Search results

Abstract

Research background: There seem to be a research gap concerning the relation between management control and innovation. Previous research in the field has generated inconclusive findings.

Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to create a conceptual model representing the relation between management control and innovation.

Research methodology: The study relied on a systematic literature review. The initial search yielded 269 papers, which were later analysed and reduced to select those with a substantial contribution to the purpose of the study. Next, the meta-synthesis method was employed to create a thematic map and extract information from the papers.

Results: The formulated conceptual model indirectly links management control systems to innovation process efficiency through decision-making quality. Furthermore, it connects management control systems indirectly to decision-making quality, through the transactive memory system (specialisation, building credibility and coordination) and shared interpretation schemes. The link between decision-making quality and innovation process efficiency is introduced and based on the concept of an innovation process.

Novelty: The paper fills in the missing link between management control and innovation by introducing decision-making quality into this context.

In contemporary economics companies operate in a fast changing environment which forces them to adapt constantly. The never ending development seems to constitute the necessary condition for achieving the ultimate purpose of a company's function - the maximization of shareholder wealth. Company value is the greatest overall measurement of its efficient functioning. Thus numerous approaches to value were created. For public companies the market value of equity changes constantly and is publicly available. Companies actively support the increase in the market value of equity by releasing positive news. In this context the role of innovation announcements is crucial for all companies. Issues concerning innovation are strongly embedded in the current worldwide scientific discussion. However different sectors are unequally represented. The discussion on innovation in low-tech industries and services has received relatively little scholarly attention. Tourism represents both categories. The investigation of innovation in tourism is especially essential for the economy of the European Union as the sector contributes significantly to GDP generation, employment and investment. Increasing the knowledge of innovation in tourism is of vital theoretical and practical importance. Thus it was addressed in the present book. The research problem in the present book was expressed in the following question: what is the relationship between innovation announcements and the market value of equity of tourism enterprises? The main objective of the research was to measure the short- and long-term impact of innovation announcements on the market value of equity of tourism enterprises. Research aimed also at creating and verifying empirically the model explaining the relationship between innovation and the market value of tourism enterprises. The research contributed to the knowledge on innovation in tourism in two ways. First, the author's model representing the relationship was created. Second, the empirical research allowed the measurement of the effects of innovation announcements and the verification of the significance of the predictors of the market value of equity. In this research a systematic model-building procedure was applied. It relied on summarizing the existing scientific evidence on the relationship studied in order to build a comprehensive framework whilst also adding the author's propositions of predictors in the next step. In order to build the exhaustive design the method of systematic literature studies SALSA was employed. The study covered the period between 2000 and 2015. It used five scientific databases. The precise four-step procedure including content analysis and meta-synthesis resulted in the indication of two innovation-level, two firm-level innovation-related and five control variables important in the context of the relationship studied. Seven theoretically related predictors proposed by the author complemented this sound conceptual framework. In total the model accounted for eleven predictors: patent, CSR, type, degree of novelty involved, source, stage and the communication of innovation, R&D intensity and the innovativeness of the implementing company, squared R&D intensity and the interaction between R&D intensity and innovativeness. It covered also 8 control variables: industry, size, volume, total cash dividend, operational experience, leverage, return on equity and growth. The empirical research covered all the tourism enterprises listed on the main markets of the most important stock exchanges in the European Union in the period between February 2011 and February 2016. There were 111 such companies. The abnormal changes in the market value of equity resulting from innovation announcements of tourism enterprises constituted the subjects of analysis. Content analysis of the 9,000 innovation announcements resulted in creating the sampling frame of 985 releases referring to innovation consistent with the definition adopted in the present research. The research was performed on the representative sample of 398 observations. As Berk et al. state the total market value of a firm's equity equals the number of its shares times their current market price [2014]. If the number of shares is constant the change in their price becomes the right proxy for the changes in MV [Damodaran 2012]. In the present study the abnormal change in the market value of equity constituted the dependent variable. In line with the above considerations and previous research it was operationalized as the abnormal return. It was calculated in the short and the long term. In the short term the event-study method was employed. In the