| To increase the effectiveness of innovation in the real sector,Russian government uses the"force to innovate" tactics of the largest State-owned enterprises,obliging them to develop and implement innovative development programs(IDP).The main expected effects are acceleration of economic modernization and additional demand for innovations.The work presents an analysis of the results of monitoring of scientific,technical and innovation activities of the largest domestic state-owned companies in connection with their implementation of design,survey work and econometric modeling across Russian regions.Interim results of state initiatives to stimulate innovation in the relevant segment of the business sector are assessed.We note the negative effects of excessive "coercion to innovate",and also provides recommendations for improving the policy in this area.Conducted monitoring observations indicate that the modernization of fixed assets through the acquisition of modern machinery and equipment remains a real priority for most companies.Technological borrowing,along with investing in research and development,significantly prevails over other possible innovation development mechanisms,including support for small and medium enterprises,staff training and education,cooperation with other subjects of the innovation system within technology platforms,and venture financing.The results of the innovation activities of a group of state-owned companies implementing IDP are generally comparable to the average Russian companies;at the same time,the obtained data do not allow to evaluate the directions of implementation of the patent strategies of the surveyed companies and the level of novelty of the innovative products produced and exported.According to our findings,the effect of organizational transformations and investments may occur over the next decade.However,the quality of company management,employee loyalty to organizational change,and corporate culture that supports innovation will play a much more significant role in improving the final performance.Among the measures proposed are improving public policy by differentiation of incentives based on organizational specifics;promoting the development of cooperation between state-owned companies and other actors(small innovative firms,universities,etc.);coordination of innovation strategies with various areas of corporate policy,as well as the integration of design and engineering into road maps of technological development of sectors,markets and regions.We use econometric model(panel data)to estimate Innovation Performance of Russian State-owned enterprises across Russian regions,we found very interesting phenomenon R&D expenses with low magnitude negatively correlated with Innovation Performance-which may indicate that State-owned enterprises have low efficiency of using R&D budget.Insignificance of R&D variable factor of Russian SOE's R&D expenses can be explained by its inefficient industrial distribution across industries presented in previous chapters of our paper.Looking at the values and significance of both the main effects R&D of and the interactive terms,it can be concluded that R&D effect on innovation performance could be due to the particular nature of industries,in Russian economy SOE's R&D expenses are concentrated in "low to medium tech" sectors,with(relatively)strong focus on extractive industries(oil,natural gas etc.).Second,is the relationship between R&D and innovation performance in Russian SOE could be explained by the form of R&D,which had been predominantly through government direct budgetary financing rather than effective corporate innovation management system. |
PDF Full Text Request