation that impacts on firm performance are a consequence of earlier impacts on firm resources and capabilities, we find a statistically significant relationship between the immediate impact of strategic information and advice, and information and advice on new markets, and longer term impact on firm performance.

[1]  Mika Nieminen,et al.  How Necessary are Intermediary Organizations in the Commercialization of Research? , 2010 .

[2]  Joseph A. Cote,et al.  Estimating Trait, Method, and Error Variance: Generalizing across 70 Construct Validation Studies: , 1987 .

[3]  Jeffrey L. Furman,et al.  The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity , 2000 .

[4]  M. Dalziel The impact of industry associations: Evidence from Statistics Canada data , 2006 .

[5]  M. Dalziel The impact of industry associations , 2005 .

[6]  K. Provan,et al.  An Emergent Theory of Structure and Outcomes in Small-Firm Strategic Manufacturing Networks , 1997 .

[7]  Tommi Inkinen,et al.  Intermediaries in Regional Innovation Systems: High-Technology Enterprise Survey from Northern Finland , 2010 .

[8]  Scott Shane,et al.  Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? , 2003 .

[9]  Scott J. Wallsten,et al.  Public-Private Technology Partnerships , 1999 .

[10]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities , 1999 .

[11]  Ralph Renger,et al.  A Three-Step Approach to Teaching Logic Models , 2002 .

[12]  Sandra Mathison,et al.  Encyclopedia of Evaluation , 2004 .

[13]  John A. McLaughlin,et al.  Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story , 1999 .

[14]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Public/private technology partnerships: evaluating SBIR-supported research , 2013, The Social Value of New Technology.

[15]  Hans Löfsten,et al.  Science Parks and the growth of new technology-based firms : academic-industry links, innovation and markets , 2002 .

[16]  Michael J. Lenox,et al.  Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry's Responsible Care Program , 2000 .

[17]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  The ex ante assessment of knowledge spillovers: Government R&D policy, economic incentives and private firm behavior , 2006 .

[18]  Alexander Kaufmann,et al.  Science–industry interaction in the process of innovation: the importance of boundary-crossing between systems , 2001 .

[19]  J. Howells Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation , 2006 .

[20]  Annie Millar,et al.  Logic models: a systems tool for performance management , 2001 .

[21]  Lee Branstetter,et al.  Measuring the impact of US research consortia , 2003 .

[22]  David B. Balkin,et al.  Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer , 2005 .