long term the buy-and-hold abnormal returns method was used. The expected returns in the short-term study were computed using the Carhart four-factor model [1997]. The abnormal returns were cumulated over the event windows and standardised which led to more powerful tests. The statistical significance of the changes in the market value of equity was tested using the Z-test and the two groups difference of means test. In order to test the author's model response surface regression and hierarchical regression were employed. The first one relies on introducing higher-order and interaction effects. The second one allows the testing of scientific hypotheses on the significance of particular predictors by building successive regression models, each adding new variables. The statistical analysis of the changes in the market value has hardly been reported in previous research. Such a study was performed here. It included the methods of descriptive statistics: central tendency, dispersion, skewness and peakedness. The first result of the empirical research reported in the book is the indication of the positive relationship between innovation announcements and the market value of equity of tourism enterprises. In the short term the effect concentrated in the event windows directly surrounding the event. In the +/- 1 day event window, the statistically significant increase in market value of equity was 0,38%. In the 6-months period it was 3,94%. The outcomes demonstrated that the initial reaction to the innovation news was adjusted in time. In the short term the market tended to undervalue the announced innovation. The difference in short- and long-term changes in the market value of equity and the statistical significance of the second suggested that the investors did not incorporate the new information immediately and fully. It means that the assessment of the effects of innovation announcements on the market value of equity of tourism enterprises should be considered over a longer period. The research did not deliver supportive evidence for the existence of leakage and dissemination effect. The significant changes in MV occurred in the period following the announcement. The fluctuations of market value of equity in the two days directly preceding the release and in the -6/-1 day event window were statistically insignificant. There is a small risk of significant fluctuations resulting from investors' aggressive trading prior to the announcement and unwinding part of the acquired position after it. The positive effects of successful innovation announcements were greater in number and magnitude than the negative effects of unsuccessful ones. The difference was statistically significant. In the +/- 1 day event window a typical change in market value of equity fell between 1,92% and -1,5%. In the half-year period the typical area of variability ranged between 16,07% and -8,95%. The distribution of changes in the market value of equity was right-skewed. It indicated that it was more probable to experience a high positive change in the market value of equity than to experience high loss. The leptokurtic character of the distribution showed that more variance resulted from infrequent extreme abnormal returns. The heterogeneity of the changes in the market value of equity required further explanation. In order to study the relationship between innovation announcements and the market value of equity of tourism enterprises the author's model was tested. The statistical significance of the groups of predictors and of the single predictors was verified. The outcomes of the analysis performed with the use of hierarchical regression indicated that innovation-level variables predict the changes in the market value of equity above and beyond the effect of the control and innovation-related company-level variables. The company-level innovation-related variables increased significantly the model's predictive power in the short term. In line with the initial hypothesis the research demonstrated that the effect of product innovation on the changes in market value resulting from innovation announcements was greater than that of other innovation types. New products may directly increase sales and impact positively on the company's cash flow. Furthermore it pointed out the positive effect of the first innovation announcement in relation to second and further releases. The informative value of the announcements beyond the first one was relatively small and caused little market reaction. In the context of market reactions the delivering of new information is essential. Moreover it was ascertained that in the short term the market rewarded the high advancement of the announced innovation and the high R&D intensity of the announcing company. In the case of hardly innovative tourism enterprises the market responded slightly to the development news and waited for the proof in the form of the innovation introduction. The high level of R&D intensity allowed tourism companies to differentiate themselves and increase innovative capabilities which was positively perceived by investors. In the long term investors acknowledged the positive effects of developing innovation in collaborative structures as it allows companies to benefit from the experience of collaborators and diminishes the risk. Furthermore the research delivered some inconclusive indications typified by the statistically insignificant results. The market positively received patented innovation in comparison to the non-patented one but the effect of such protection was relatively small. Patents are especially important for highly advanced technological innovation which is rare in tourism. Besides investors seemed optimistic about the innovation's degree of novelty involved. In line with the hypothesis they rewarded radical innovation as it carries higher potential benefits but the result was statistically insignificant. In the case of tourism dominated by minor upgrades investors treated radical innovation carefully and followed