Innovation and international )smes)
ساعت ٧:٤٤ ‎ب.ظ روز یکشنبه ٢٠ دی ۱۳۸۸ : توسط : عیسی ذوقی خبوشان

 

Innovation and international
involvement of Dutch SMEs

drs. S.J.A. Hessels
Zoetermeer, July, 2006



This report is published under the SCALES-initiative (SCientific AnaLysis of Entrepreneurship and SMEs), as
part of the 'SMEs and Entrepreneurship programme' financed by the Netherlands Ministry of Economic
Affairs.

Most recent EIM reports and much more on SMEs and Entrepreneurship can be found at: www.eim.nl/smesand-
entrepreneurship.

The responsibility for the contents of this report lies with EIM bv. Quoting numbers or text in papers, essays
and books is permitted only when the source is clearly mentioned. No part of this publication may be copied
and/or published in any form or by any means, or stored in a retrieval system, without the prior written
permission of EIM bv. EIM bv does not accept responsibility for printing errors and/or other imperfections.


INNOVATION AND INTERNATIONAL INVOLVEMENT OF DUTCH SMES

S. Jolanda A. Hessels
EIM Business and Policy Research
Italiëlaan 33, P.O. Box 7001
2701 AA Zoetermeer
The Netherlands
tel. +3179 343 02 00
e-mail: joh@eim.nl
Paper prepared for the International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business

ABSTRACT

This study focuses on the relation between innovation and the international
involvement of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), taking into account
export as well as import activities of firms. The analysis is based on a sample of more
than 1.800 Dutch SMEs using regression analysis. First, a positive impact is found for
innovative investments on international involvement. The results of the analysis also
suggest that there is a significant positive effect of several innovative realisations or
practices on international involvement. More specifically, the results indicate that
product innovations, strategic attention for innovation and inter-firm cooperation are
positively related to export behaviour and export intensity. The results also indicate
that product innovations, process innovations and supplier-driven innovations are
positively related to import behaviour. Further, product innovations as well as
innovations in distribution systems show a positive relation to a firm’s import
intensity. Finally, some evidence is also found that international involvement may
stimulate firms to investment in product innovations and in new distribution systems.

Keywords: internationalisation; innovation; SMEs.


1. INTRODUCTION
Various studies suggest that small firms play an import role in realising technological
innovations and in shaping a nation’s innovation and competitiveness (e.g. Acs, 1996;
Rothwell, 1989; Audretsch & Thurik, 2000; Audretsch, 2002). This is related to the
revival of small businesses in Western economies from the 1970 onwards, commonly
referred to as the emergence of the Entrepreneurial Economy (Audretsch & Thurik
2001; 2004). Increased globalisation and economic integration, developments in ICT
and the increased importance of knowledge in the economic process (Thurik et al.,
2002) have resulted in the re-emergence of small firms and in an increased
specialisation in and importance of knowledge based activities in Western economies
(Audretsch & Thurik 2000, 2001).

Furthermore, because of developments such as globlisation and technological
changes, firms are increasingly involved in international markets. Yet only a small
proportion of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are internationalising. This
is one of the reasons why research on internationalisation of enterprises is
traditionally strongly focused on large multinational enterprises. However, currently
there is more attention for SME internationalisation, as it is recognised that SMEs are
increasingly involved in international markets (European Commission, 2004).

The aim of this study is to explore whether a link exists between the
innovativeness of SMEs and their internationalisation activities (imports and exports).
Research into internationalisation of SMEs used to be primarily focused on exports. In
recent years however, it has been increasingly acknowledged that exporting and
importing are interrelated processes and there is more attention in research for imports
and other inward modes of internationalisation (e.g. Korhonen, 1997; 1999; Liang &
Parkhe, 1997).

A number of studies have explored the relationship between innovation and
internationalisation of SMEs (e.g. Lefebvre & Lefebvre, 2002). These studies mainly
focus on the relationship between innovation and export. However, there are also
indications that a relation exists between innovation and import (Van de Graaff &
Overweel, 2002; Blalock and Veloso, 2005) but there is a lack of empirical studies
that address this relationship. Therefore it was decided to include imports as well as
exports in the analysis.

In this study innovativeness is assessed by a number of indicators, such as the
recent introduction of new products or services, the recent introduction of new or


improved internal business processes and inter-firm cooperation. International
involvement is defined as being involved in exporting and/or importing activities.
First, it is examined whether a positive relation exists between innovation (innovative
investments and innovative practices or realisations) and international involvement of
the enterprise. Second, it is also investigated whether international involvement
influences innovative investments. The analysis is based on SMEs located in the
Netherlands. The data relate to a sample of Dutch SMEs. Elaborating on existing
research into innovativeness of SMEs (e.g. Vermeulen et al., 2003), indicators for
innovation will be used that are specifically developed for SMEs.

The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 provides a discussion of relevant
literature and states the hypotheses. Section 3 elaborates on the main data used to test
the hypotheses. Next, the results of the regression analyses are described in section 4.
In section 5 the conclusions are presented.

2. LITERATURE ON INNOVATION AND INTERNATIONALISATION
2.1 Innovation in SMEs
Innovation involves the targeted renewal of products, services or working methods.
Entrepreneurs innovate in order to be able to better address the demands of customers,
to improve their competitiveness or to achieve better financial results for their
businesses. For this reason innovation is as important for small enterprises as it is to
large firms (Van de Graaff & De Jong, 2004). A growing body of literature states that
small firms are important contributors for realising innovations and for shaping a
country’s innovativeness (e.g. Acs, 1996; Rothwell, 1989; Audretsch & Thurik, 2000;
Audretsch, 2002).

There are a number of differences between SMEs and larger enterprises with
respect to the way innovation takes place (Rothwell, 1991; Rothwell & Dodgson,
1994; Hadjimanolis, 2000). For example, SMEs traditionally have more limited
resources for conducting R&D. Also, innovation is often less formalised in smaller
enterprises. For many small firms, product innovations are not the result of a
structured process or formal strategy (see e.g. Acs & Audretsch, 1990). On the other
hand, SMEs are more flexible than larger firms, which enables them to respond more
quickly to changes in the market than larger firms. For this reason SMEs are often


successful in developing new product-market combinations and in adapting products
to the demands of niche markets or individual customers (Bernardt et al., 2001).

These differences between small and larger enterprises affect the ways in which
innovation is measured in SMEs. Many traditional indicators of innovation, such as
expenditures on R&D are not very useful in measuring innovation in SMEs (e.g.
Vermeulen et al., 2003). That is why specific indicators have been developed for
measuring the innovativeness of SMEs based on insights from literature (see e.g.
Vermeulen et al., 2003; Van de Graaff & De Jong, 2004). In this study the focus will
be on these specific indicators.

