• A cross-country analysis of business innovation modes using CIS-Eurostat 2014 regional data. • Comprehensive investigation of internal and external DUI and STI drivers. • Empirical results confirm regional variations in the impact of innovation modes on innovation outputs. • Our findings also support the hypothesis of technological nuances of innovation; in particular DUI drivers are very important for most types of innovation output. • Specific policy actions are required to support the effective use of DUI (and STI) innovation modes and drivers across European regions.

We investigate whether public support for innovation increases the propensity of SMEs in traditional manufacturing industries to cooperate for innovation—in particular, for incremental innovation—with other firms and external knowledge providers. Using data from seven EU regions, we find that support programmes do not promote cooperation with competitors, marginally promote cooperation with customers and suppliers and strongly promote cooperation with knowledge providers. These findings suggest that, in this case, the role of public policy is systems conforming rather than systems creating. Innovation support programmes can assist SMEs in traditional manufacturing industry to consolidate and/or extend their innovation ecosystems beyond familiar business partners by promoting cooperation with both private and public sector knowledge providers. Finally, our findings suggest that evaluation studies of innovation support programmes should be designed to capture not only input and/or output additionality but also behavioural and systemic effects.

Drawing on a longitudinal data of Spanish manufacturing firms, this study explores the persistence of technological innovation and exports, their potential complementary relations and feedback effects. Empirical results suggest the presence of both true and spurious state dependence in all three activities. True state dependence in technical innovation and exports implies intertemporal spillovers relevant to the evaluation of innovation and export policy measures. However, given that results also suggest spurious state dependence, firm-specific characteristics should be taken into account in promoting technological innovations and exports. In addition, we find a strong complementarity between product and process innovation both through a contemporaneous effect and via unobserved firm characteristics. However, concerning complementarity between innovation and exports, results suggests complementarity only through contemporaneous effects. Finally, we find no support for the causal link from past product and process innovations to current export activities.

A growing literature discusses the effectiveness of business innovation modes on innovation performance. In particular, the innovation mode based on the application of science and technology drivers -STI- (e.g. R&D; collaboration with universities) is analysed and compared to the mode based on learning-by-doing, by-using and by-interacting -DUI- (e.g. teamwork, collaboration with suppliers). These modes express the archetypical strategies firms use to innovate. The literature has long identified specificities of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). However, in this study we segment this group of enterprises and inquire the peculiar innovation modes adopted by these firms as we expect SMEs to be less homogeneous than typically expected. Here, we distinguish between internal STI and DUI drivers, and external STI and DUI drivers as we expect firms of different sizes to compete through different combinations of drivers. Complementarily, we investigate the impact of these drivers on innovation output across these types of firms. The results show the effective adoption of internal STI drivers across micro/small firms, and the well-rounded approach taken by medium-sized firms. Large firms show a more limited effectiveness of external STI and DUI drivers, which seems to be linked to a selective approach to innovation.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate how both technological and non-technological innovations influence export intensity in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). In addition, the authors report results for each firm-size category of micro-, small and medium firms, and thus reflect SME heterogeneity. Design/methodology/approach: The research methodology is based on the analysis of the Eurobarometer 2014 data set from 28 EU Member States, Switzerland and the USA covering the period 2011–2014. To statistically test the three defined research hypotheses on individual and joint effects of both types of innovation, a multiple treatment model was estimated. The advantage of this empirical strategy is that it takes into account the endogeneity of both technological and non-technological innovations. Moreover, the authors employ the production approach or the direct test of complementarity between technological and non-technological innovations. Findings: Empirical findings indicate that technological innovations positively affect export intensity in small and medium firms, whereas non-technological innovations exert no influence on export intensity, regardless of the firm size. Moreover, the results from the direct test suggest no evidence of the complementary effects of technological and non-technological innovation on export intensity. Research limitations/implications: The authors infer that SMEs would benefit more from public support targeting both exports and innovations than micro-firms, as the sunk costs of exports are too high for the latter. However, public support aimed at reducing fixed costs of exports could be particularly beneficial for micro-firms. Originality/value: The research fills a literature gap on the joint impact of technological and non-technological innovations on export intensity while taking into account the endogeneity of innovation activities and SME heterogeneity.