Search

Firm innovation is of vital importance to New Zealand's economy, but we understand little about how different human resource (workforce) factors influence innovation approaches (product/services innovation, process innovation, and innovation speed). We explore three human resource (HR) factors: workforce knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), workforce attraction, and workforce retention, using a sample of New Zealand private sector firms (n = 402). Regression analysis shows all HR factors are significant predictors of all innovation approaches. Further analysis shows workforce KSAs is dominant towards product/service innovation, workforce attraction is dominant towards process innovation, and workforce retention is dominant towards innovation speed. Moderating effects by firm size are found showing small-sized firms out innovate large-sized firms when workforce KSA are high, despite small-sized firms having, on average, weaker HR factors and innovation approaches than large-sized firms. We highlight the organisational implications across small – and large-sized firms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We first examine the effect of having innovation cooperation arrangements on the productivity level among firms with innovation activities. Then, we examine whether a firm's productivity level is affected by its number and types of innovation cooperation partners among those with innovation cooperation arrangements. Data on Norwegian firms with innovation activities is used. In the analysis, we differentiate between small and large firms. The estimation results show that unlike small firms, large firms can benefit from cooperation arrangements by achieving productivity improvements. Using the group of internal partners as the reference category, the results show that the productivity level is relatively higher in the short term among all and small firms that had cooperation arrangements with competitors or other enterprises in their sector, and relatively lower both in the short and medium term among all and small firms that had arrangements with partners in the academic sector. This level is relatively higher among large firms that had arrangements with consultants or consulting enterprises, and relatively lower among large firms that had arrangements with commercial labs or R&D-enterprises, in the medium term. We also find that most effects of the number of different types of cooperation partners are not significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]