2.2 Internationalisation of SMEs
The international activity of SMEs is of increased importance in a globalised
economy. Traditionally, research on internationalisation of enterprises has strongly
focused on large multinational enterprises. Currently there is more attention on SME
internationalisation, since it is recognised that SMEs are increasingly involved in
international markets (European Commission, 2004). Also, it is expected that as a
result of increased globalisation and economic cooperation, SMEs will increasingly
have to deal with international competition, even if the firm itself is active only in the
domestic market (e.g. Reynolds, 1997; Hessels et al., 2005).

Studies on the internationalisation of SMEs initially mainly focused on export
activities (e.g. Bloodgood et al., 1996; McDougall & Oviatt, 1996). More recently
there has been more attention for imports and other inward modes of
internationalisation in the fields of internationalisation research (e.g. Korhonen, 1997;
1999; Liang & Parkhe, 1997). It is important to study imports, for example because
imports may contribute to the upgrading of products or services and may contribute to
improving a firm’s competitiveness.

Research has found that the majority of internationalised enterprises are involved
in outward (e.g. export, foreign direct investment) as well as inward (e.g. import)
international activities (Fletcher, 2001). The majority of Dutch SMEs that are
involved in exporting activities, for example, are also involved in importing activities
(Hessels et al., 2005). It is increasingly recognised that inward and outward modes of
internationalisation are interrelated processes (e.g. Korhonen, 1999; Van de Graaff &
Overweel, 2002). For example, specific foreign inputs may be needed in order to be
able to produce products that are competitive for selling on foreign markets. Also,


foreign purchasing, for example, may stimulate enterprises to start exporting
(Korhonen, 1999; Lefebvre & Lefebvre, 2002; Van de Graaff & Overweel, 2002).
The logic behind this idea is that the step to start exporting may be smaller when an
enterprise already has business contacts in foreign countries. A firm that is involved in
importing maintains a channel to a foreign market through which it gets information
about this market. Lefebvre & Lefebvre (2002) found that import activity is a strong
determinant of the probability for SMEs to export and of the export performance of
SMEs. However, it is also possible that the export activity of firms may result in
(more) imports. It is advisable not to study export and import behaviours of firms as
isolated activities. In the current study, inward (imports) as well as outward (exports)
modes of internationalisation are included in the analysis.

2.3 Innovativeness and internationalisation of SMEs
The link between innovation and trade has been gaining attention for a considerable
length of time in several studies. A number of previous studies (e.g. Gruber et al.,
1967; Baldwin, 1971; Lowinger, 1975; Stern & Maskus, 1981; Hughes, 1986; Vestal,
1989) focusing on the US, the UK and Japan have reported a significant positive
influence of R&D efforts on trade in general. Also, various firm-level studies have
been conducted in which technological orientation of firms is linked to their export
behaviour, focusing on innovative investments as well as innovative realisations or
practices. For example, a study by Hirsch & Bijaoui (1985) found that firms that
undertake R&D-activities are more likely to be exporters as compared to other firms
in the same industry. A study by Sterlacchini (1999), focusing on Italian
manufacturing firms, demonstrated an important impact of R&D activities on export
performance. Kleinknecht and Oostendorp (2002) showed that a firm’s R&D intensity
significantly influences the probability that a firm will be an exporter. Lefebvre &
Lefebvre (2002) found that R&D is an important determinant of the probability that
SMEs (defined as firms with up to 500 employees) will export, and of export
performance.

A number of empirical studies suggest that innovativeness of enterprises is likely
to affect the probability or propensity of enterprises to export, for example because
innovation may improve the international competitiveness of an enterprise (see e.g.
Wakelin, 1998; Sterlacchini, 1999; Roper & Love, 2001; Karagozoglu & Lindell,
1998). For example Karagozoglu and Lindell (1998) argue, in their study on small and


medium-sized technology based firms, that innovative enterprises are more likely to
export, because prospects in international markets are more promising as compared to
prospects in national markets. Also, the potential market for products of innovative
firms may be much wider than is the case for less innovative firms (Autio et al.,
2000). In addition, innovative firms often have to anticipate competitive responses,
which may encourage them to make international commitments (Franko, 1989).
Therefore, innovation may result in (more) international involvement.

In explaining the relation between innovation and export performance it may be
advised to distinguish between product and process innovation (Kleinknecht and
Oostendorp, 2002). Product innovations may make it possible for enterprises to target
new markets. Improved, modified or new products may give enterprises a (temporary)
competitive advantage in foreign markets (Van Dijken & Prince, 1997).

Furthermore, improved or renewed business processes make it possible for firms
to adapt or innovate products, to increase the speed of the production process and to
reduce costs (Van Dijken & Prince, 1997). The acquisition of new process technology
may motivate enterprises to review or revise their strategic direction and market focus
(Bell et al., 2004). This may stimulate enterprises to undertake international business
activities or to accelerate their internationalisation process.

Most previous studies focus only on the link between innovation and export.
Innovation, however, may not only stimulate enterprises to export but may also have
an effect on the propensity of enterprises to import goods or services from abroad. In
order to realise the necessary product and/or process innovation enterprises may need
to purchase foreign inputs. Indications can be found that a positive relationship exists
between innovativeness and a firm’s importing activities (e.g. Blalock & Veloso,
2005; Van de Graaff & Overweel, 2002). However, there is a lack of empirical studies
that address the link between innovation and import at the firm level.

Since a positive relation between innovation (innovative investments as well as
realisations/practices) and the propensity of enterprises to export and/or import is
expected the following hypotheses are formulated in the research design:

Hypothesis 1: Innovative investments of SMEs are positively related to

international involvement.

Hypothesis 1A: Innovative investments of SMEs are positively related to

export behaviour and export intensity.


Hypothesis 1B: Innovative investments of SMEs are positively related to

import behaviour and import intensity.

Hypothesis 2: Innovative realisations or practices of SMEs are positively

related

to international involvement.

Hypothesis 2A: Innovative realisations or practices of SMEs are positively

related to export behaviour and export intensity.

