Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회논문지)

The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Influence of regional environment factor on Technology-based firms' Performance -Moderator effect of Innovation Intermediaries-

지역의 환경적 요인이 기술기반 창업기업 성과에 미치는 영향 -혁신거점기관의 조절효과를 중심으로-

  • 윤호열 (한국기술교육대학교 대학원 산업경영학과) ;
  • 김병근 (한국기술교육대학교 대학원 산업경영학과)
  • Received : 2017.01.31
  • Accepted : 2017.05.12
  • Published : 2017.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed the role of innovation intermediaries on the performance of technology-based firms in Korea. Technology-based firms are important to the economy because they contribute to regional economic development and national competitiveness. In Korea, various types of intermediaries, such as Techno-parks and incubators have been established to foster technology-based firms. Researchers analyzed various factors influencing the performance of technology-based firms. On the other hand, there have been few studies on the relationship between the innovation intermediaries and the performance of technology-based firms in Korea. This study identified the firms' capabilities, institutional and environmental factors in the light of the literature. A total of 2,313 technology-based firms in Techno-parks, business incubator of public institutes and universities were surveyed. Of these, 110 respondents were used for empirical analysis. OLS techniques were applied to analyze the data. The empirical results showed that the marketing competence, R&D capacity, which is a firms' innovation capacity, have a positive effect on the performance. The support of intermediaries positively affects the performance of technology-based firms. The economic aspects of regional innovation infrastructure, and cooperation with the customer has a positive effect on the performance of technology-based firms.

