No abstract

There have been divergent opinions as to the suitability of the various indicators of locus of control in business management research. This study examines how the indicators of internal locus and strategic locus of control function in the small business context. The study examines first the interrelations between these indicators and then relation between each of the indicators and the firm's strategic factors. The indicators of locus of control differed from each other in their relation to external control. The indicator of strategic locus of control correlated with the firm's targets, strategic decision-making and success. On the other hand the indicator of internal locus of control is useful in research on entrepreneurship and the birth of new firms.

PURPOSE: The aim of the paper is to analyse the importance of both internal capabilities (resources) and external information sources in implementing product, process, marketing and organizational innovations aiming to maximize firm competitive advantage and create value for stakeholders. Furthermore, in particular, we examine the role of public organizations, business networks, firm size, and the industry sector, in the emergence of different types of product, process, marketing, and organizational innovations. The research was based on the typology of innovation (product, process, marketing, and organizational) adopted by the OECD. METHODOLOGY: The paper is based on data from 389 SMEs located in Finland and describes the development of a model for testing the factors that increase the innovativeness of SMEs. The logistic regression model is used as a methodology. Findings: The results show that the creation of novel products, processes and marketing innovation is connected to various external sources of information, such as fairs, the media and the internet. Moreover, the relationship between internal capabilities such as the firm’s know-how increases the marketing and organizational innovativeness of SMEs. Our results demonstrated that the creation of product innovation is positively connected to manufacturing. Furthermore, we find that the creation of novel processes and organizational innovation is related to firm size, such that firms with fewer than 20 employees (smallest firms) were concentrated among non-innovators and companies with more than 20 employees were concentrated among innovators. IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE: The contribution of our study is to analyse to what extent various types of innovation rely on specific information sources. This study also provides suggestions for practice and policymakers. Contrary to expectations regarding our findings, public support organizations were not statistically significant in any innovation model. Therefore, public support organizations should develop better mechanisms to find SMEs with strong motivations to develop new products and market opportunities. ORIGINALITY AND VALUE: This paper provides a new and topical viewpoint for the literature by examining the possible factors explaining the increase in SMEs’ likelihood of implementing product, process, marketing, and organizational innovations. Our study provides comprehensive information on how different stakeholders contribute to the emergence of SME innovation.

Audretsch & Feldman (2004) argue that an agglomeration is a collection of localized firms with a common focus. As firms thrive, resources are attracted to the region. They state that, if entrepreneurship serves as a mechanism for knowledge spillovers, measures of entrepreneurial activity should be linked positively to regional growth performance. In Schumpeterian economics the engine of economic development is entrepreneurial innovation. Creative destruction makes way for new innovations and growth. In this study, we simultaneously examine the regional entrepreneurial activity and regional growth activity in Finland. A further aim of the study was to find out if entrepreneurial activity and growth activity also play a deagglomerating role. We find, first, that the indicators used are very well suited to measure the dynamic environment, especially in manufacturing, since the regions with the most dynamic environment were areas with high smallbusiness activity. Furthermore, the study indicates that growth activity should be taken into account when examining regional development by means of the concept of the dynamic environment. Secondly, we find that entrepreneurial activity and growth activity decreases regional specialization, i.e., the regions with the highest regional specialization are characterized by the lowest levels of entrepreneurial activity and growth activity. Our study confirms with Finnish data the findings of Dumais et al. (2002) that new plant births play a deagglomerating role. The results of the study indicate also that growth activity tends to act to reduce regional specialization. As a whole, the results suggest that the regional specialization is the result of a dynamic process in which the combination of plant births and growth act together.

No abstract