Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship (벤처창업연구)

The Korean Society of Business Venturing (한국벤처창업학회)
권호 표지

The impact of open innovation activities on performance of Korean IT SMEs·Venture: Technology Transfer Experiences and Technological Collaborations

중소·벤처기업의 개방형혁신 노력이 성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 기술이전경험과 기술협력유형을 중심으로

  • Received : 2016.11.15
  • Accepted : 2017.02.14
  • Published : 2017.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In Korea, small and medium sized domestic enterprises (SMEs) play an pivotal role in the national economy, accounting for 99.8% of all enterprises, 87.9% of total employment, and 48.3% of production. and SMEs were driving a real force of the development of national economy in many respects such as innovation, job creation, industrial diversity, balanced regional development. Despite their crucial role in the national development, most of SMEs suffer from a lack of R&D capabilities and equipments as well as funding capacity. Government-Supported Research Institute (GRI) can provide SMEs with valuable supplementary technological knowledges and help them build technological capacities. so, In order to effectively support SMEs, government and GRI must be a priority to know about the factors influencing the performance related to technology transfer and technological collaborations. The paper analyzes the effects of Korean IT SMEs Venture external collaborations and technology transfer on their performances, according to their collaboration activities and technology transfer experiences. The results show that there was a significant difference between '3~5times' of technology transfer experience and 'zero technology transfer experience' in the case of technology transfer experience. In case of technological collaboration type, there was a significant difference between 'R&D manpower' and 'enhancement of technological capabilities including core technologies'. The results show that the effectiveness of technology transfer of Korean IT SMEs Venture depends on experiences, types of collaboration activities. so the results of this research will be useful for Government-Supported research institute (GRI)' policy makers when establishing technology commercialization support policies and strategic planning of small and medium sized domestic enterprises.