Hypothesis 2B: Innovative realisations or practices of SMEs are positively

related to import behaviour and import intensity

Also, in previous research evidence is found for a reversed influence or an impact of
export on innovation. For example, Hughes (1986) and Zhao and Li (1997) have
found evidence of a mutual or reciprocal relationship between R&D and exports.
Dahlman and Westphal (1982) have demonstrated, focusing on firms from Korea, that
export activity enables firms to gain improvements in product quality. Kleinknecht
and Oostendorp (2002) found that export intensity has a positive impact on the
probability of firms to engage in R&D and on a firm’s R&D intensity. The idea is that
exporting provides access to new markets, knowledge, product ideas and technologies
which may (further) enhance innovative capabilities (see e.g. Cavusgil & Zou, 1994).
Furthermore, foreign market expansion can increase the probability for a firm to pick
up foreign technology spillovers (Kleinknecht and Oostendorp, 2002). The same
arguments may also hold for imports. Therefore, the following hypotheses are
formulated:

Hypothesis 3: The international involvement of SMEs is positively related to

innovative investments.

Hypothesis 3A: Export behaviour and export intensity of SMEs is

positively related to innovative investments.

Hypothesis 3B: Import behaviour and import intensity of SMEs is

positively related to innovative investments.


3. DATA
3.1 Method
The hypotheses are tested by using SME Policy Panel data. This panel is set up and
controlled by EIM Business and Policy Research in the Netherlands. The panel is
used for both cross-sectional and longitudinal research. Twice a year about 2000
Dutch business owners participate in this panel. The panel is stratified in two size-
classes and eight economic sectors of industry.1 For the current research detailed
information on innovativeness and international business activities was collected from
the business owners that participated in the SME Policy Panel in July 2004. The
sample consists of 1,846 Dutch SMEs (firms with up 100 occupied persons). The
hypotheses will be tested using regression analysis.

1 The size classes are: 0 through 9 employees, 10 through 99 employees. The sectors of industry are:
Manufacturing, Construction, Trade, Lodging, Transport, Business services, Financial services and
Other Services.


3.2 Measures
In the following section the measures that are used in the analysis are described.

International involvement

Several measures of international involvement are used in this paper. The measures
were identified by asking the entrepreneurs whether they were currently undertaking
exporting and or importing activities. Enterprises were categorised into the following
categories:

(1) Export and/or import (2004). This variable takes the value 1 for
enterprises that are exporting and/or importing goods or services and 0 for
enterprises that are not involved in these modes of internationalisation.
(2) Export and import (2004). This variable is coded 1 for enterprises that
are involved in exporting as well as importing activities and otherwise
coded 0.
(3) Export (2004). This variable gets the value 1 for enterprises that are
involved in exporting activities, and the value 0 for all other enterprises.
(4) Import (2004). This variable takes the value 1 for enterprises that are
involved in importing activities, and 0 for all other enterprises.
Furthermore, two variables that relate to intensity of exports and imports were also
included in the analysis:

(1) Export intensity (2004). This variable indicates the share of exports in a
firm’s total sales.
(2) Import intensity (2004). This variable indicates the share of imports in a
firm’s total business costs.
Innovativeness

Innovativeness was measured by several dichotomous (0/1) variables developed
specifically for measuring the innovativeness of SMEs.


The following measures for the realisation of innovations were used:


Recent product/service introductions: new to the firm (past 3 years). This
variable is a proxy for product innovation or the renewal of products and/or
services that a firm offers. The variable is coded 1 when the firm introduced at
least one product new to the firm during the last three years; otherwise coded
0.

Recent changes or innovations in internal business processes (past 3
years). This variable is a proxy for process innovation or the renewal or
improvement of the working methods that are used. The variable is coded 1
when the firm has introduced changes or innovations in internal business
processes during the last three years, and coded 0 otherwise.

Recent changes or innovations in distribution systems (past 3 years). This
variable is a proxy for innovations or renewals in patterns of distribution. The
variable is coded 1 when the firm has introduced changes or innovations in
distribution systems during the last three years, and otherwise it is coded 0.

Recent changes or innovations developed by suppliers (past 3 years). This
variable is a proxy for innovations that are driven or proposed by suppliers.
The variable is coded 1 when the firm has introduced changes or innovations
that were developed by suppliers during the last three years, and coded 0
otherwise.
Also, the following measures for innovative practices were included in the
analysis:


Strategic attention for innovation (2004). When the firm is continuously
seeking and providing support to innovative opportunities this variable is
coded 1, and coded 0 in all other cases.

Use of external networks (2004). This variable is coded 1 for enterprises that
maintain regular contacts with an external network of universities, suppliers
and/or knowledge institutes to extend its knowledge base, and is coded 0
otherwise.

Inter-firm cooperation (2004). When the firm formally cooperated with other
firms or institutes to initiate or develop any renewal activities (evidenced by a
formal agreement), this variable is coded 1; otherwise it is coded 0.

Finally, a number of measures were included that refer to a firm’s innovative
investments. One measure relates to a firm’s past expenditures:


Expenditures on innovation (2003). When the firm indicates having spent
money on innovation in 2003 this variable is coded 1; it is coded 0 when this
has not been the case.
The following measures refer to a firm’s future innovative investments:


Plans to invest in new products/services (next 12 months). When the firm
will certainly or probably invest in new products or services in the next 12
months this variable is coded 1, and in all other cases coded 0.

Plans to invest in renewals in internal business processes (next 12
months). When the firm will certainly or probably invest in renewals in
internal business processes in the next 12 months this variable is coded 1, and
coded 0 otherwise.

Plans to invest in new distribution systems (next 12 months). When the
firm will certainly or probably invest in new patterns of distribution in the next
12 months this variable is coded 1, and in all other cases coded 0.
Control variables

The following control variables were used:


Sector of industry: The firms were assigned to one of the following eight
industries: (1) manufacturing, (2) construction, (3) trade, (4) lodging, (5)
transport, (6) financial services (7) business services, and (8) other services.
‘Other services’ was used as a reference category in the regression analysis.

Firm size: Two size classes were distinguished for the SMEs in our sample:
(1) 0-9 employed persons, (2) 10-99 employed persons.

Gender: This variable takes the value 0 for females and the value 1 for males.

4. EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
4.1 Correlation analysis
The bivariate correlation coefficients between the variables for innovation and current
international involvement are presented in Table 1. A significant positive correlation
is found between all indicators for innovation and all categories of internationalised
enterprises. In order to shed more light on the relations between the measures for
innovation and international involvement regression analysis is carried out.


