Sources, Obstacles and Effects of Innovation Activities in the Lubuskie Region in 2009-2011 ? Probit Modeling
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/OeC.2013.006Keywords:
innowacje, region, system, determinanty innowacyjności, efekty innowacyjnościAbstract
The aim of the study was to determine the significance of the use of probit modeling and the impact of sources and barriers to innovation activity and to determine its effects, in particular investments in innovation and implementation of new solutions. The main hypothesis of this paper is the claim that the innovative activity of enterprises is dependent on the diversity of factors affecting the parties, and both the source and the barriers can be influenced in different directions. The collected material for research (545 surveys) were analyzed by means of probability. The reason for the choice of this method is the fact that in the case of dichotomous variables (ie, taking the value of 0-no, 1-yes) the use of multiple regression is pointless. The values of this function may in fact be negative, which deprives them of interpretive meaning. An alternative test method in this situation is the probit regression. Positively to the implementation of new solutions affects search for information on innovations in science. The transfer of knowledge and the creation of new technological solutions, in particular, contribute to international research bodies. This strong links with R&D in the future may result in the achievement of superiority in the region. Interestingly it appears that keeping a positive effect on innovation activity affects their high cost. It?s not disstimulating on companies to implement such new products and processes. It can therefore draw the thesis that high expenditures on innovative activities of entrepreneurs make thorough preparation for innovation processes in their companies in order to minimize the risk of failure of implementing the new solution. In this way, many of them are successful. In addition, this thesis confirms the correctness of the fact that more than half of the surveyed companies indicated the cost barrier, and so much of the reasoning confirms the research sample.
Downloads
References
Bogdanienko J. (1998), Zarządzanie innowacjami, SGH, Warszawa.
Bukowski M., Szpor A., Śniegocki A. (2012), Potencjał i bariery polskiej innowacyjności, IBS, Warszawa.
GUS, US w Szczecinie (2012), Nauka i technika w 2010 r., Informacje i opracowania statystyczne, Warszawa.
Drozdowski R., Zakrzewska A., Puchalska K., Morchat M., Mroczkowska D. (2010), Wspieranie postaw proinnowacyjnych przez wzmacnianie kreatywnosci jednostki, PARP, Warszawa.
Juchniewicz M., Grzybowska B. (2010), Innowacyjność mikroprzedsiębiorstw w Polsce, PARP, Warszawa.
OECD, Eurostat (2008), Podręcznik Oslo. Zasady gromadzenia i interpretacji danych dotyczących innowacji, Wydanie trzecie, MNiSW, Warszawa.
Stanisz A. (2007), Przystępny kurs statystyki, Tom 2, Statsoft, Kraków.
Świadek A. (2011), Regionalne systemy innowacji w Polsce, Difin, Warszawa.
Welfe A. (1998), Ekonometria, PWE, Warszawa.
