Analysis on firm innovation boundaries

Innovation has been widely recognized as an important driver of firm competitiveness, and the firm’s internal research and development (R&D) activities are often considered to have a critical role in innovation activities. Internal R&D is, however, not the source of innovation as firms may tap into knowledge necessary for innovation also through various types of sourcing agreements or by collaborating with other organizations. The objective of this study is to analyze the way firms go about organizing efficiently their innovation boundaries. Within this context, the analysis is focused, firstly, on the relation between innovation boundaries and firm innovation performance and, secondly, on the factors explaining innovation boundary organization. The innovation literature recognizes that the sources of innovation depend on the nature of technology but does not offer a sufficient tool for analyzing innovation boundary options and their efficiency. Thus, this study suggests incorporating insights from transaction cost economics (TCE) complemented with dynamic governance costs and benefits into the analysis. The thesis consists of two parts. The first part introduces the background of the study, research objectives, an overview of the empirical studies, and the general conclusions of the study. The second part is formed of five publications. The overall results firstly indicate that although the relation between firm innovation boundary options is partly industry sector-specific, the firm level search strategies and knowledge transfer capabilities are important for innovation performance independently of the sector. Secondly, the results show that the attributes suggested by TCE alone do not offer a sufficient explanation of innovation boundary selection, especially under conditions of high levels of (radical) uncertainty. Based on the results, the dynamic governance cost and benefit framework complements the static TCE when firm innovation boundaries are scrutinized.

Capital Structure and Firm Growth: R&D Intensive Companies

The purpose of this study is to examine and explain firm`s growth impact on capital structure decision-making in research and development intensive companies. Many studies claim that R&D has a pivotal impact on capital structure decisions, but corporate finance theories have often failed to explain these observed patterns. As sales growth is an important concept and objective for R&D firms, it is logical to assume that it plays a vital role in capital structure decisions. This study applies nomothetic research approach. The theoretical part employs a formal conceptual analysis in order to develop the propositions that are tested with empirical data. The empirical part consists of the analysis of three companies; the data is obtained from the annual reports over the period 2003 – 2008. The companies operate in IT- or ICT-industry and are publicly listed. The method for analyzing the case data is based on the financial indicators, which are obtained from the financials of the case companies. These economic indicators describe the capital structure and the financial decision-making of the firms. The method relates to the quantitative studies. Yet, this study extends the analysis beyond the indicators. Specifically, this study addresses the question of what is behind the economic indicators, therefore combining aspects of quantitative and qualitative analysis. The firms examined in this study seem to prefer internal finance during growth. However, external finance seems to be a catalyst for sales growth. Firms strongly prefer equity financing. In growth, the use of equity per capital either increases or stays in a constant level. Over the period 2003 – 2008, the firms were often associated to equity related transactions and short-term debt. Short-term debt was used as a substitute of long-term debt and equity. The case firms also adjusted their capital structure – these adjustments were carried out with short-term debt or equity. The case data also provides implications for the growth signal theory that was developed in this study. Based on the econometric indicators, arguments can be made that equity investors are `attracted` to growing R&D firms. This is because growth helps investors perceive the true type of firm. The findings of this study are best explained by the trade-off theory and the pecking order theory. These corporate finance theories are considered as mainstream. Little support can be found to the implications of the signaling theory and market timing theory.

Critical success factors for improving societal effectiveness of transport sector's R&D

This study investigates societal effectiveness of transport sector’s Research & Development (R&D) operations. In this study effectiveness refers to organization’s capability to produce the intended and desired impacts through its operations. The aim of this study is to identify the motives for evaluating societal effectiveness and recognize the critical success factors for improving effectiveness. The theoretical framework focuses first in the policy context of effectiveness evaluation in public sector and secondly the framework introduces the concept and process of effectiveness evaluation. The empirical part is carried out as a case study, which investigates societal effectiveness of Finnish Transport Agency’s (FTA’s) R&D. The aim is to recognize FTA’s critical success factors for improving R&D operations’ societal effectiveness. Based on these factors, the organization is able to define indicators for measuring effectiveness in the future operations. In this study societal effectiveness is investigated from R&D purchasers’ and R&D end- users’ points of views according to Purchaser-Provider-model. The results indicate that societal effectiveness evaluation is important part of R&D operations, but the implementation of the evaluation as part of daily operations is challenging. Because of limited resources, the organization is forced to strong priorization and therefore R&D tasks are secondary after the operational tasks. Based on the results the critical success factors can be recognized as resources and priorization, clear strategy and objectives, internal communications, cooperation between public and private sector and R&D implementation and dissemination.