Table 1:
Correlation matrix


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
1 International involvement (2004) 1.00
2 Export and import (2004) 0.58*** 1.00
3 Export (2004) 0.73*** 0.79*** 1.00
4 Import (2004) 0.85*** 0.68*** 0.48*** 1.00
5 Export intensity (2004) 0.49*** 0.56*** 0.67*** 0.34*** 1.00
6 Import intensity (2004) 0.52*** 0.52*** 0.38*** 0.62*** 0.33*** 1.00
7 Expenditures on innovation (2003) 0.17*** 0.18*** 0.19*** 0.16*** 0.13*** 0.11*** 1.00
8
Product/service introductions: new to firm
(past 3 years) 0.24*** 0.24*** 0.28*** 0.19*** 0.18*** 0.17*** 0.34*** 1.00
9
Changes or innovations in internal business
processes (past 3 years) 0.13*** 0.13*** 0.13*** 0.13*** 0.08*** 0.09*** 0.42*** 0.25*** 1.00
10
Changes/innovations in distribution
systems (past 3 years) 0.07*** 0.06** 0.08*** 0.05** 0.07*** 0.09*** 0.24*** 0.25*** 0.22*** 1.00
11
Changes/innovations developed by
suppliers (past 3 years) 0.07*** 0.09*** 0.06** 0.10*** 0.01 0.05** 0.22*** 0.13*** 0.21*** 0.13*** 1.00
12 Strategic attention for innovation 0.18*** 0.17*** 0.21*** 0.14*** 0.16*** 0.11*** 0.40*** 0.36*** 0.41*** 0.25*** 0.28*** 1.00
13 Use of external networks 0.09*** 0.08*** 0.10*** 0.07*** 0.07*** 0.03 0.25*** 0.21*** 0.21*** 0.15*** 0.18*** 0.28*** 1.00
14 Inter-firm cooperation 0.16*** 0.16*** 0.20*** 0.12*** 0.14*** 0.08*** 0.31*** 0.30*** 0.23*** 0.19*** 0.18*** 0.32*** 0.35*** 1.00
15 Invest in new product/services (next 12
months) 0.15*** 0.17*** 0.18*** 0.14*** 0.14*** 0.10*** 0.30*** 0.36*** 0.22*** 0.20*** 0.17*** 0.39*** 0.21*** 0.29*** 1.00
16 Invest in renewals in internal business
processes (next 12 months) 0.12*** 0.13*** 0.13*** 0.12*** 0.07*** 0.08*** 0.32*** 0.23*** 0.42*** 0.21*** 0.15*** 0.37*** 0.23*** 0.24*** 0.32*** 1.00
17 Invest in new distribution systems (next 12
months) 0.08*** 0.10*** 0.12*** 0.06** 0.11*** 0.09*** 0.18*** 0.17*** 0.15*** 0.34*** 0.09*** 0.20*** 0.16*** 0.16*** 0.23*** 0.22*** 1.00
Mean 0.33 0.14 0.21 0.26 6.34 5.53 0.59 0.39 0.69 0.18 0.36 0.63 0.51 0.40 0.45 0.58 0.15
Standard Deviation 0.47 0.35 0.41 0.44 18.60 15.31 0.49 0.49 0.46 0.38 0.48 0.48 0.50 0.49 0.50 0.49 0.35
Observations 1846 1846 1824 1822 1815 1804 1843 1844 1843 1842 1835 1843 1846 1844 1775 1813 1816

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05;


4.2 Regression analysis: impact of innovative investments on international
involvement
First, it is investigated whether innovative investments have an impact on international
involvement. ‘Expenditures on innovation in 2003’ is taken as a proxy for innovative
investments. Table 2 shows the results of the logistic regression analysis when
expenditures on innovation in 2003 are used as an explanatory variable. Various
categories for international involvement are taken as the dependent variable. Considering
the binary nature of the dependent variables, logistic regression analysis is used. For each
of the dependent variables, both the control variables and the predictor variable are
included. It is found that larger enterprises are more likely to undertake international
trading activities than smaller ones (p =
0.01). Also, it can be seen that males show higher
international involvement than females (p =
0.01). Furthermore, manufacturing and trade
are the industries that are most likely to engage in international business activities. The
predictor variable ‘expenditures on innovation in 2003’ has a positive impact on the
categories ‘export and/or import’ and on the combination of export and import. With the
purpose of gaining more insight into differences between the impact of innovation on
export and import activities, export and import are also taken separately as dependent
variables. It can be seen that manufacturing and transport are specifically export-oriented
industries for SMEs, whereas trade and also manufacturing are industries that are likely
to be involved in import activities. The variable ‘expenditures on innovation in 2003’ has
a significant positive impact on ‘export’ as well as ‘import’. Also, the results confirm that
export and import are interrelated processes as the variables ‘import’ as well as ‘import
intensity’ have a significant positive impact on ‘export’, whereas ‘export’ and ‘export
intensity’ have a significant positive impact on ‘import’.


Table 2: Investigating the impact of innovative investments (2003) on international
involvement (2004)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE
EXPORT
AND/OR
IMPORT
(2004)
EXPORT
AND
IMPORT
(2004)
EXPORT
(2004)
IMPORT
(2004)
EXPORT
(2004)
IMPORT
(2004)
Expenditures on innovation in 2003 0.71*** 1.01*** 0.61*** 0.48*** 0.74*** 0.65***
Constant -2.80*** -5.13*** -4.44*** -2.90*** -3.91*** -2.87***
Industry: manufacturing1 1.54*** 2.18*** 1.79*** 0.62** 1.80 0.96***
Industry: construction 0.16 0.19 0.03 0.16 0.04 0.19
Industry: trade 1.32*** 1.44*** 0.50 1.24*** 0.38 1.28***
Industry: lodging -0.69** -1.21* -0.98* -0.38 -1.03** -0.53
Industry: transport 0.46* 0.86** 1.57*** -0.74** 1.10*** -0.63*
Industry: financial services -0.46 0.09 0.64 -0.91** 0.16 -0.77**
Industry: business services 0.13 0.38 1.15*** -0.76** 0.79** -0.47*
Firm size 0.41*** 0.77*** 0.42*** 0.29** 0.51*** 0.34**
Gender 0.66*** 0.70** 0.43* 0.45** 0.46** 0.53***
Import (2004) 2.37***
Export (2004) 2.38***
Import intensity (2004) 0.05***
Export intensity (2004) 0.03***
Nagelkerke R2 0.192 0.229 0.396 0.383 0.307 0.285
-. -2 Log likelihood 2054*** 1236*** 1333*** 1539*** 1444*** 1685***
Observations 1843 1843 1819 1819 1801 1810

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

As a next step in Table 3 ‘export intensity’ and ‘import intensity’ are taken as the
dependent variables using ordinary regression analysis. The Table shows that
‘expenditures on innovation in 2003’ has a significant positive impact on a firm’s export
intensity as well as on a firm’s import intensity in 2004.