우리나라의 중소기업은 전체 사업체 수의 99.8%, 종사자 비중의 87.9%, 전체 생산액의 48.3%를 차지하는 등 국가경제의 근간을 형성하고 있으며, 기술혁신, 고용창출, 산업의 다양성, 지역균형개발 등 여러 측면에서 국민경제 발전에 있어서 실질적인 원동력이 되고 있다. 이로 인해 중소기업은 기술혁신을 통해서 기술역량을 확보하는 것이 더욱더 필요해졌다. 하지만 대부분의 중소기업은 자금부담 능력, 연구인력, 연구장비 등 R&D 역량이 대체적으로 부족한 실정이다. 이에 정부에서는 중소 중견기업 지원을 위해서 정부 출연(연)을 통해 다양한 지원을 강화하고 있다. 즉, 출연(연)은 산업 전반의 혁신활동을 증진시키고, 기업의 기술역량을 강화하기 위해 연구개발 (R&D)을 통해 창출된 지식과 기술을 꾸준히 시장에 제공하고 있으며, 중소 벤처기업이 견실한 기업으로 도약할 수 있도록 인력지원, 연구시설/장비지원 등을 통해 기업들을 지원하는 역할을 수행하고 있다. 이 시점에서 정부와 정부 출연(연)이 우리 경제에서 중요한 역할을 하고 있는 중소 벤처기업들을 효과적으로 지원하기 위해서는 기술이전 및 전략적 제휴(기술협력)와 관련해서 기업성과에 미치는 영향요인에 대해 정확히 알아야 된다. 본 연구는 중소 벤처기업의 기업성과에 영향을 미치는 요인에 있어 기술이전경험 및 기술협력유형의 내용별로 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 알아보고자 1,104개 기업을 대상으로 실증적으로 분석하였다. 감마회귀분석을 실시한 결과, 기술이전경험과 기술협력유형이 중소 벤처기업의 매출액에 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구의 결과는 기술이전경험의 경우, 기술이전경험'3~5회'와 '기술이전경험 무' 간에 유의미한 차이가 있었고, 기술협력유형의 경우, '핵심기술 확보 등 기술역량 제고'와 '개발인력확보'간에 유의미한 차이가 있었다. 이는 기술이전경험의 유무와 기술협력활동의 유형에 따라 달라진다는 것을 보여주고 있어, 향후 정부출연(연)과 중소 벤처기업 간 협력 정책 등 중소 벤처기업의 상호협력 촉진정책을 수립할 때 기초자료로 활용될 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn, C. S. & Lee, Y. D.(2011), An Empirical Analysis of the Influence Factors on Open Innovation Activities in Korea, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, 14(3), 431-465.
  2. Belderbos, R., Carree, M. & Lokshin, B.(2004), Cooperative R&D and firm performance, Research policy, 33(10), 1477-1492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.07.003
  3. Bae, J. T. & Jung, J. W.(1997), Relationships Between Technological Cooperation Activities and Performance of Small and Medium-sized Companies in Korea, Asia Pacific Journal of Small Business, 19(2), 273-296.
  4. Barney, J. B.(1991), Firm resources and sustainable competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  5. Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P.(1991), Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation, Organization Science, 2(1), 40-57. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.40
  6. Chesbrough, H. W.(2006), OPEN INNOVATION: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press.
  7. Dussauge, P., Garrette, B. & Mitchell, W.(2000), Learning from competing partners?: Outcomes and durations of scale and link alliances in Europe, Strategic Management Journal, 21(2), 99-126. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200002)21:2<99::AID-SMJ80>3.0.CO;2-G
  8. Eisenhardt, K. M. & Schoonhoven, C. B.(1990), Organizational growth linking founding team strategy environment, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(3), 504-529. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393315
  9. Frenz, M. & Ietto-Grillies, M.(2009), The Impact on Innovation Performance of Different Sources of Knowledge: Evidince from the UK Community Innovation Survey, Research Policy, 38(7), 1125-1135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.05.002
  10. Grimpe, C. & Sofka, W.(2009), Search Patterns and Absorptive Capacity: Low and High Technology sectors in European Countries, Research Policy, 38(3), 495-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.006
  11. Gulati, R.(1998), Alliances and Networks, Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199804)19:4<293::AID-SMJ982>3.0.CO;2-M
  12. Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. N. & Vonortas, N. S.(2000), Research Partnerships, Research Policy, 29(4), 567-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00090-6
  13. Hamel, G.(1991), Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances, Strategic Management Journal, 12(S1), 83-103.
  14. Hausman, W. H., Montgomery, D. B., & Roth, A. V.(2002), Why Should Marketing and Manufacturing Work Together? Some Exploratory Empirical Results, Journal of Operations Management, 20(3), 241-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00010-4
  15. Hennart, J. F.(1988), A Transaction Costs Theory of Equity Joint Ventures, Strategic Management Journal, 9(4), 361-374. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250090406
  16. Huston, L. & Sakkab, N.(2006), Connect and Develop: Inside Procter & Gamble's new model for innovation, Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 68-76.
  17. Hwang, H. R., Kim, K. G. & Jeong, H. G.(2015), A Study on the Technology Commercialization Policy for Technology-based SMEs: Case on Daedeok Innopolis, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 8(3), 39-52.
  18. Hwhang, H. D. & Chung, S. Y.(2015), A Measure on Technology Transfer Activation of Government-Sponsored Research Institutes Focusing on Companies in Demand: Focusing on the Cases in the K Research Institute, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, 18(2), 318-337.
  19. KBIZ(2016), Status of SMEs in 2016, Seoul, KBIZ.
  20. Kim, B. K., Cho, H. J. & Ok, J. Y.(2011), A Study on the Technology Commercialization Process and Performance of Public Research Institutes in Korea using the Structural Equation Model, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, 14(3), 552-577.
  21. Kim, S. K., Chang, B. Y., Lee, Y. J., Song, J. K., Ahn, D. H., Lee, K. H., Choi, J. S.(2008), Open Innovation:Theory, Practices, and Policy Implications, STEPI, 2008, 1-330.
  22. Kim, J. H., Park, J. H. & Jung, K. D.(2013), The Role of Absorptive Capacity in Technological Collaboration of SMEs, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, 16(1), 101-129.
  23. Kogut, B.(1988), Joint Ventures: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives, Strategic Management Journal, 9(4), 319-332. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250090403
  24. KOVA(2015), Survey report on SMEs of ICT Business, Seoul.
  25. Ku, B. C.(2014), Derivation and Empirical Analysis of Critical Factors that Facilitate Technology Transfer and Commercialization of research Outcome, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 9(5), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.16972/apjbve.9.1.201402.69