the "high risk – high return" strategy to a small extent. In line with the prediction in the long term the market seemed to reward highly R&D intensive tourism companies but the result was statistically insignificant. Moreover the research did not deliver supportive evidence for the existence of the second-order effect of R&D intensity and the interaction between R&D intensity and innovativeness. The inclusion of such variables did not predict changes in the market value of equity above and beyond the effect of the control variables. In the long term the diminishing marginal returns to R&D intensity were suggested but the effect was statistically insignificant. It may result from the level of expenditure on R&D in tourism which is too low to strongly advocate the diminishing marginal returns. In addition to the above outcomes the research delivered some unexpected results. It seemed that innovation without the elements of CSR was perceived better than innovation carrying such elements. The results were statistically insignificant. First, the CSR elements may have been perceived as superficial. Second, some previous research suggested that in non-innovative companies the concentration on social responsibility instead of enhancing innovativeness leads to a decrease in consumer satisfaction and in turn in market value [Luo and Bhattacharya 2006]. It seems to be the case in tourism. The number of innovation announcements released within a year before the event day did not have any impact on the reaction to the current announcement. Investors did not perceive companies reporting numerous innovations better. In the case of tourism enterprises it may result from the relatively high number of minor upgrades. It seems that their implementation did not guarantee the perception of the company as innovative. Each innovation announcement was evaluated irrespectively of such defined innovativeness. The results were statistically insignificant. The research did not deliver the supportive evidence for the market to reward the reported high advancement of innovation in the long term. The results were inconclusive due to their statistical insignificance. The research indicated that in the long term the stage of innovation at the moment of release was less important than in the short term. One possible explanation is that the period of six months following the development release might cover also the actual implementation. In the short term the effect of innovation developed in-house on the changes in market value resulting from innovation announcements was minimally greater than that of innovation from other sources. The calculated parameter and thus the actual difference were small. In the long term investors did not appreciate tourism companies' own efforts. The research question was positively answered by indicating the positive impact of innovation announcements on the market value of equity of tourism enterprises. Based on the empirical study all the hypotheses were verified. The study was burdened with several limitations. The research relied on specialist databases. As far as data accessibility is concerned the small amount of information inaccessible through databases required it to be collected directly from companies. Moreover the choice of linear regression modelling might not necessarily allow the capture of all possible effects. Besides which although the advantages of covering the period of relative stability have been discussed in the book the determination of the time frame prevents the generalisation of results in a period of major economic downturns. The research covered comprehensive announcements reporting innovation consistent with the definition adopted. As discussed in the book such an approach offered numerous benefits. However the omission of imprecise, incomplete and partial releases may be considered a certain limitation as this kind of information may also stimulate market reaction to some extent. In the light of the results of the present research it seems that a promising direction for further research is the in-depth, qualitative analysis explaining why and how the predictors influenced the market value of equity. It should cover the reasons behind the statistical significance of the predictors demonstrated in this research. Also the growing potential of alternative trading systems suggests the need for the replication of the study in this context. It is especially important for tourism enterprises which are mainly relatively small. Furthermore it seems important to compare the effects of innovation on tourism companies with the effects on other low-tech companies. It could deliver insights into the discussion on the specificity of tourism companies. In the light of the results obtained in this study it seems necessary to deepen the research on the interaction between innovation and corporate social responsibility. The qualitative analysis of the possible synergic effects appears to be a valuable course for further investigation. Value is the most comprehensive measure of company activity. However it is not the only one especially since companies in different periods may pursue different strategies (e.g. profit maximization). The effects of innovation on different financial measures seem to be an important direction for further research. The research contributed to the current scientific discussion on innovation in services with special regard to innovation in tourism. It complemented the broader knowledge on the efficiency of capital markets by providing a conceptual overview and empirical evidence. The research introduced the author's model representing the relationship between innovation announcements and the market value of equity of tourism enterprises. Thus it added to the understanding of the predictors of the market value of equity. The research was based on a representative sample and provided firm support for previous research indicating the positive effects of innovation on tourism companies. ; National Science Centre, Poland