Table 3: Investigating the impact of innovative investments (2003) on export
intensity (2004) and import intensity (2004)

 DEPENDENT VARIABLE
EXPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
IMPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
EXPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
IMPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
Expenditures on innovation in 2003 2.53** 1.56* 2.98*** 2.30***
Constant -4.83** -1.78 -3.10 -1.75
Industry: manufacturing1 15.43*** 3.55* 16.23*** 4.93**
Industry: construction -0.55 0.39 -0.64 0.78
Industry: trade 1.55 9.39*** 0.71 9.98***
Industry: lodging 0.11 -0.12 -0.74 -0.65
Industry: transport 11.97*** 0.52 9.95*** 0.21
Industry: financial services 3.13 0.26 1.32 0.34
Industry: business services 1.54 -1.31 0.85 -0.35
Firm size 0.04** -0.01 0.05** -0.01
Gender 1.75 1.80 1.93 2.36**
Import (2004) 13.25***
Export (2004) 14.02***
Import intensity (2004) 0.34***
Export intensity (2004) 0.26***
Adjusted R-sqaure 0.231 0.216 0.219 0.181
Observations 1357 1348 1345 1345

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

4.3 Regression analysis: impact of innovative practices/realisations on international
involvement
In Table 4 the logistic regression results for the impact of innovative practices and
realisations on international involvement are demonstrated. Again, logistic regression
analysis is used because of the binary nature of the dependent variables. The following
picture emerges from the analysis. The variables ‘recent product introductions’, ‘strategic
attention for innovation’ and ‘inter-firm cooperation’ have a significant positive impact
on international involvement.

Table 4 also shows results for the analysis in which ‘export’ and ‘import’ are taken
separately as dependent variables. Some differences appear between the impact of
innovative practices or realisations on export activity and import activity. The variables
‘recent product/service introductions’, ‘strategic attention for innovation’ and ‘inter-firm
cooperation’ have a significant positive impact on export activity. The variables ‘recent
product/service introductions’, ‘recent changes/innovations in internal business
processes’ and ‘recent changes/innovations developed by suppliers’ have a significant
positive impact on the probability of firms to be involved in import activity.


Table 4: Investigating the impact of innovative practices/realisations on
international involvement (2004)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE
EXPORT
AND/OR
IMPORT
(2004)
EXPORT
AND
IMPORT
(2004)
EXPORT
(2004)
IMPORT
(2004)
EXPORT
(2004)
IMPORT
(2004)
Recent product /service introductions: New to
the firm (past 3 years) 0.78*** 0.99*** 0.85*** 0.32** 0.86*** 0.53***
Recent changes/innovations in internal business
processes (past 3 years) 0.17 0.23 -0.08 0.37** -0.03 0.43***
Recent changes/innovations in distribution
systems (past 3 years) 0.03 -0.18
-0.18 0.09
-0.33* 0.01
Recent changes/innovations developed by
suppliers (past 3 years) 0.01 0.23
-0.19 0.25*
-0.02 0.24*
Strategic attention for innovation 0.35** 0.46** 0.66*** -0.05 0.62*** 0.04
Use of external networks 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.12 0.03 0.06
Inter-firm cooperation 0.24* 0.32* 0.43*** -0.03 0.44*** 0.11
Constant -2.83*** -5.28*** -4.65*** -2.93*** -4.06*** -2.91***
Industry: manufacturing1 1.39*** 1.95*** 1.61*** 0.60** 1.59*** 0.87***
Industry: construction 0.17 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.14
Industry: trade 1.20*** 1.23*** 0.35 1.19*** 0.17 1.18***
Industry: lodging -0.86*** -1.34** -1.27** -0.43 -1.32** -0.63*
Industry: transport 0.38 0.80* 1.54*** -0.73** 1.02*** -0.63*
Industry: financial services -0.68** -0.19 0.46 -1.05*** -0.04 -0.95***
Industry: business services -0.06 0.14 0.97*** -0.82*** 0.55 -0.57**
Firm size 0.28** 0.67*** 0.33** 0.22 0.43*** 0.24*
Gender 0.59*** 0.62** 0.37 0.41* 0.39 0.47**
Import (2004) 2.38***
Export (2004) 2.36***
Import intensity (2004) 0.05***
Export intensity (2004) 0.03***
Nagelkerke R2 0.235 0.274 0.442 0.392 0.359 0.303
-. -2 Log likelihood 1960*** 1168*** 1243*** 1503** 1350*** 1633***
Observations 1821 1821 1798 1798 1781 1789

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

In Table 5 the results for the analysis of the impact of innovative practices or realisations
on export intensity and import intensity are displayed. They are based on ordinary
regression analysis. The measures ‘recent product/service introductions’ and ‘strategic
attention for innovation’ have a significant positive impact on a firm’s export intensity.
For import intensity it is ‘recent product/service introductions’ and ‘recent
changes/innovations in distribution systems’ that have a significant positive influence.


Table 5: Investigating the impact of innovative practices/realisations on export
intensity (2004) and import intensity (2004)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE
EXPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
IMPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
EXPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
IMPORT
INTENSITY
(2004)
Recent product /service introductions: New to the firm
(past 3 years) 3.12*** 2.04** 3.10*** 3.27***
Recent changes/innovations in internal business
processes (past 3 years) -0.75 1.48 -0.57 1.81*
Recent changes/innovations in distribution systems
(past 3 years) 0.27 2.69*** -0.80 2.21**
Recent changes/innovations developed by suppliers
(past 3 years) -0.70 -0.39 -0.03 -0.16
Strategic attention for innovation 2.52** -0.67 2.43** -0.32
Use of external networks -0.75 -0.23 -0.70 -0.33
Inter-firm cooperation 1.39 -1.34 1.99* -1.18
Constant -4.87** -1.74 -3.23 -1.93
Industry: manufacturing1 14.72*** 3.42* 15.48*** 4.67**
Industry: construction -0.24 0.32 -0.44 0.73
Industry: trade 1.24 9.24*** 0.40 9.65***
Industry: lodging -0.12 -0.27 -1.02 -0.99
Industry: transport 11.65*** 0.11 9.77*** -0.14
Industry: financial services 2.48 -0.53 0.80 -0.50
Industry: business services 1.08 -1.51 0.41 -0.68
Firm size 0.03 -0.01 0.04** -0.01
Gender 1.64 1.89 1.76 2.34*
Import (2004) 12.85***
Export (2004) 13.96***
Import intensity (2004) 0.33***
Export intensity (2004) 0.25***
R-square 0.239 0.224 0.227 0.190
Observations 1340 1331 1328 1328

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

4.4 Regression analysis: impact of international involvement on innovative
investments
As a next step, the impact of current international involvement on innovative investments
was investigated. Since the data relates only to the year 2004 a number of indicators for
innovative investments are used that relate to future plans to innovate. The dependent
variables are binary in nature and therefore logistic regression analysis was carried out.
Table 6 shows the result for the impact of the variables ‘export and/ or import’ and
‘export and import’ on future plans to innovate. It can be seen that both measures have a
significant positive impact on plans to invest in new products or services in the next 12
months. No evidence is found of an impact of the internationalisation measures on plans
to invest in renewals in internal business processes. Further, whereas the measure ‘export


and/or import’ has no significant impact on plans to invest in new distribution systems, a
significant positive impact is found for a combination of export and import activities.

