Research on the Influence of Technological Innovation Enthusiasm on Innovation Performance from the Perspective of Nonlinearity—Empirical Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Analysis and Hypothesis Development
2.1. Literature Review
2.2. Technological Innovation Enthusiasm and Innovation Performance
2.3. The Moderating Role of CEO Succession
3. Research Design
3.1. Sample Selection and Data Collection
3.2. Variable Definition and Measurement
3.3. The Empirical Model
4. Data Analysis
4.1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis
4.2. Multiple Regression Analysis
4.3. Robustness Test
5. Research Conclusions and Management Implications
5.1. Research Conclusions
5.2. Management Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Tian, M.; Deng, P.; Zhang, Y.; Salmador, M.P. How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review. Manag. Decis. 2018, 56, 1088–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hameed, W.U.; Nisar, Q.A.; Wu, H.C. Relationships between external knowledge, internal innovation, firms’ open innovation performance, service innovation and business performance in the Pakistani hotel industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 92, 102745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrigno, G.; Dagnino, G.B.; Di, P.N. R&D alliance partner attributes and innovation performance: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2021, 36, 54–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, J.; Wang, X.; Liu, F. Government subsidies, R&D investment and innovation performance: Analysis from pharmaceutical sector in China. Technol. Anal. Strateg. 2021, 33, 535–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yi, J.T.; Hong, J.J.; Hsu, W.C.; Wang, C. The role of state ownership and institutions in the innovation performance of emerging market enterprises: Evidence from China. Technovation 2017, 62–63, 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramadani, V.; Hisrich, R.D.; Abazi-Alili, H.; Dana, L.P. Product innovation and firm performance in transition economies: A multi-stage estimation approach. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2019, 140, 271–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, Y.; Li, D. Interaction effects of government subsidies, R&D input and innovation performance of Chinese energy industry: A panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) analysis. Technol. Anal. Strateg. 2021, 85, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, Y.; Deng, Z.; Liu, H.; Yang, M.; Liu, M.; Wang, X. Exploring the mediating effect of managerial ability on knowledge diversity and innovation performance in reverse cross-border M&As: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing corporations. Int.J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 247, 108434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.C.; Chen, P.C.; Fang, S.C. A critical view of knowledge networks and innovation performance: The mediation role of firms’ knowledge integration capability. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 88, 222–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, M.C.; Warner, J.B. The distribution of power among corporate managers, shareholders, and directors. J. Financ. Econ. 1988, 20, 3–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarfraz, M.; Shah, S.G.M.; Fareed, Z.; Farrukh, S. Demonstrating the interconnection of hierarchical order disturbances in CEO succession with corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 2956–2971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarfraz, M.; Qun, W.; Shah, S.G.M.; Fareed, Z. Do hierarchical jumps in CEO succession invigorate innovation? Evidence from Chinese economy. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Duan, Y. The impact of different types of market orientation on product innovation performance: Evidence from Chinese manufacturers. Manag. Decis. 2010, 48, 849–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Disoska, E.M.; Tevdovski, D.; Toshevska-Trpchevska, K. Evidence of innovation performance in the period of economic recovery in Europe. Innovation 2020, 33, 280–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kostis, P.C.; Kafka, K.I.; Petrakis, P.E. Cultural change and innovation performance. