ABSTRACT

Evidence shows that training can increase product innovation. Yet in most studies survey design omits the differentiation between ‘new' and ‘improved' technical innovation. Thus, our objective is to quantify the impact of training on product and process innovation, especially in terms of new versus improved innovations. We use a national, establishment level, mandatory survey, explicity designed as longitudinal. We use a 2SLS approach to correct for endogeneity of training in the innovation production function. We find that training has no effect on new products, while it augments improved products. Training has a positive and significant effect on new and improved process innovations. A question that comes to mind is: ‘Can we specifically train for new product innovation?' While there are highly cited papers in strategic management, we conclude after scanning the economics literature that a widely accepted theory of new product innovation does not exist. Perhaps, it is possible to train for new product innovation, while remaining cognizant of our inability to predict the recombinant knowledge required for newness. As Polanyi (1958. Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press) surmised: ‘ … invention must be acknowledged to be unpredictable, a quality which is assessed by the intensity of the surprise it might reasonably have aroused’.

摘要

证据表明，培训可以增加产品创新。然而，在大多数研究中，调查设计忽略了“新的”和“改进的”技术创新之间的区别。因此，我们的目标是量化培训对产品和流程创新的影响，尤其是在新创新与改进创新方面。我们使用国家、机构层面、强制性调查，明确设计为纵向调查。我们使用 2SLS 方法来校正创新生产函数中培训的内生性。我们发现培训对新产品没有影响，但它增强了改进的产品。培训对新的和改进的流程创新具有积极和显着的影响。我想到的一个问题是：“我们能否专门针对新产品创新进行培训？” 虽然在战略管理方面有高被引论文，我们在浏览经济学文献后得出结论，广泛接受的新产品创新理论并不存在。也许，有可能为新产品创新进行培训，同时仍然认识到我们无法预测新产品所需的重组知识。正如波兰尼 (1958.个人知识：走向后批判哲学。芝加哥大学出版社）推测：“……必须承认发明是不可预测的，这种品质可以通过它可能合理引起的惊奇程度来评估”。