Table 6:
Investigating the impact of international involvement (2004) on innovative
investments (next 12 months)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE
INVEST IN NEW
PRODUCTS/SERVICE
S (next 12 months)
INVEST IN
RENEWALS IN
INTERNAL
BUSINESS
PROCESSES (next 12
months)
INVEST IN NEW
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS (next 12
months)
Export and/or import (2004) 0.23* 0.05 0.17
Export and import (2004) 0.36** 0.13 0.37*
Constant -1.43*** -1.38*** -2.64*** -2.63*** -4.02*** -3.96***
Recent product /service introductions: New to
the firm (past 3 years)
0.96***
0.95*** 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.11
Recent changes/innovations in internal business
processes (past 3 years)
0.08
0.08 1.25*** 1.25*** 0.18 0.17
Recent changes/innovations in distribution
systems (past 3 years)
0.33**
0.34** 0.50*** 0.50*** 1.53*** 1.54***
Recent changes/innovations developed by
suppliers (past 3 years)
0.18
0.17 -0.03 -0.03 0.09 0.07
Strategic attention for innovation 1.18*** 1.18*** 0.81*** 0.81*** 0.76*** 0.77***
Use of external networks 0.19 0.19 0.37*** 0.37*** 0.39** 0.40**
Inter-firm cooperation 0.54*** 0.53*** 0.33*** 0.33** 0.26 0.26
Industry: manufacturing1 -0.27 -0.30 0.34 0.33 0.55 0.47
Industry: construction -0.41 -0.41 0.01 0.01 -0.04 -0.05
Industry: trade -0.59** -0.58** 0.23 0.23 0.53 0.50
Industry: lodging -0.70*** -0.70*** 0.05 0.05 0.55 0.55
Industry: transport -0.63** -0.64** 0.21 0.20 0.96** 0.94**
Industry: financial services -0.64** -0.65** 0.47* 0.47* 0.82** 0.79**
Industry: business services -0.17 -0.18 0.04 0.04 0.42 0.41
Firm size 0.16 0.15 0.77*** 0.76*** -0.05 -0.07
Gender -0.37** -0.36** -0.02 -0.02 0.19 0.19
Nagelkerke R2 0.311 0.312 0.344 0.344 0.225 0.227
-. -2 Log likelihood 1948*** 1947*** 1908*** 1908*** 1241*** 1239***
Observations 1752 1752 1790 1790 1793 1793

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

In Table 7, the influence of the measures ‘export’ and ‘import’ on future plans to
innovate is investigated separately. A significant positive impact is found for ‘import’ on
plans to invest in new products or services in the next 12 months, and no significant
impact for ‘export’. Similar to results that were found for the other categories of
international involvement (‘import and/or export’ and ‘import and export’) the variable
‘import’ and the variable ‘export’ do not have a significant influence on plans to invest in


renewals in internal business processes. For plans to invest in new distribution systems a
significant positive effect is found for ‘export’ and no significant effect for ‘import’.

Table 7:
Investigating the impact of export (2004) and import (2004) on innovative
investments (next 12 months)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE
INVEST IN
NEW
PRODUCTS/SE
RVICES (next 12
months)
INVEST IN
RENEWALS IN
INTERNAL
BUSINESS
PROCESSES
(next 12 months)
INVEST IN
NEW
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS (next
12 months)
Import (2004) 0.28* 0.09 -0.07
Export (2004) 0.11 0.02 0.42**
Constant -1.43*** -2.67*** -3.95***
Recent product /service introductions: New to the firm (past 3
years) 0.94*** 0.12 0.05
Recent changes/innovations in internal business processes (past
3 years) 0.08 1.25*** 0.17
Recent changes/innovations in distribution systems (past 3
years) 0.35** 0.49*** 1.56***
Recent changes/innovations developed by suppliers (past 3
years) 0.15 -0.03 0.08
Strategic attention for innovation 1.17*** 0.79*** 0.74***
Use of external networks 0.17 0.37*** 0.37*
Inter-firm cooperation 0.56*** 0.33** 0.27
Industry: manufacturing1 -0.32 0.31 0.49
Industry: construction -0.38 0.04 -0.06
Industry: trade -0.59** 0.25 0.53
Industry: lodging -0.69** 0.07 0.54
Industry: transport -0.62** 0.26 0.85**
Industry: financial services -0.59** 0.48* 0.75**
Industry: business services -0.14 0.07 0.37
Firm size 0.15 0.76*** -0.06
Gender -0.38** -0.01 0.20
Nagelkerke R2 0.311 0.343 0.226
-. -2 Log likelihood 1921*** 1890*** 1220***
Observations 1731 1769 1772

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

Finally, Table 8 investigates the impact of ‘export intensity’ and ‘import intensity’ on
future plans to innovate. The table shows that no significant impact is found for these
measures on intentions to invest in innovations in the near future.


Table 8: Investigating the impact of export intensity (2004) and import intensity
(2004) on innovative investments (next 12 months)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE
INVEST IN
NEW
PRODUCTS/SE
RVICES (next 12
months)
INVEST IN
RENEWALS IN
INTERNAL
BUSINESS
PROCESSES
(next 12 months)
INVEST IN
NEW
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS (next
12 months)
Import intensity (2004) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Export intensity (2004) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Constant -1.34*** -2.71*** -3.97***
Recent product /service introductions: New to the firm (past 3
years) 0.94*** 0.14 0.06
Recent changes/innovations in internal business processes (past 3
years) 0.05 1.25*** 0.16
Recent changes/innovations in distribution systems (past 3 years) 0.32** 0.51*** 1.51***
Recent changes/innovations developed by suppliers (past 3 years) 0.16 -0.02 0.09
Strategic attention for innovation 1.19*** 0.79*** 0.75***
Use of external networks 0.18 0.36*** 0.37**
Inter-firm cooperation 0.57*** 0.35*** 0.28*
Industry: manufacturing1 -0.31 0.38 0.62
Industry: construction -0.41 0.00 0.02
Industry: trade -0.61** 0.28 0.56
Industry: lodging -0.75*** 0.04 0.59
Industry: transport -0.69** 0.30 0.94**
Industry: financial services -0.64** 0.45 0.88**
Industry: business services -0.21 0.07 0.51
Firm size 0.15 0.79*** -0.06
Gender -0.39** 0.02 0.15
Nagelkerke R2 0.310 0.342 0.219
-.
-2 Log likelihood 1898*** 1869*** 1203***
Observations 1708 1746 1749