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 88, 306–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Zou, H. Study on the effect of wind power industry policy types on the innovation performance of different ownership enterprises: Evidence from China. Energ. Policy 2018, 122, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howell, A.; Lin, J.; Worack, S. Going out to innovate more at home: Impacts of outward direct investments on Chinese firms’ domestic innovation performance. China Econ. Rev. 2020, 60, 101404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, B.; Pérez-Castrillo, D.; Toldrà-Simats, A. Firms’ innovation strategy under the shadow of analyst coverage. J. Financ. Econ. 2019, 131, 456–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hovakimian, G. Financial constraints and investment efficiency: Internal capital allocation across the business cycle. J. Financ. Intermed. 2011, 20, 264–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, M.W.; Zhang, S.; Li, X. CEO duality and firm performance during China’s institutional transitions. Manag. Organ. Rev. 2007, 3, 205–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wakasugi, R.; Koyata, F. R&D, firm size and innovation outputs: Are Japanese firms efficient in product development? J. Prod. Innovat. Manag. 1997, 14, 383–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, J.; Wang, W. Managerial conservatism, board independence and corporate innovation. J. Corp. Financ. 2018, 48, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beneito, P. Choosing among alternative technological strategies: An empirical analysis of formal sources of innovation. Res. Policy 2003, 32, 693–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graham, J.R.; Harvey, C.R.; Puri, M. Managerial attitudes and corporate actions. J. Financ. Econ. 2013, 109, 103–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeh, M.L.; Chu, H.P.; Sher, P.J.; Chiu, Y.C. R&D intensity, firm performance and the identification of the threshold: Fresh evidence from the panel threshold regression model. Appl. Econ. J. 2010, 42, 389–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, B.H.; Lotti, F.; Mairesse, J. Evidence on the impact of R&D and ICT investments on innovation and productivity in Italian firms. Econ. Innov. New. Tech. 2013, 22, 300–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Gu, F.; Ji, Y.; Fan, Y. Technological capability, eco-innovation performance, and cooperative R&D strategy in new energy vehicle industry: Evidence from listed companies in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 261, 121157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grant, R.M. Toward A Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1996, 17, 109–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.S.; Chen, Y.S.; Liang, W.; Wang, Y. R&D spillover effects and firm performance following R&D increases. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 2013, 48, 1607–1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, J.; Choi, J.Y. The effects of R&D cooperation on innovation performance in the knowledge-intensive business services industry: Focusing on the moderating effect of the R&D-dedicated labor ratio. Technol. Anal. Strateg. 2021, 33, 396–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeoh, P.L. Realized and Potential Absorptive Capacity: Understanding Their Antecedents and Performance in the Sourcing Context. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2009, 17, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caner, T.; Tyler, B.B. The Effects of Knowledge Depth and Scope on the Relationship between R&D Alliances and New Product Development. J. Prod. Innovat. Manag. 2015, 32, 808–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gulati, N.R. Is Slack Good or Bad for Innovation? Acad. Manag. J. 1996, 39, 1245–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, J.; Li, C.; Yuan, R.; Ahmed, M.; Khan, M.A.; Oláh, J. The influence of the knowledge-based network structure hole on enterprise innovation performance: The threshold effect of R&D investment intensity. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, C.; Tang, Y.; Su, S. R&D internationalization, product diversification and international performance for emerging market enterprises: An empirical study on Chinese enterprises. Eur. Manag. J. 2019, 37, 529–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chakravarty, A.; Grewal, R. Analyst earning forecasts and advertising and R&D budgets: Role of agency theoretic monitoring and bonding costs. J. Mark. Res. 2016, 53, 580–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salge, T.O.; Vera, A. Small steps that matter: Incremental learning, slack resources and organizational performance. Br. J. Manag. 