Upload
albert-haynes
View
218
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Msc Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
Innovation and Technology Transfer
Lecture 7 - Innovation Measurement
Giorgio Sirilli “Old and new paradigms in the measurement of R&D”, 1998 “Science ans Technology Indicators, The state of the Art and
prospects for the future”, 1997
by Rodrigo Rodrigues
TOPICS
1) Introduction - Nature of Indicators
2) Science and Technology Indicators
3) Prospects for future developments
4) Case Study – Measurement of R&D
Introduction - Nature of Indicators
Science and Technology (S&T) Indicators
Definition: series of data that can answer several questions about S&T
enterprise, like assess a qualitative performance of S&T tool to
science policy at a national level
Goal: give a picture of the state of S&T and anticipate the consequences of
scientific advances and technological change
Introduction - Nature of Indicators
Indicators can be divided into 2 groups:
1st group-indicators for which a statistical methodology has been developed
- data are collected
- and analysed by a standardised methodology
2nd group-indicators for which methodology are still in a development stage
- no possibility of comparison across countries and over time
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Research and development (R&D)
- Expenditures and personnel for R&D - 1st indicators and the majors
- OECD in 1963 adopted the Frascati Manual
- main features:
. data are reliable
. data are comparable over time and across countries
. not clear if R&D covers information technology related with innovative
activities like software
. etc
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Patent statistics
- the most widely available indicator of output of technological activities
- more detailed in terms of technology and cover longer periods than data on
R&D
- patents reveal inventive activities extending outside the research labs
- OECD in 1994 adopted the Patent Manual
- problems:
. patenting an invention vary from country to country
. the “quality” and “value” of patents varies greatly
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Surveys of technological innovation
- one of the main development factors in our society acquisition of tools
and control it is a priority in S&T policy
- data gathering follows two approaches:
. identify the most significant innovations and then send questionnaires to
the firms that have introduced them (individual innovations)
. submit questionnaires to the firms that have introduced innovations
during a given period of time (innovating firms)
- data show that R&D represents only a limited part of the innovation
expenditures
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Surveys of technological innovation - CIS
- OECD revised the Oslo Manual in 1996 – inclusion of services
- and one of the most important survey is the Community Innovation Survey (CIS),
which was designed to address two main sets of issues:
. general structure of innovation processes
. comparison between European countries
- Some aspects from the CIS1:
. no possible comparison between countries with the data collected
. obtain the main factors that influence the innovation behaviour of firms
S&T Indicators – 1st group
The technological balance of payments (TBP)
- flow of funds for transactions concerning industrial property rights – indicator of
technology transfer across countries
- OECD in 1990 adopted Manual for the collection and publication of TBP data
- main features
. indicator of the diffusion of technology or competitiveness
. the range covered by the technological balances is not uniform
. international comparability of the TBP indicator is also limited
. etc
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Analysis of international trade in high-technology products
- problem is to distinguish the high, medium and low technology products
- “high-tech”: when ratio between R&D expenses and turnover or value added is
above a certain threshold
- limitations:
. research intensity and technological intensity not equivalent concepts
. statistical data not uniform
. the choice of threshold values is arbitrary
. technological intensity can vary greatly within one group of products
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Bibliometrics
- based on the number of publications, citations and co-citations
- main problems
. propensity to publish and cite varies with disciplines
. citations may be critical rather than positive (but always knowledge)
. probability of being cited varies with the sector
. number of citations not follow a linear rate in course of time
. papers only one output of lab-based activity
S&T Indicators – 1st group
Human resources
- key factor for the production and distribution of knowledge
- OECD in 1994 adopted the Canberra Manual
- limitation of the Manual:
. only covers individuals with higher-level skills
. data not comparable (different national systems of education)
- example of data bases: social security
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Indicators based on information of technical journals
- analysis of information about innovations reported in technical and trade
journals
- in the journal: brief desription of the new product ou service and the address and
phone number of the firm