Standardised regression coefficients; ***: p<0.01; **: p<0.05; *: p<0.10.
1 Industry category “other services” used as base case

Based on the above support is found for Hypothesis 1, since expenditures on innovation
are positively related to all categories of international involvement. Also, some support is
found for Hypothesis 2, as a significant positive influence is found for various measures
of innovative practices/realisations on various categories of international involvement.
Finally, the results of this study also provide some support for Hypothesis 3, which states
that international involvement may contribute to a firm’s innovativeness.


5. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
In this study the relationship between innovation and international involvement was
explored. International involvement was defined as the extent to which enterprises are
importing and/or exporting goods or services. While existing literature on the
internationalisation of enterprises is strongly focused on export and other outward modes
of internationalisation, inward modes of internationalisation (imports) were also included
in the analysis. Also, literature on the relationship between innovation and
internationalisation has thus far mainly focused on export.

First, it was investigated whether innovation has a positive impact on international
involvement. The results of this study reveal that when firms invested money in
innovation in 2003, it had a significant positive impact on their international involvement
in 2004.

Looking more specifically at innovative realisations or practices it is found that a
number of measures for innovation have a significant positive effect on international
involvement. More specifically, the results suggest that SMEs that recently realised
product innovations are more likely to be involved in international trading activities than
other SMEs. In accordance with previous studies it is found that product innovations are
related to export behaviour and to a firm’s export intensity (e.g. Karagozoglu & Lindell,
1998; Lefebvre & Lefebvre, 2002). Also, a significant positive impact of recent product
innovations on the propensity of firms to import and on import intensity is illustrated.
This supports the idea that the realisation of product innovations may require specific
foreign inputs, such as technologies or knowledge. It is also found that recent product
innovations may stimulate enterprises to combine both export and import activities.

Furthermore, according to the results of this study, recent innovations in business
processes have a significant positive impact on the probability for enterprises to import.
Also, some evidence is found of a positive impact of process innovations on a firm’s
import intensity. One explanation for the positive effect of recent process innovations on
the import behaviour and import intensity of SMEs is that process innovations are often
initiated in order to realise cost reductions. One of the most important reasons for SMEs
to import is to get access to know how and technology and to buy products at lower


prices than would be possible on the national market (Hessels et al., 2005). Thus, imports
may provide firms with access to the necessary know how/technology or to (cheap)
inputs needed for realising the required innovations in internal business processes. A
focus on internal processes and cost reduction may also imply that enterprises are not so
much concentrating on seeking foreign market expansion, which may explain that no
significant effect was found on the propensity of enterprises to export.

Also, the results of this study indicate that when a firm realises innovations that are
initiated by suppliers this may enhance their involvement in import activity. With this
type of innovation firms are stimulated by their suppliers to adopt e.g. new technologies
or applications in their firm. Again the argument is that this type of innovations possibly
requires foreign purchases or knowledge. Another result of this study is that the
realisation of innovations in distribution systems only shows a significant positive
relation to a firm’s import intensity and not to other categories of international
involvement.

Furthermore, it is also found that the innovative practice ‘strategic attention for
innovation’ has a significant positive impact on the likelihood of enterprises to be
involved in international markets. Enterprises with strategic attention for innovation are
more likely to be involved in international trading activities than other enterprises.
Strategic attention for innovation is positively related to export behaviour, export
intensity and to the combination of both export and import activities. No significant
impact is found on import behaviour and import intensity. Thus, strategic attention for
innovation seems to be mainly related to an outward-oriented international focus. In
general it requires more effort for a firm to export than to import, which is for example
illustrated by the fact that enterprises barely face barriers in the import process (Hessels
et al., 2005). In order to export their products or services enterprises normally need to
develop an export plan and export strategy. It is possible that enterprises with strategic
attention for innovation are more ready or capable to devoting strategic attention to and
preparing themselves for the export process.

In addition, the results of this study reveal that inter-firm cooperation has a significant
positive impact on the probability of enterprises to be involved in export and/or import


activity. A positive impact for this variable was found on the combination of export and
import activities. This may suggest that when a firm cooperates in the field of innovation,
it may require or stimulate import activity on the one hand and result in export
opportunities on the other hand. Looking at export and import separately, the effect of
inter-firm cooperation is significant positive on exports while no significant effect is
found on imports. Also, some evidence if found of a positive impact on a firm’s export
intensity. Finally, the results of the analysis suggest that keeping up regular contacts with
external networks of universities, suppliers and/or knowledge institutes does not have a
significant effect on the international involvement of SMEs.

Next, it was also investigated whether international involvement has an impact on
innovative investments. It is found that ‘export and/or import’ and a combination of
export an import have a significant positive impact on a firm’s intentions to invest in new
products or services in the coming year. Looking at export and import separately it is
found that SMEs that import are more likely to invest in new products or services in the
next year as compared to other SMEs, whereas no significant effect was found for SMEs
that export. This may illustrate that when a firm imports goods or services from abroad, it
may get access to knowledge, technologies or product ideas in the foreign market that
could stimulate the firm to (further) invest in renewals of its own products or services. No
evidence is found of an impact of international involvement on plans to invest in
renewals or improvements in internal business processes. Finally, the results of this study
indicate that exporters as well as firms that combine export and import activities are more
likely to invest in new distribution systems in the near future as compared to other firms.

Based on the analysis it may be concluded that it is useful to include imports in the
analysis when studying the relationship between innovation and internationalisation.
Several measures of innovation have an effect on import behaviour and import intensity
and the impact of innovation on import differs in a number of ways from that of
innovation on export. Of course import and export are different activities. Imports relate
to the buying or purchasing function whereas exports are per definition sales oriented.
But, for example, the significant positive effect of a number of measures for innovation
on the probability of enterprises to be involved in a combination of export and import


activity may imply that there is some interaction effect between imports and exports.
Also, in accordance with previous findings (e.g. Lefebvre & Lefebvre 2002), the separate
analysis for export, in which import was concluded as a control variable, and for import,
in which export was included as one of the controls, illustrate that there is a clear link
between export and import. However, in the current analysis it was not possible to
identify directions of causality between export and import since both indicators were only
measured for the year 2004.