2013, 24, 156–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.; Kim, H.; Lee, P.M. Ownership structure and the relationship between financial slack and R&D investments: Evidence from Korean firms. Organ. Sci. 2008, 19, 404–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Gao, S.; Zhou, Y.; Huang, K.F. Picturing firms’ institutional capital-based radical innovation under China’s institutional voids. J. Bus. Res. 2015, 68, 1166–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Lin, Y. The effects of supply chain collaboration on green innovation performance: An interpretive structural modeling analysis. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 2020, 23, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tonya, B.; Ganeshan, R.; Jain, A.; Sanders, N.R. Forecasting sales in the supply chain: Consumer analytics in the big data era. Int. J. Forecast. 2019, 35, 170–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, M.A.; Zeitz, G.J. Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2002, 27, 414–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Zhou, Y. Business model innovation, legitimacy and performance: Social enterprises in China. Manag. Decis. 2020, 59, 2693–2712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, R.P. Extending the Environment—Strategy—Performance Framework: The Roles of Multinational Corporation Network Strength, Market Responsiveness, and Product Innovation. J. Int. Mark. 2010, 18, 58–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- James, D.W.; James, W.F. Who directs strategic change? Director experience, the selection of new CEOs, and change in corporate strategy. Strateg. Manag. J. 2001, 22, 1113–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mackey, A. Research notes and commentaries the effect of CEOs on firm performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29, 1357–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graffin, S.D.; Boivie, S.; Carpenter, M.A. Examining CEO succession and the role of heuristics in early-stage CEO evaluation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2013, 34, 383–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stein, J.C. Efficient capital markets, inefficient firms: A model of myopic corporate behavior. Q. J. Econ. 1989, 104, 655–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fredrickson, J.W.; Hambrick, D.C.; Baumrin, S. A model of CEO dismissal. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1988, 13, 255–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hambrick, D.C.; Geletkanycz, M.A.; Fredrickson, J.W. Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some tests of its determinants. Strateg. Manag. J. 1993, 14, 401–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lundstrum, L.L. Corporate investment myopia: A horserace of the theories. J. Corp. Financ. 2002, 8, 353–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Z.; Fan, X.; Zhu, B.; Xia, J.; Zhang, L.; Wang, P. Do government subsidies improve innovation investment for new energy firms: A quasi-natural experiment of China’s listed companies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2022, 175, 121418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carney, M.; Shapiro, D.; Tang, Y. Business group performance in China: Ownership and temporal considerations. Manag. Organ. Rev. 2009, 5, 167–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, P.; Zhang, H.; Bai, G. Research on the Differentiated Impact Mechanism of Parent Company Shareholding and Managerial Ownership on Subsidiary Responsive Innovation: Empirical Analysis Based on ‘Principal–Agent’ Framework. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, B.W.; Chen, J.S. Corporate technology portfolios and R&D performance measures: A study of technology intensive firms. RD Manag. 2005, 35, 157–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable Name and Code | Index |
---|---|
Innovation performance (IP) | Number of patents filed by listed companies in the current year |
Technological innovation enthusiasm (IS) | Based on the research and development cost, the calculation is carried out according to the formula designed |
CEO succession (SUCC) | In the current year, if CEO succession occurs in listed companies, a value of 1 is assigned, otherwise assignment is 0 |
Board independence (BI) | The proportion of independent directors in the total number of directors of the listed company in the current year |
Company size (CS) | Logarithm of the total assets of the listed company in the current year |
Leverage level (LL) | Ratio of total liabilities to total assets of listed companies at the end of the current year |
Return on equity (ROE) | The ratio of current year profit to net assets of a listed company |
Leadership structure (LS) | If the general manager concurrently holds the post of chairman, it is assigned to 1, otherwise, it is assigned to 0 |
Board size (BS) | Total number of directors of listed companies in the current year |
