Upload
esben
View
45
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The fork in the road for innovation measurement: which way should we go?. Jonathan Haskel Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London and CEPR , UKIRC [email protected] National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, 11 th July 2011 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The fork in the road for innovation measurement: which way should we
go?Jonathan Haskel
Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London and CEPR, UKIRC
National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, 11th July 2011Slides plus spares, links to papers etc. in spares section
1
The exam questions(to be answered in final slide…)
• The objective of this session is to identify – recent developments in measuring STI and – what is currently planned for the future.
• Discussion should reveal – what has been successfully and unsuccessfully measured. – What are critical bottlenecks and perceived
opportunities?– What global STI metrics and indicators should NCSES
develop in the near and medium term (the next 5-10 years)?
2
The fork in the road for innovation measurement
• Approach 1: EU-type innovation surveys– Tried for 15+ years in EU, Applied in latest US work– Key questions
• “have you process/product innovated?”• Spending on innovation e.g. software, marketing, training• Potpourri of other questions
– Information for innovation (e.g. importance of information from universities high/med/low)– What stopped you from innovating?
• Approach 2: extended R&D/spending type surveys– Follows Griliches/Jorgenson/CHS/Nat Accounts to measure knowledge capital– Implementation: software and (forthcoming) R&D spend– CHS agenda: need coinvestments with R&D e.g. design, training, marketing,
business process• Current method: potpourri of surveys• UK: intangibles investment survey, similar style to R&D survey• Kauffman
3
What theory do we have to guide measurement?
• Innovation as TFP i.e. output net of tangible K and labour– Logically consistent, suggests measurement (e.g. depreciation,
investment)– Appropriate if all knowledge from free spillovers
• Corrado, Hulten, Sichel – Recognises innovation is routinised in many firms e.g. organised spending
on marketing, training , design etc. – Helps understand innovation in non-R&D industries e.g. finance– Strength: CHS categories are matched to functional bodies in (large) firms
e.g. HR dept for training , marketing dept for brand etc. – Still scope for knowledge spillovers
• Measurement implications– Spending, investment, depreciation, asset and rental prices
European Innovation survey questionnaires
• UK example: product innovation
5
• Process innovation
6US data: Boroush (2010), Other: OECD Measuring innovation (2010), p.26
Spa
in
Icel
and
(200
2-04
)
Irela
nd
Net
herla
nds
Aus
tralia
(200
6-07
)
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom Ita
ly
Bel
gium
Est
onia
Aus
tria
Finl
and
Ger
man
y
US
A (2
006-
8)
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Luxe
mbo
urg
Sou
th A
frica
(200
2...
Por
tuga
l
Nor
way
Den
mar
k
Japa
n (1
999-
2001
)
Chi
le
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Weighted % of companies introducing new or significantly improved product or process: service industries%
Michael Mandel: “You can’t be an innovative economy if only 9% of your companies are innovating”
What do innovation surveys find?
What does the “have you innovated” question measure?
• Other findings– the total is procyclical: rises strongly in IT boom end of 1990s – Item non-response can be very high e.g. 70% to intangible spending
questions– Large firms show poor response rates
• So what does the question measure? Crespi , Criscuolo, Haskel (2007, Appendix 1), UK CIS3 (98-00)– 45% of firms reported technological product/process– they were asked for text describing their innovation– They are given instructions on what to include and exclude e.g.
