Download - Servitization Daniel Feser
1
Innovation in the cooperation between KIBS and small and medium-sized
enterprises: an explorative study
III. International Business Servitization Conference (13-14 November 2014, Bilbao, Spain)
Daniel Feser
2
Research Question
• Regional Innovation Systems are relevant space for SMEs (Sternberg, 1999)
-> growth of ICT (Thomi and Böhn, 2003) and importance of service innovation/servitization (Sakata et al. 2013; Vandermerve and Rada, 1988)
• KIBS are key in the RIS (Muller and Zenker, 2001)
• Research Question: ‚Why‘ and ‚how‘ use SMEs KIBS for innovation?
Exploring a new field
Introduction
3
Types of KIBS use
Category Service type
Identification of high value knowledge Identification of technological and equipment requirements
Identification of R&D needs
Consulting services for access to technology, patents, etc.
Knowledge validation Consulting services for business plan preparation
Assistance with prototype design or technological feasibility test
Consulting services for patent preparation
Certification of product or process safety
Implementation Consulting services for improving management processes
Consulting services for implementing process or bringing a product to line
Consulting services for accessing capital or financing
Financial services
Commercialization Support services/implementation
Consulting services for commercialization or marketing
Human resource management services
Services offered by lawyer or notary
Accounting services
Definition
(Doloreux and
Shearmur, 2013)
4
Literature review
• Literature focus on innovation in KIBS (Muller and Zenker, 2001): – Transfer of Innovation
– Innovation by KIBS
– Recombination
• Focus on innovation: Positive Bias about function of KIBS For example: (Koch and Strotmann, 2008; Ferreira and Fernandes, 2011; Muller and Doloreux , 2009)
• Influence on user: Some tries, more general answers: – Muller, 2001: KIBS are responsible for diffusion and knowledge creation
in SMEs
– Evangelista et al. 2013: Positive effect on client sector
– Doloreux and Shearmur, 2013: Can rise the probability to innovate
Literature Review
5
The Use of KIBS as Credence Good
• Credence goods are defined as goods with a level of quality that cannot be measured by the buyer of the specific good (Darby and Karni, 1973; Dulleck and Kerschbamer, 2006; Nelson, 1970).
Implication: market break-down, little demand for products.
• Two first indications of Innovation of KIBS as credence good:
– Innovation is an experience good (Hawkins and Davis, 2012)
– In sub-sectors the use of KIBS as credence good is analysed: Marketing (Howden and Pressey, 2008), Legal sector (Camignani and Giacomelli, 2010), Accounting (Demski, 2007).
Literature Review
6
RIS of Südniedersachsen
7
Methodology
• Qualitative Approach with semi-structured Questions: – SMEs create low response rate (Newby et al 2003)
– CEOs prefer human interaction (complexity of the content) (Newby et al. 2003)
– Socially desirable response behaviour (Wiggins, 1968)
• Interviews Separated in 2 parts: 1) Beginning of the cooperation
2) Innovation
• Structure: Open questions to closed question
Methodology
8
Theoretical Sampling (Glaser, 1965; Glaser and Strauss, 2008)
• Aim: a brief overview of the SME-Sector in South-Lower Saxony
• Only prerequisite: Use of KIBS and innovative SME
• Diversified in sector, classification, market penetration, gatekeeper, spatial distribution
Packaging Cluster Germany 2014
Methodology
9
Sample of SMEs Code Name Typology Classification Size Sector Market Gatekeeper Spatial
Distribution
Company A CCG Service-Industry Small Craft Regional HWK Urban
Company B CCG Industry Micro Manufacture of metal structures
Regional No Urban
Company C CCG Service Micro Trade Germany No Urban
Company D CCG Service-Industry Small Biotech Worldwide RES Urban
Company E SEG Service Micro Health Regional HWK Urban
Company F SEG Industry Medium Mechanical Engineering Regional HWK Rural
Company G SEG Industry Medium Casting Germany No Rural
Company H SEG Service Small Construction Regional HWK Urban
Company I SEG Service Small IT Worldwide RES Urban
Company J SEG Service Small Biotech Worldwide RES Urban
Company K SEG Service Small Medicine Worldwide RES Urban
Company L SEG Service Micro Publishing Worldwide No Urban
Company M RG Service-Industry Medium Steel Worldwide HWK Urban