IP | IS | SUCC | BI | CS | LL | ROE | LS | BS | Mean | Standard Deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IP | 1.000 | 45.552 | 237.491 | ||||||||
IS | 0.395 *** | 1.000 | 1.343 | 4.181 | |||||||
SUCC | −0.024 *** | −0.012 * | 1.000 | 0.213 | 0.410 | ||||||
BI | 0.010 | 0.023 *** | 0.000 | 1.000 | 37.194 | 4.858 | |||||
CS | 0.284 *** | 0.334 *** | −0.058 *** | 0.006 | 1.000 | 21.948 | 1.323 | ||||
LL | 0.101 *** | 0.127 *** | −0.026 *** | −0.019 *** | 0.373 *** | 1.000 | 44.093 | 22.119 | |||
ROE | 0.052 *** | 0.068 *** | −0.018 *** | −0.021 *** | 0.080 *** | −0.191 *** | 1.000 | 0.055 | 0.169 | ||
LS | −0.002 | −0.042 *** | −0.012 ** | 0.116 *** | −0.167 *** | −0.153 *** | 0.016 *** | 1.000 | 0.263 | 0.440 | |
BS | 0.128 *** | 0.106 *** | −0.026 *** | −0.480 *** | 0.259 *** | 0.149 *** | 0.037 *** | −0.180 *** | 1.000 | 8.683 | 1.734 |
Model | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | IP | IP | IP | IP |
SUCC | 0.008 (0.37) | −0.002 (−0.08) | −0.001 (−0.03) | 0.010 (0.38) |
BI | 0.033 *** (3.09) | 0.023 ** (2.18) | 0.022 ** (2.11) | 0.023 ** (2.16) |
CS | 0.340 *** (27.73) | 0.163 *** (12.00) | 0.139 *** (9.67) | 0.132 *** (9.18) |
LL | −0.056 *** (−4.61) | −0.019 (−1.51) | −0.016 (−1.27) | −0.015 (−1.22) |
ROE | 0.062 *** (4.67) | 0.032 ** (2.32) | 0.025 * (1.84) | 0.023 * (1.65) |
LS | 0.125 *** (5.82) | 0.086 *** (4.09) | 0.082 *** (3.95) | 0.083 *** (4.00) |
BS | 0.082 *** (7.29) | 0.058 *** (4.89) | 0.057 *** (4.81) | 0.059 *** (4.96) |
IS | 0.239 *** (26.79) | 0.319 *** (17.79) | 0.343 *** (18.33) | |
IS × IS | −0.004 *** (−5.12) | −0.004 *** (−5.93) | ||
SUCC × IS | −0.001 (−0.01) | |||
SUCC × IS × IS | −0.022 *** (−2.94) | |||
CON | −0.008 (−0.63) | −0.027 ** (−2.25) | −0.026 ** (−2.12) | −0.026 ** (−2.18) |
R2 | 0.094 | 0.163 | 0.166 | 0.169 |
F | 173.73 | 187.94 | 170.52 | 142.50 |
Variables | Replacement Lag | Add Control Variables | Change the Time |
---|---|---|---|
SUCC | −0.010 (−0.34) | 0.000 (0.01) | 0.001 (0.04) |
BI | 0.024 ** (1.98) | 0.021 * (1.93) | 0.022 * (1.90) |
CS | 0.157 *** (9.66) | 0.173 *** (9.96) | 0.145 *** (8.96) |
LL | −0.014 (−0.98) | −0.013 (−0.93) | −0.024 * (−1.68) |
ROE | 0.037 ** (2.43) | 0.026 * (1.80) | 0.022 (1.49) |
LS | 0.075 *** (3.09) | 0.061 *** (2.83) | 0.085 *** (3.70) |
BS | 0.057 *** (4.17) | 0.076 *** (6.14) | 0.048 *** (3.64) |
IS | 0.275 *** (14.23) | 0.310 *** (16.14) | 0.345 *** (17.28) |
IS × IS | −0.004 *** (−5.21) | −0.003 *** (−4.63) | −0.005 *** (−5.35) |
state | −0.056 ** (−2.29) | ||
old | 0.003(1.40) | ||
Time fixation effect | Control | ||
Industry fixation effect | Control | ||
CON | −0.024 * (−1.73) | −0.157 (−0.82) | −0.029 ** (−2.21) |
R2 | 0.147 | 0.204 | 0.159 |
F | 116.89 | 23.70 | 138.50 |
Variables | Replacement Lag | Add Control Variables | Change the Time |
---|---|---|---|
SUCC | 0.003 (0.09) | 0.013 (0.51) | 0.014 (0.50) |
BI | 0.024 ** (2.00) | 0.021 ** (1.99) | 0.023 ** (1.97) |
CS | 0.161 *** (9.94) | 0.162 *** (9.24) | 0.136 *** (8.37) |
LL | −0.014 (−0.98) | −0.011 (−0.83) | −0.023 (−1.63) |
ROE | 0.039 ** (2.55) | 0.023 (1.62) | 0.019 (1.29) |
LS | 0.076 *** (3.17) | 0.061 *** (2.85) | 0.086 *** (3.75) |
BS | 0.056 *** (4.10) | 0.078 *** (6.35) | 0.051 *** (3.83) |
IS | 0.257 *** (12.59) | 0.339 *** (16.87) | 0.375 *** (17.92) |
IS × IS | −0.001 ** (−1.98) | −0.004 *** (−5.56) | −0.005 *** (−6.12) |
IS × SUCC | 0.043 (0.89) | 0.025 (0.37) | −0.000 (−0.00) |
IS × IS × SUCC | −0.008 *** (−4.70) | −0.025 *** (−3.36) | −0.024 *** (−3.03) |
state | −0.060 ** (−2.46) | ||
old | 0.003 (1.41) | ||
Time fixation effect | Control | ||
Industry fixation effect | Control | ||
CON | −0.026 * (−1.93) | −0.168 (−0.87) | −0.029 ** (−2.23) |
R2 | 0.157 | 0.207 | 0.163 |
F | 103.50 | 23.59 | 116.63 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bai, G.; Wang, W.; Wang, X. Research on the Influence of Technological Innovation Enthusiasm on Innovation Performance from the Perspective of Nonlinearity—Empirical Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610154
Bai G, Wang W, Wang X. Research on the Influence of Technological Innovation Enthusiasm on Innovation Performance from the Perspective of Nonlinearity—Empirical Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms. Sustainability. 2022; 14(16):10154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610154
Chicago/Turabian StyleBai, Guiyu, Wenjuan Wang, and Xinxin Wang. 2022. "Research on the Influence of Technological Innovation Enthusiasm on Innovation Performance from the Perspective of Nonlinearity—Empirical Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms" Sustainability 14, no. 16: 10154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610154