- advantages:
. in principle all sectors of the economy are covered
- limitations
. only refers products or services, not processes
. not internationally comparable
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Intangible investment
- costs of intangible products that become available in the period under review
and that remain in use for more than one year
- core components are:
. R&D
. education and training;
. software and marketing
- not internationally comparable because of heterogeneity in definitions and data
collection procedures
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Surveys of manufacturing technologies
- innovation and the application on new technologies have moved into the centre
of firm strategies
- use of surveys to measure:
. objectives and barriers to the introduction of the technologies
. their diffusion and the impact of their introduction in the firm
. public policies toward the adoption of the technologies
- but surveys are still uncoordinated, without a harmonisation of concepts and
procedures
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Indicators in the field of information and communication
technologies
- information technology is changing the very nature of work and society
- building indicators in this area is quite necessary
- the major problems identified by statisticians refer to:
. the very definition of information and communication technologies
. the classification of sectors and activities ti be surveyed
. the products and services to be covered
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Measurement of organisational change in enterprises
- the changes in the organisation of firms and in the institutional context
determine the effectiveness and impact of the adoption of new technologies
- this changes can be in:
. the strategy or the structure
. the work-place organisation or the human resource management
- goal is to obtain measurement for qualitative phenomena like organisation and
strategy, and their linkage with performance and structure variables
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Technology foresight
- the main objective is to identify potentially important technologies early enough
to facilitate their development and utilisation
- the methodology used for the technology foresight must involved a large number
of experts to acquire the necessary information and an adequate variety of options
- limitations:
. procedure is very expensive
. different mix of methodologies has been used in various countries
. foresight may lead firms to not considered some interesting
technologies
S&T Indicators – 2nd group
Public attitudes and public understanding of S&T
- allow to add a social dimension to the S&T process
- typical question is:
What is the citizens´view about scientific developments, scientific programmes or
current problems requiring research efforts ?
Prospects for future developments
develop theories to explain the working of complex systems, but also amenable
to statistical measurement
OECD is expected to continue to act as a stimulus and “clearing house” for the
activities of the member countries
weight of the databases constructed using information collected for
administrative purposes (patents, scientific publications, etc) will likely to be
greater than that of ad hoc surveys (R&D, innovations, etc)
Prospects for future developments
methodologies developed within OECD countries become standard, so data
may be compared across almost all countries of the world
one challenge for those who are in charge of providing indicators is linked to
the timing of indicators building
S&T indicators are in a period of rapid evolution, so that will allow us to
understand better the complex phenomena of knowledge creation and distribution
Case Study – Measurement of R&D
ITALY: 1985 and 1992
- R&D survey carried by national statistical agencies
- Innovation surveys carried by ISTAT – Italian National Statistical
Institute – and occurred in the 1980s and early 1990s:
. the collection of innovation data on the basis of the
methodology set out in the Oslo Manual
. the studies on the knowledge-based economy
Case Study – Measurement of R&D
ITALY: 1985 and 1992
From the collection of innovation data we conclude that the
number of R&D-performing firms is higher than that emerging from
the R&D surveys.
R&D survey Innovation survey
R&D-performing firms(number)
1985 793 2 557
1992 748 4 229
Case Study – Measurement of R&D
ITALY: 1985 and 1992
The reasons for different results are linked to the fact that the same phenomena is
measured from two different angles, so the highest value obtained in the
innovation survey can be result of:
- small and discontinuous R&D activities are included
- the statistical universe is more dynamic due to the discontinuous character of
innovation in firms
- the definition of R&D is interpreted in an innovation context
Case Study – Measurement of R&D
ITALY: 1985 and 1992
From the studies on the generation and distribution knowledge
we conclude that the concept of full-time equivalent for measuring
the quantity and quality of work done by professionals engaged in
R&D is less and less tenable.
The cause is that some of the professional personnel devote their time to various
activities, including research, teaching, consulting and administration.