The U-Shaped Relationship between Intellectual Capital and Technological Innovation: A Perspective on Enterprise Ownership and the Moderating Effect of CSR

Abstract

Promoting technological innovation is an essential issue for enterprises to maintain sustainable development in a highly competitive environment. Previous studies have focused on exploring the linear relationship between intellectual capital and technological innovation, ignoring the possibility of a non-linear relationship between them. This study draws on a dualistic view of intellectual capital and divides it into two elements: human capital and structural capital. Based on the factor endowment theory, we explored the non-linear relationship between intellectual capital and technological innovation, using the data of Chinese A-share listed companies from 2014 to 2019 as the sample, and then analyzed the moderating effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on their relationship. The results of the OLS regressions indicated a significant U-shaped relationship between intellectual capital and its elements on technological innovation. This means a “regressive” effect of low levels of intellectual capital on technological innovation and an “incremental” effect of high levels of intellectual capital on technological innovation. Improving CSR could positively enhance the U-shaped effect of intellectual capital on technological innovation. A further study found that the U-shaped effects of intellectual capital and human capital on technological innovation were still supported in state-owned and private enterprises. The U-shaped effect of structural capital on technological innovation was still supported in private enterprises but not in state-owned enterprises. This study explored the relationship between intellectual capital and technological innovation from a unique perspective. It provides a theoretical basis for enterprises to appropriately fulfill their social responsibility and actively promote technological innovation.

An Empirical Study of the Technoparks in Turkey in Investigating the Challenges and Potential of Designing Intelligent Spaces

“…Stares emphasizes the role of collective being and public engagement in science and technology in Europe [56], which should be considered primarily for responsible and open innovation [2,3,18]. As another fact, the universities and new technology campuses with research-based companies reveal dependent relations for open and responsible innovation [1][2][3]11,13]. Thus, the increasing influence of technology transfer compels this research to regard the performance of research universities in close connection with industry, start-up companies, and research-based institutions [12,57].…”

“…Indeed, significant recent articles also draw similar conceptual frameworks of open innovation in defining the circumstances for the construction of intelligent environments [11,13,18,[23][24][25]. Intelligent learning spaces, encouraged by open innovation for smart campuses and workspaces, can offer responsible innovation through social cooperation and knowledge transfer, as networked via the new interfaces for Subjectile-Objectile (human-technology) relations, to be augmented via Artificial intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT) projects [1][2][3]11,12,24,26] (Figures 1 and 2). Therefore, the research critically analyzes the spatiotemporal organization of the creative class in certain significant TDZs, R&D, and design centers in Turkey.…”

“…The aim of the empirical research reported in this study is to gather the necessary information and evaluate the potential for and need to encourage incentives and investments for innovative practices of intelligent spaces. The Sustainability 2023, 15, 10150 2 of 22 study evaluates the role of intelligent spaces for responsible innovation to overcome the emerging social issues related to unemployment and productivity [1][2][3] regarding the critical facts from the creative class in TDZs and research centers in Turkey.…”

“…Cache's seminal concept of Objectile, defining the flow of production of the technological object, becomes widespread and extensively discussed with the advancing circumstances of Industry 4.0 [7][8][9][10] (Figure 1). Nevertheless, the role of the individual experience and productivity in designing [1], and accordingly Subjectile, which can even be better described by the emerging concept of Industry 5.0 or Society 5.0 [11], is not deliberately emphasized for responsible innovation in an overarching manner during the coeval period [3,12] (Figure 1). Based on this argument, it can be maintained that the role of planning and designing with regard to collectivism and individual performance together, which cohere with a form of intelligence [12], has had little impact on the relations of production and the built environment for the creative class.…”

Intellectual Capital, Firm Performance, and Sustainable Growth: A Study on DSE-Listed Nonfinancial Companies in Bangladesh

“…In another study, Xu and Wang [14] found a positive impact of RCE on ROA and ROE, whereas Vishnu and Kumar Gupta [19] found a reverse result. The literature also shows that IC performance enhances business sustainability [20][21][22]. However, a study by Smriti and Das [23] found the opposite effect.…”