Do firms located in science and technology parks enhance innovation performance? The effect of absorptive capacity

Úbeda, Fernando; Ortiz‐de‐Urbina‐Criado, Marta; Mora-Valentín, Eva-María

doi:10.1007/s10961-018-9686-0

Cited by 41 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, within this study it is also taken into account that SPs may accommodate a heterogeneous group of firms. Past research has argued the importance of acknowledging the heterogeneous composition of SP firms (Ferguson and Olofsson 2004;Chan and Lau 2005;Díez-Vial and Fernández-Olmos 2015;Ubeda et al 2019). The cluster analyses show three different SP tenant types based on (dis)similarities on activities, size and length of stay.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The mature science-based firms within the sample have stayed relatively the longest on their SPs, which might explain their positive perception towards the university. However, the effectiveness of knowledge for tenant firms with high absorptive capacity might reduce as a result of knowledge duplicity (Ubeda et al 2019). Furthermore, Gassmann et al (2010) suggested that larger firms are motivated to engage in open innovation strategies as a means to be near their markets and to access potential human talent in order to expand their knowledge base.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This capacity of identifying value, assimilation and commercialisation of ideas enables organisations to utilise external knowledge sources more efficiently (Cohen and Levinthal 1990). Firms with high absorptive capacity benefit less from SPs as their knowledge bases might be too similar to others (Ubeda et al 2019). Tacit knowledge, which is often complex knowledge, is more easily shared among strong ties, while well-documented knowledge is benefited by weak ties (e.g.…”

Section: Knowledge Sharing and Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research suggests that SP impact varies among different types of firms (e.g. Díez-Vial and Fernández-Olmos 2015; Ubeda et al 2019). So far, the majority of evaluation research has focused solely on start-ups (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands

Junker

Appel‐Meulenbroek

et al. 2019

J Technol Transf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science parks as area developments have existed for decades and captivated the attention of academia and policy-makers for their potential impact on firms and regions. Only limited attention is given to the needs of science park firms regarding what science parks offer. Therefore, this study focused on science park facilities and services and how firms perceive the benefits associated with these attributes. An online survey distributed among tenants on seven science parks in the Netherlands yielded 103 respondents. An a priori list of science park attributes was presented in order to gain insight in how the respondents associated these facilities and services with potential benefits. The benefits considered were derived from proximity and innovation literature within the science park context. In general, science park attributes were associated with either proximity benefits or benefits related to the SP real estate. Based on a cluster analysis of organisational characteristics three tenant types were identified. The three tenant types sought different benefits through different attributes. Commercially-orientated firms associated science park attributes as ways for being near customers. Mature science-based firms associated attributes with a wider range of benefits, such as image benefits, being near customers and other firms. Young technology-based firms were more cost-driven and focused on image benefits. The associations between various types of facilities and the benefits that tenant types seek, provide insights for practitioners in terms of the design and management of science parks and add to the body of knowledge of science parks within the context of innovation management.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Knowledge Sharing and Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands

Junker

Appel‐Meulenbroek

et al. 2019

J Technol Transf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firm's size is expected to have a positive relationship with a firm's innovation performance, since larger firms have more resources and might benefit from economies of scales and scope (Vasquez‐Urriago et al, 2016). We also control firm's export for it does force enterprises to develop patent and new products (Ubeda, Ortiz‐de‐Urbina‐Criado, & Mora‐Valentín, 2019). In addition, human resource is regarded as an important factor to improve firm's innovation performance.…”

Section: Data Sources and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Government support and firm innovation performance in Chinese science and technology parks: The perspective of firm and sub‐park heterogeneity

Teng

Zhang

et al. 2020

Growth and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science and technology parks (STPs) are established to promote the firm innovation performance via agglomeration economy and government support in China. On-site qualified firms obtain government R&D funding as a type of government support, and they are offered differential innovation service caused by the differential capabilities of subparks which scatter throughout a single city. It is debatable whether those government supports at firm and sub-park levels can promote firm innovation capabilities. This study takes Zhangjiang National Innovation Demonstration Zone, Shanghai as an example. It applies a Tobit regression model to analyse the databases of Zhangjiang Annual Sampling Survey of Firms 2015 and Zhangjiang Development Report 2015. We find out at the firm level, government R&D funding has a significant and positive influence on firms' innovation, but government R&D funding generates a crowing-out effect the innovation performance of on-site firms with more R&D investment themselves. At the sub-park level, innovation service agencies of sub-parks do not exert an important role in influencing firms' innovation, and they even have negative moderating effects on the relationship 750 |

show abstract

Science Technology Parks and Close Relations: Heterogeneity, Context and Data

Wright

Westhead

2019

Palgrave Advances in the Economics of Innovation and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do firms located in science and technology parks enhance innovation performance? The effect of absorptive capacity

Cited by 41 publications

References 83 publications

Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands

Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands

Government support and firm innovation performance in Chinese science and technology parks: The perspective of firm and sub‐park heterogeneity

Science Technology Parks and Close Relations: Heterogeneity, Context and Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About