  26. Kwon, K. D. & Kim, J. W.(2006), Relational Trait between Large Firm & Venture Business, Relationship of Cooperation and Venture Business Performance, Korea Journal of Business Administration, 19(6), 2065-2091.
  27. Kwon, Y. K.(2011), An empirical study on the open innovation and its effects on the innovation performance of Startups: The moderatingrole of the intellectual property stock, The Journal of Intellectural property, 6(4), 133-158.
  28. Laursen, K., & Salter, A.(2006), Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms, Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  29. Lee, K. J. & Choe, B. H.(2006), An Empirical Study on the Determinants of R&D Cooperation, Korea Academic Society of Industrial Organization, 14(4), 67-102.
  30. Lee, J. M. & Jeong, S. Y.(2011), An Empirical Study on the Determinants of Technology Commercialization in Korean SMEs, Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, 175-184.
  31. Lee, J. W. & Kang, Y. W.(2006), Impact of the Cooperation with Large Enterprise on Technological Innovation of SME: An Exploratory Study, Asia Pacific Journal of Small Business, 28(3), 243-268.
  32. Leiponen, A. & Helfat, C. E.(2010), Innovation Objectives, Knowledge Sources, and the Benefits of Breadth', Strategic Management Journal, 31(2), 224-236. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.807
  33. Lemmens, C. E.(2004), Innovation in Technology Alliance Networks, Edward Elgar.
  34. Levinson, N. S.(1984), Industry-University Research Arrangements: An Action-Oriented Approach, Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, 16(2), 23-30.
  35. Lowe, J. & Taylor, P.(1998), R&D and technology purchase through licence agreements: complementary strategies and complementary assets, R&D Management, 28(4), 263-278. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00103
  36. Moon, H. S. & Park, J. B.(2014), R&D alliance performance Promoting Technology Commercialization in the Korean Private Sector, Issue Paper, kiet.
  37. MSIP(2014a), A Plan to reinvigorate Government Funded Researcher's commercialization Supports plan for SMEs, MSIP.
  38. MSIP(2014a), The Plan for Technology Commercialization for the diffusion of R&D performance, Seoul, MSIP.
  39. MSIP(2015), Government's R&D Innovation policies, MSIP
  40. Oerlemans, L. A. G., Meeus, M. T. H. & Boekema, F. W. M.(1998), Do networks matter for innovation? the usefulness of the economic network appoarch in analysing innovation, Tijdschrift voor Economishe en Sociale Geografie, 89(3), 298-309. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00029
  41. Ok, J. Y. & Kim, B, G.(2009), Measuring the Performance of Technology Transfer Activities of the Public Research Institutes in Korea, Journal of Technology Innovation, 17(2), 131-158.
  42. Osborn, R. N. & Hagedoorn, J.(1997), The institutionalization and evolutionary dynamics of interorganizational alliances and networks, The Academy of Management Journal, 40(2), 261-278. https://doi.org/10.2307/256883
  43. Park, E. B. & Kim, C. H.(2003), A study on the Critical Factors for Strategic Alliance: Focused on Corporation Information System, International Business Review, 7(2), 37-56. https://doi.org/10.21739/IBR.2003.12.7.2.37
  44. Park, J. B.(2008), Status and Position of Commercialization in Korea-Focused on Government Funded Technology, Issue Paper, kiet.
  45. Park, W., Kim, E. J. & Park, H. Y.(2016), An Empirical Analysis of the Influence Factors on Private-Public R&D Collaboration of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in ICT Sector, Asia Pacific Journal of Small Business, 38(2), 25-44.
  46. Pisano, G. P.(1990), The R&D Boundaries of the Firm: An Empirical Analysis, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 153-176. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393554
  47. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. & Simth-Doerr, L.(1996), Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393988
  48. Rivers, P. C.(1990), Self-study report for community health organizations(Pub. No. 21-2329), New York: National League for Nusing.
  49. Rogers, M.(2004), Networks, Firm Size and Innovation, Small Business Economics, 22(2), 141-153. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SBEJ.0000014451.99047.69
  50. Roh, D. H., Jeong, Y. K. & Park, H. Y.(2016), An Analysis on the Relative Importance Evaluation of SMEs.Venture Technology Commercialization Problems Using AHP, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Enterprenership, 11(1), 1-12.
  51. SMBA(2014a), Overview of Budget and Fund in 2014, Seoul. SMBA.
  52. SMBA(2014b), Yearly Report, Seoul. SMBA.
  53. Song, J. Y. & Kim, H. C.(2007), Knowledge Transfer and Acquisition Through Strategic Alliances: A Study of Asian Firms' Strategic Alliances in the High-tech Sector, Journal of Strategic Management, 10(1), 1-18.
  54. Spann, M. S., Adams, M., & Souder, W. E.(1993), Improving Federal Technology Commercialization: Some Recommendations From A Field Study, Journal of Technology Transfer, 18(3), 63-74. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02174805
  55. Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, J. P., Vanhaverbeke, W., & De Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6), 423-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.10.001
  56. Williams, J.(2008), The victims of crime, Sociology Review, 17(4), 30-32. Retrieved from http://www.philipallan.co.uk/sociologyreview/index.htm.
  57. Yang, S., Kim, M. & Jung, H.(2011), The Effects of Entrepreneur's Competence and Technology Commercialization Capabilities on Business Performance of Technology-based Start-ups, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 6(4), 195-213. https://doi.org/10.16972/apjbve.6.4.201112.195
  58. 현창희.김서균.박호영.이익찬.강은아(2015), 훤히 보이는 ICT R&D 기술사업화, 대전; 콘텐츠하다.