중소기업의 기술경영 활동수준과 기술역량 및 기술혁신 애로요인간의 관계

Abstract

This study investigates the intensity of technology management practices on technological capabilities and barriers to innovations in Korean small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Researchers have examined the roles of innovations on firms’ short-term performances and long-run survival and growth of firms. Under this important role of innovation, firm managers and policy makers have invested more financial resources into research and development functions to enhance innovation capabilities and seize business opportunities. Prior studies, however, have shown controversial relationships between R&D investment and firm performance. Some studies have shown positive effects of R&D investment on firm performance, guiding more investment in R&D activities. Others have shown non-significant or negative relationships between R&D investment and performance. These inconsistent relationships between R&D investment and performance show a need to explore additional factors to explain the differences and contingent effects of R&D investment on performance. Among many factors, a group of researchers have been interested in technology management practices to effectively and efficiently manage innovation processes from strategic alignment through R&D management to commercialization. In spite of theoretical arguments on technology management practice, there are few empirical studies to understand the relationships of technology management practices with innovation capabilities and barriers to innovation. Based on prior researches, we developed two hypotheses on the impacts between technology management on technological capabilities and barriers to innovations. This paper focuses on the relationships between technology management processes on performances and barriers to innovations in SMEs. To verify hypothetical relationships, we collected and analyzed empirical data from Korean SMEs from firms older than three years in multiple industries. We asked key informants responsible for R&D investment to respond to this survey. This study measured two dependents variables. One is the level of technological capability that was measured by averaging the perceived level of product and process capabilities compared to major competitors. Another is barriers to innovation in the overall innovation processes. From eight different key difficulties around innovation processes based on related prior studies, we reduced two difficulty factors, barriers on R&D process and barriers on commercialization with four different items in each factor. The independent variable used in this paper was a measure of the intensity of technology managements. We identified five different sub-activities related to technology management from prior studies. They include market analysis and intelligence, technology strategy and planning, project and R&D management, intellectual property management, and organizational support. Each sub-activity was independently regarded as one of the key factors in technology management and critical determinants of innovation performances. All sub-activity consists of four detailed items measured by binary variables. From this measurement, the intensity of technology management added all binary measures on all activities and sub-activity was measured by the addition of the binary usage of the detailed items. This paper used several control variables. Firm age was measured by total firm years from its inception. Firm size was the natural logarithm of the total number of employees. Also another firm size variable was added by coding a binary variable depending on total sales volumes. We added another binary variable depending on the existence of a corporate R&D center. To measure government certification on technological capability, we coded one for externally certified firms in terms of technological capabilities and zero for other SMEs. We measured competitive strategy : technology leadership, cost leadership, and niche strategy. Each firm was identified with one competitive strategy as two different binary variables. Based on data collected from 337 respondents from a survey on Korean SMEs in manufacturing sectors, the results show that the intensity of technology management is important for SMEs to enhance innovation capabilities. Total intensity of technology management practices has positive relationships with technological capabilities. It means that SMEs utilizing more technology management practices operate more competitive innovation processes and build their technological capabilities. Among sub-activities in technology management, there are different relationships with technological capabilities. Practices related to market analysis and R&D management show positive relationships. Other practices, such as technology planning, intellectual property management and organizational support, have no significant impacts on technological capabilities. This indicates market analysis and R&D management practices are more significant and important for SMEs to build their innovation capabilities. Also the intensity of technology management practices has significantly negative relationships with both barriers to innovations, R&D process and commercialization. For the barrier to R&D processes, practices on R&D management and organizational support have negatively significant relationships with general difficulties in R&D processes. Other practices including market intelligence, technology planning, and intellectual property management show no statistically significant impacts on R&D processes. This result indicates that barriers to R&D processes are the matter of organizational systems and processes to manage overall innovation processes within the organization. The total intensity of technology management practices has a significantly negative relationship with the barrier to commercialization. Among the sub-activities, practices related to R&D management and market intelligence show negative relationships with difficulty in commercialization processes. Other practices such as technology planning, intellectual property management, and organizational support have shown no significant relationships. This result indicates that commercialization problems in innovation are rooted in practices in the early stages of innovation processes, not only assessing market potential and customer needs in the market, but also timely and strategic management of R&D projects and progress in research and development. The study shows the importance of technology management for SMEs to build their technological capabilities and reduce difficulties in innovation processes. Most technology management and practical practices have focused on large companies with sufficient internal resources. Different from prior studies, this study examined the importance of technology management and identified some specific practices, of which one is highly related to technological capabilities and innovation processes. The most interesting technology management practice is R&D management practice. This practice has shown a positive relationship with technological capabilities and negative relationships with both barriers to innovation. It indicates that R&D management could be a baseline practice on technology management and a practical guideline for SMEs to enhance their innovation performances. Another interesting practice is market intelligence to analyze market trends and customer needs which are regarded as key factors on innovation. Apart from financial investment in innovations, technology management is another important factor for industrial firms to create and capture more value from innovation. There are some limitations and future research directions. Most of all, we need more systematic and practical technology management models rather than highly complex and resource-intensive systems. Despite increasing interest and literature, there is still a lack of understanding on critical practices for SMEs to adopt and utilize technology management with practical viewpoints. More empirical studies are needed to test more robust models and methodology to measure intensity and quality of technology management practices. Also we need additional researches on the generalization of the relationships between technology management and innovation performances in diverse contexts and environments.