include “robotised welding”, exclude “packaging” – Analysis of 874 firms showed
7
The “have you process innovated “ question measures new capital equipment
• Summary: – of firms who provided the information, reported process innovation is
mostly new capital spending– This is why measured “innovation” is highest in IT boom– Conjecture: we would get same/better(?) information from a
standard investment survey (+ good deflators) 8
Analysis pf 874 process innovation using firm-reported text
Type of Word Share (%)
HARDWARE word 22.54 SOFTWARE word 15.33
LEAN PROCESS word 8.92 Other (mostly capital equipment) 53.20
Total 100
An alternative approach guided by CHS
• What does this framework suggest you need to know?– Knowledge services within the firm = knowledge capital
stock and rental rates• Innovation spending on broad range of knowledge assets:
software, design etc. • Convert to investment• Convert to real stock: need depreciation and deflators
– Implication: need a spending survey. Can piggy back onto R&D survey or new one (or modify innovation survey)
– Knowledge from outside the firm• Information flows
– Patents is one source: but service sector?– CIS information flows
Possible model: Investment in Intangible Assets Survey(www.ceriba.org.uk/bin/view/CERIBA/InvestIntangAssetsSurvey)
)
Extension of UK R&D survey, Autumn 2009, through ONS: so linked to national accounts data and R&D and CIS surveySurvey follows (for large firms) typical business functions
10
Each section has a filter question which defines the asset with examples
11
Then asks purchased and own-account
12
Finally life lengths
13
14
Life lengths
• All asset life lengths are greater than one year and range between 2.75 years for training and reputation to around 4.5 years for R&D.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
Training Software Reputation & Branding R&D Design Business ProcessImprovement
Asset Category
Ave
rage
ben
efit
lives
(yea
rs)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
ALLUpperMidLower
My answers to the exam questions• The objective of this session is to identify
– recent developments in measuring STI • US innovation survey raises puzzles for survey design. Intangible assets framework gaining
policy traction. Some surveys moving in this direction. – what is currently planned for the future
• Review by OECD of innovation surveys. More UK intangible surveys. Kauffman survey to continue?
• Discussion should reveal – what has been successfully and unsuccessfully measured.
• yes/no innovation questions have not worked. I• Intangible spending can work if asked to business functions, own-account explained.• Business process has not worked in UK survey
– What are critical bottlenecks and perceived opportunities?• Shortages of funding for more surveys. Opportunity (a) in EU, convert Innovation surveys to
intangible spending surveys, (b) in US to convert supplement to BERDIS to intangible spending survey.
• General lesson: take best practice from each survey– What global STI metrics and indicators should NCSES develop in the near and
medium term (the next 5-10 years)?• Intangible spending, life lengths. Integrate with National Accounts work on deflators, service
sector output. 15
Spares
16
What do innovation surveys find?
17
US data: Boroush (2010), Other: OECD Measuring innovation (2010), p.26
Irela
nd
US
A (2
006-
08)
Sou
th A
frica
(200
2...
Icel
and
(200
2-04
)
Net
herla
nds
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Aus
tralia
(200
6-07
)
Kor
ea (2
005-
07)
Est
onia
Italy
Finl
and
Spa
in
Bel
gium
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Luxe
mbo
urg
Aus
tria
Nor
way
Den
mar
k
Chi
le
Por
tuga
l
Ger
man
y
Japa
n (1
999-
2001
)0
5
10
15
20
25
Weighted % companies introducing new or significantly improved product or process: mfring %
Crespi et al, 2008. What do firms write down as their most significant process
innovation?
• Replies – 53% are other, mostly including capital equipment (e.g. steel wire machine, spectrophotometer..)– 23% are hardware related (computer, CAD, PC) and software related (website, email, software, internet etc.)
• Summary: of firms who provided the information, reported process innovation it new capital spending
• Not surprising that measured “innovation” is highest in IT boom• We likely get equivalent information from a standard investment survey (and spend resources on
better deflators) 18
Analysis pf 874 process innovation using firm-reported text
Type of Word Share (%)
HARDWARE word 22.54 SOFTWARE word 15.33
LEAN PROCESS word 8.92 Other (mostly capital equipment) 53.20
Total 100
The future• Take best practice from elements of different surveys
– Innovation surveys• Don’t ask % new, % innovation• Do ask information sources
– R&D/IAS• Do ask for spending • Keep structure of questionaire allied with business function: ICT dept for software,
HR dept for training, Marketing dept for branding• Complement with
– What do firms do? Innovation data at project level ?– What do young firms do? Likely very intangible intensive. Kauffman survey. – What do consultants do, especially intangible consultants?– What do financial institutions do esp young firms, they are trying to value
innovation?– Measuring business process huge challenge
• Chance for NAS/OECD to lead as OECD did on software