본 논문은 한국의 기술기반 창업기업의 성과에 영향을 미치는 요인들을 혁신거점기관의 역할을 중심으로 분석한다. 기술기반 창업기업은 지역의 경제 개발을 촉진하고, 국가 경쟁력을 강화하는 것으로 알려져 있다. 한국에는 테크노파크, 창업보육센터 같은 다양한 형태의 거점기관들이 기술기반 창업기업의 보육과 성장을 지원하기 위해 설립되었다. 연구자들이 기술기반 창업기업의 성과에 영향을 주는 요인들을 분석하였으나 지역혁신역량과 혁신거점기관에 관한 연구는 많지 않다. 본 연구에서는 선행문헌 분석을 통해 창업기업의 성과에 영향을 주는 내부역량과 지역적 환경적 요인들을 분석한다. 국내 18개 테크노파크와 262개의 공공기관, 대학에서 설립한 창업보육센터에 입주해있는 2,313개의 기술기반 창업기업을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하여 데이터를 수집하였다. 110개의 자료가 실증 분석에 사용되었으며 거점기관의 조절효과를 검증하기 위해 위계적 조절회귀 분석을 실시하였다. 분석 결과 내부역량인 마케팅역량, R&D역량은 기업의 재무적 성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치며 관리역량의 경우 부정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 거점기관 지원은 기업의 재무적 성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 확인되었다. 지역적 환경적 요인으로는 경제적 기반, 지역 내 협력의 경우 구매업체와의 협력만이 기업의 재무적 성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Storey, D. J, Understanding the small business sector, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship, 1994.
  2. K. K. Kim, H. J. Kang, T. Y. Kim, E. Jo, J. H. Park, 2015 Global Innovation Scoreboard, STEPI, pp. 1-304, 2015.
  3. Massey, D., Quintas, P., Wield, D., High tech fantasies, Science Parks in Society Science, 1992.
  4. Guy I., A look at Aston Science Park, Technovation, 16, pp. 217-218, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(96)00002-8
  5. J. H. Kim, An Empirical Analysis between Regional Innovative Capabilities and Regional Industrial Performance in Korea, The Korean Journal of Economic Studies, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 99-121, 2003.
  6. J. M. Na, Empirical Analysis between Regional Innovation Capabilities and Technology Development Performance: The Case of Manufacturing Industries, The Study of Regional Development, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 51-67, 2006.
  7. Buesa, M., Heijs, J., Pellitero, M. M., Baumert, T., Regional systems of innovation and the knowledge production function: the Spanish case, Technovation, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 463-472, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(96)00002-8
  8. B. K. Kim, K. Om, H. Ryu, Regional Innovation Capabilities and Firms' Technological Innovation Activities in Chungnam Province of South Korea, Journal of Korea technology innovation society, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 265-289, 2009.
  9. Marshall, A., Principles of economics: an introductory volume, 1920.
  10. Saxenian, A., Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Cityscape, pp. 41-60, 1996.
  11. Saxenian. A., Regional advantage: culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, 1994.
  12. Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., Holmen, M., Rickne, A., Innovation systems: analytical and methodological issues, Research policy, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 233-245, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(96)00002-8
  13. Cooke, P., Urange, M. G., Etxebarria, G., Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organizational dimensions, Research Policy, 26, pp. 475-491, 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00025-5
  14. Enright, M. J., Regional clusters: what we know and what we should know, Innovation clusters and interregional competition, pp. 99-129, 2003.
  15. Cooke, P, Regional innovation systems, Introduction: Origins of the Concept, in H. Braczyk, P. Cooke and M. Heidenreich (eds.) Regional Innovation Systems, London, UCL Press, 1998.
  16. Asheim, B. T., Isaksen, A., Regional Innovation Systems : The Integration of Local 'Sticky' and Global 'Ubiquitous' Knowledge, Journal of Technology Transfer, 27, pp. 77-86, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013100704794
  17. Doloreux D., Regional innovation systems in the periphery: the case of the Because in Quebec (Canada). International Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 67-94, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919603000738
  18. Y. S. Kwon, Model technopark project and building the regional innovation system in Korea, 2001.
  19. Siegel, D. S., Westhead, P., Wright, M., Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom, International journal of industrial organization, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1357-1369, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7187(03)00086-9
  20. Phan, P. H., Siegel, D. S., Wright, M., Science Parks and Incubators : Observation, Synthesis and Future Research, Journal of Business Venturing, 20, pp. 165-182, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.12.001
  21. J. H. Seo, The Korean techno-parks as the hub of sub-national innovation system: case of Daegu techno-park, In National Workshop on "Sub-national Innovation systems and Technology building policies to enhance competitive of SMEs", pp. 21-22, 2006.
  22. J. H. Hyun, Trend of Science & Technology Park and future policy direction, STEPI, 1997.
  23. J. H. Park, H. S. Sheng(2001), Role and Limitations of Local Government in Technopark Activation Process, Korean Public Administration Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 179-202, 2001.
  24. Fry, The role of incubators in small business planning, American Journal of Small Business, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 51-61, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225878701200104
  25. Bollingtoft, A., Ulhoi, J. P., The networked business incubator-leveraging entrepreneurial agency?, Journal of business venturing, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 265-290, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.12.005
  26. Sherman, H., Chappell, D. S., Methodological challenges in evaluating business incubator outcomes, Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 313-321, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124249801200403
  27. Peters, L., Rice, M., Sundararajan, M, The Role of Incubators in the Entrepreneurial Process. Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 83-91, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOTT.0000011182.82350.df
  28. K. S. Song, A Study on the Characteristics of the Firms in Korean Business Incubators, Journal of entrepreneurship and venture studies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 73-103, 2000.
  29. Chesbrough, H., The era of open innovation, MIT Sloan Management Review, 44, pp. 35-41, 2003.
  30. C. Lee, K. Lee, Johannes M. Pennings, Internal Capabilities, External Networks, and Performance: A Study on Technology-Based Ventures, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 22, no. 6/7, pp. 615-640, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.181
  31. Y. J. Kim, Technological Collaboration Lingkages and the Innovation Output in Small and Medium-sized Firms: A Study on the Moderating Effects of Absorptive Capacity, Korean management review, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1365-1390, 2005.
  32. Nieto, M. J., Santamaria, L., The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation, Technovation, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 367-377, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2006.10.001
  33. Barney, J, Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of management, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 99-120, 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  34. Cooper, R. G., The dimensions of industrial new product success and failure, The Journal of Marketing, pp. 93-103, 1979. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1250151
  35. Song, X. M., Parry, M. E., The determinants of Japanese new product successes, Journal of Marketing Research, pp. 64-76, 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3152065
  36. Danneels, E., The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences, Strategic management journal, vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 1095-1121, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.275
  37. Guan, J., Ma, N., Innovative capability and export performance of Chinese firms, Technovation, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 737-747, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(02)00013-5
  38. Yam, R. C., Guan, J. C., Pun, K. F., Tang, E. P., An audit of technological innovation capabilities in Chinese firms: some empirical findings in Beijing, China, Research policy, vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 1123-1140, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.05.004
  39. van Hemert, P., Nijkamp, P., Masurel, E., From innovation to commercialization through networks and agglomerations: analysis of sources of innovation, innovation capabilities and performance of Dutch SMEs, The Annals of Regional Science, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 425-452, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-012-0509-1
  40. C. J. Chen, Technology commercialization, incubator and venture capital and new venture performance, Journal of Business Research, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 93-103, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.003
  41. Chan, K. F., Lau, T., Assessing technology incubator programs in the science park: the good, the bad and the ugly, Technovation, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1215-1228, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.03.010
  42. Paul A. Pavlou, Omar A. El Sawy, Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities, Decision Sciences, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 239-273, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2010.00287.x
  43. Romijn, H., M. Albaladego, Determinants of innovation capacity in small electronics and software firms in southeast England, Research Policy, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1053-1067, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00176-7
  44. Laursen, K., Salter, A, Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms, Strategic management journal, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 131-150, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  45. Porter, M. E., Stern, S., National innovative capacity. The global competitiveness report 2001-2002, In World Economic Forum, pp. 102-118, 2001.
  46. Scheel, C., Knowledge clusters of technological innovation systems. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 356-367, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270210440866
  47. Baum, J. R., Locke, E. A., Smith, K. G., A multidimensional model of venture growth. Academy of management journal, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 292-303, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3069456
  48. KDI, Market Structure Research, KDI Research Paper, 2013.
  49. S. K. Park, B. K. Kim, The Effects of Proximity and Social Capital on R&D Collaboration of Korean SMEs, Asia Pacific Journal of Small Business, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 49-77, 2013.
  50. Aiken, G.,L. S., West, S. Reno, R. R., Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interaction, Sage, 1991.