Company N RG Industry Medium Special purpose machinery Worldwide HWK Rural
Company O RG Service Micro Consulting Germany RES Urban
Company P RG Industry Medium Car Industry Worldwide No Rural
Company Q RG Industry Medium Mechanical Engineering Worldwide No Rural
Company R RG Industry Medium Craft Worldwide No Rural
Company S RG Service Medium Biotech Worldwide RES Urban
Methodology
10
Analysis
• Qualitative content analysis (Mayring 2000)
• Transcripts: Due to time limitations only 10 out of 19 companies were transcripted
• Codings with mixed elements (inductive/deductive)
• MAXQDA used for computer analysis
• Cross case analysis: Groups of intensity of use (Quelle) to identify innovation strategies
Methodology
11
Results and theoretical Implication
12
Information asymmetry before KIBS-use
Decision Process
Non-Use
Finance
Risk
Selection Process
Network (formal/informal)
Direct Contact
Recommendation of network
Recommendations
Evaluation Collection of Information
Results and theoretical Implications
13
Information asymmetry after KIBS-use
1. Quality
Results and theoretical Implications
Direct
2. Profit 3. Control • Communication • Responsibility • Complexity • Knowledge spillover
Indirect
14
Typology of SMEs
(1) Core Competence Group: No use for innovative purposes (no intensive selection/No interest in innovation by KIBS/CEO arranges cooperation with KIBS)
(2) Some Experience Group for innovative use (high risk in projects/negative experience leads to stopping projects/ high disruptive innovation potential)
(3) Routine Group for innovative use (Routine in using KIBS and credence situation/incremental innovation/ long-term cooperation)
15
Policy Implication
• Public KIBS programmes need to be aware of credence good situation
• SEG as important group since high uncertainty by dealing with uncertainty
Research Implication • Strengthening formal networks only show indirect influence
through informal networks
• Merging research strands: Credence good research (Dulleck et al., 2006) and KIBS research
• Quantitative analysis to confirm results
• More knowledge on the effect of the credence good situation is needed
Conclusion
16
Thank you for your attention!
17
18
Typology of KIBS use: Focus on SEG Variable Sub-Variable Definition Example
Relevant
Factor for
Groups
Communication All Employees
The employees that have the need to
speak with the KIBS work with the
KIBS
All employees are involved. Very close.
They learn to know what to do
(Company N)
RG
Few Employees Only a limited number of employees
speak with the KIBS
Mostly me, partly my employees
(Company B) SEG, RG
Only CEO Only the CEO has the communication
with the KIBS
It's the CEOs task [..] like in all the SMEs
(Company E) CCG, SEG
Network Formal
Association or organised gathering of
cooperation helps to find KIBS as
cooperation partner
There is this formal network. But it
works on an informal level. (Company
P) If you go to exhibitions, it's easy to
get in contact. (Company M)
SEG, RG
Informal
Friends, acquaintances or business
partner help to find KIBS as
cooperation partner
I knew Professor () because of other
lectures. (Company H) Most of the
times it is about personal
recommendations (Company O)
CCG, SEG
Estimation of
Risk High Perceived high risk for KIBS-project
If the project would have failed, it
would be a catastrophe (Company G) CCG, SEG
Low Perceived low risk for KIBS-project
There is no risk. It's just people's
service you buy. If they are not good,
we don't buy them anymore (Company
F)
SEG, RG
Financing Not
Problematic
Financial issues play a role for
selecting KIBS
Not really.(Answer to the question: Do
you see problems in financing projects
with KIBS) (Company Q)
SEG, RG
Problematic Financial issues don't play a role for
selecting KIBS
SMEs don't have a lot of resources
(Company M) CCG, SEG
Innovation Recombination KIBS and customer firm recombine a
new innovation
Normally we recombine new
knowledge (Company P) RG
Innovation by
KIBS
KIBS offers a product that is
developed by the KIBS It's about new knowledge (Company N) RG
Transfer
KIBS transfers innovation from other
firms or sector to the customer. It's
new-to-the-firm
We don't have the capacity and the
know-how (Arguing for transfer of
innovation) (Company Q)
SEG, RG
19
Factors that influence the use of KIBS by SMEs
• Risk
• Financial opportunities
• Networks
• Absorptive Capacity