Purpose: Eco-innovation appears to be at the very heart of the European Union policy. It is of crucial importance for both single companies and the whole economic systems. At the same time eco-innovation is driven by the countless factors. Thus the purpose of the present research was to indicate the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation. Design/methodology/approach: The research relied on the systematic literature studies performed with the use of SALSA (Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis, Analysis) method. It focused on the papers published between January 2000 and June 2016. A total of 469 publications were examined selected form Scopus database. The precise appraisal procedure allowed indicating the ones including the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation. Findings: The studies of literature allowed indicating a total of 24 determinants. Moreover the results indicate that the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation may be divided based on two criteria. The first includes costsrelated and revenues-related determinants. The second includes strategic and operational levels. Research limitations/implications Together eleven publications were omitted in the research due to their incompletion or inaccessibility. Practical implications: Stimulating eco-innovation seems vital for all companies. Delivering a comprehensive set of the determinants of its efficiency will support executives in managing eco-innovation. Originality/value: The paper attempts to fulfil the research gap concerning the determinants of the efficiency of ecoinnovation. ; Cel badań Ekoinnowacje leżą w samym sercu polityki Unii Europejskiej, co jest szczególnie istotne zarówno dla pojedynczych spółek jak i całych systemów ekonomicznych. Jednocześnie, ekoinnowacje zależą od niezliczonej liczby czynników, stąd też celem podjętych badań było wskazanie determinant warunkujących efektywność ekoinnowacji. Metodologia badań Badania przeprowadzono w oparciu o systematyczny przegląd literatury z wykorzystaniem metody SALSA (Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis, Analysis). Skoncentrowano się na artykułach opublikowanych między styczniem 2000 a czerwcem 2016 roku, łącznie przeanalizowano 469 publikacji korzystając z bazy danych Scopus. Szczegółowe badania pozwoliły na określenie tych, które dotyczyły czynników warunkujących efektywność ekoinnowacji. Wyniki badań Studia literaturowe wskazały 24 determinant. Ponadto, wyniki badań pozwoliły na dokonanie podziału czynników określających efektywność ekoinnowacji według dwóch następujących kryteriów: zależnych od kosztów i przychodów, oraz na poziomie operacyjnym i strategicznym. Ograniczenia badań Łącznie 11 publikacji zostało pominiętych w badaniu z uwagi na ich niekompletność lub niedostępność. Zastosowanie praktyczne przeprowadzonych badań Stymulowanie ekoinnowacji ma szczególne znaczenie dla wszystkich przedsiębiorstw. Zestawienie czynników warunkujących efektywność ekoinnowacji może wspierać kierownictwo w ich zarządzaniu. Oryginalność/znaczenie przeprowadzonych badań Praca wypełnia lukę badawczą w zakresie czynników warunkujących efektywność ekoinnowacji.

Purpose: Eco-innovation appears to be at the very heart of the European Union policy. It is of crucial importance for both single companies and the whole economic systems. At the same time eco-innovation is driven by the countless factors. Thus the purpose of the present research was to indicate the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation. Design/methodology/approach: The research relied on the systematic literature studies performed with the use of SALSA (Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis, Analysis) method. It focused on the papers published between January 2000 and June 2016. A total of 469 publications were examined selected form Scopus database. The precise appraisal procedure allowed indicating the ones including the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation. Findings: The studies of literature allowed indicating a total of 24 determinants. Moreover the results indicate that the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation may be divided based on two criteria. The first includes costs-related and revenues-related determinants. The second includes strategic and operational levels. Research limitations/implications Together eleven publications were omitted in the research due to their incompletion or inaccessibility. Practical implications: Stimulating eco-innovation seems vital for all companies. Delivering a comprehensive set of the determinants of its efficiency will support executives in managing eco-innovation. Originality/value: The paper attempts to fulfil the research gap concerning the determinants of the efficiency of eco-innovation.