The results of this study give a number of options for possible linkages that may exist
between innovation and international involvement. For example, the results suggest that
recent innovations in products or services or recent process innovations may stimulate
SMEs to be involved in import activities. Then, import activity is suggested (in addition
to recent product innovations) to further enhance investments in product innovations.
More research is needed in order to assess the complex relationship between international
business activities and innovation, and to better understand the connection between
inward and outward modes of internationalisation.

Using an analysis over a longer period of time would provide better insight into the
relation between innovation and internationalisation behaviour of firms. For example,
because entrepreneurs were only questioned at one point in time it is not possible to
assess whether firms that have indicated intention to invest in innovations in the next 12
months will actually make these investments. In the analysis presented above only two
modes of internationalisation (import and export) are included in the analysis. Future
research could also take account of other modes of internationalisation such as foreign
direct investments and international cooperation. This study only focused on SMEs in the
Netherlands. The results should also be tested for SMEs in other countries.


REFERENCES

Acs, Z. (ed) (1996), Small Firms and Economic Growth, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Acs, Z.J. and D. Audretsch (1990), Innovation and Small Firms, MIT Press, Cambridge.

Audretsch, D. (2002), ‘The dynamic role of small firms: Evidence from the US’, Small
Business Economics, Vol. 18, Nos. 1-3, pp. 13-40.

Audretsch, D.B. and Thurik, A.R. (2000) ‘Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century:
from the managed to the entrepreneurial economy’, Journal of Evolutionary
Economics, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.17–34.

Audretsch, D.B. and Thurik, A.R. (2001) ‘What is new about the new economy: sources
of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies’, Industrial and
Corporate Change, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.267–315.

Audretsch, D.B. and Thurik, A.R. (2004) ‘A model of the entrepreneurial economy’,
International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.143–166.

Autio, E., H.J. Sapienza and J.G. Almeida (2000), ‘Effects of age at entry, knowledge
intensity and imitability on international growth’, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 909-924.

Baldwin, R.E. (1971), ‘Determinants of the commodity structure of U.S. trade’,
American Economic Review, Vol. 61, pp. 126-146.

Bell, J., D. Crick and S. Young (2004), ‘Small Firm Internationalization and Business
Strategy. An exploratory study of ‘knowledge intensive’ and traditional
manufacturing firms in the UK’, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 22,
No. 1, pp. 23-56.

Bernardt, Y., J. Borger and R. Braaksma (2001), De innovativiteit van de Nederlandse
industrie (The innovativeness of the Dutch manufacturing sector), EIM,
Zoetermeer.

Blalock, G. and F. Veloso (2005), Trade, technology transfer and productivity growth:
The neglected role of imports, Working Paper, Cornell University.

Bloodgood, J.M., Sapienza, H.J. and J.G. Almeida (1996), ‘The internationalization of
new high-potential U.S. ventures: antecedents and outcomes’, Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 61-76.

Cavusgil, S.T. and S. Zou (1994), ‘Marketing Strategy-Performance Relationship: An
Investigation of the Empirical Link in Export Market Ventures’, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 1-21.

Dahlman, C.J. and L.E. Westphal, L.E. (1982), ‘Technological effort in industrial
development’. In: Stewart, F., and J. James (Eds), The Economics of New
Technology in Developing Countries, Frances Pinter, London.

Dijken, J.A. Van and Y.M. Prince (1997), Zicht op de relaties tussen marktwerking,
innovativiteit en export. Theorie en praktijk (Insight into the relation between the
functioning of the market, innovativeness and export. Theory and practice),
Ministry of Economic Affairs, The Hague.

European Commission (2004), Internationalisation of SMEs, Observatory of European
SMEs; Report 2003 No. 4, Report submitted to the Enterprise Directorate General
by KPMG Special Services, EIM Business & Policy Research, and ENSR;
Brussels.


Franko, L.G. (1989) ‘Global corporate competition: Who’s winning, who’s losing, and
the R&D factor as one reason why’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, No.
5, pp. 449-474.

Fletcher, R. (2001), ‘A holistic approach to internationalisation’, International Business
Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 25-49.

Gruber, W.H., Mehta, D. and R. Vernon (1967), ‘The R&D factor in international trade
and international investments of United States Industries’, Journal of Political
Economy, Vol. 75, pp. 20-37.

Hadjimanolis, A. (2000), ‘An investigation of innovative antecedents in small firms in the
context of a small developing country’, R&D Management, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp.
235-245.

Hessels, S.J.A., M.J. Overweel and Y.M. Prince (2005), Internationalisering van het
Nederlandse MKB. Bestaande en gewenste inzichten (Internationalisation of
Dutch SMEs. Existing and required insights), EIM, Zoetermeer.

Hirsch, S. and I. Bijaoui (1985), ‘R&D intensity and export performance: a micro view’,
Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Vol. 121, pp. 238-251.

Hughes, K. (1986), Exports and Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Karagozoglu, N. and M. Lindell (1998), ‘Internationalization of small and medium-sized
technology-based firms: An exploratory study’, Journal of Small Business
Management, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 44-60.

Kleinknecht A. and R. Oostendorp (2002), ‘R&D and export performance: Taking
Account of Simultaneity’, in: Kleinknecht, A. and P. Mohnen (2002), Innovation
and firm performance: econometric explorations of survey data, Palgrave,
London.

Korhonen, H. (1997), ‘Inward-outward connections’, in: Macharzina, M. Oesterle and J.
Wolf, editors (1997), Global Business in the Information Age, Stuttgard: 23rd
Annual EIBA Conference.

Korhonen, H. (1999), Inward-Outward Internationalization of Small and Medium
Enterprises, Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics and Business
Administration.

Lefebvre, E. and L.-A. Lefebvre (2002), ‘Innovative Capabilities as Determinants of
Export Performance and Behaviour: A Longitudinal Study of Manufacturing
SMEs’, in: Kleinknecht, A. and P. Mohnen (2002), Innovation and firm
performance: econometric explorations of survey data, Palgrave, London.

Liang, N. and A. Parkhe (1997), ‘Importer Behavior: The Neglected Counterpart of
International Exchange, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 28, No.
3, pp. 495-530.

Lowinger, T.C. (1975). ‘The technology factor and the export performance of U.S.
manufacturing industries’, Economic Inquiry, Vol. 13, pp. 221-236.

McDougall, P.P., and B.M. Oviatt 1996, ‘New venture internationalization, strategic
change, and performance: a follow-up study,’ Journal of Business Venturing, Vol.
11, No. 1, pp. 34-40.

Reynolds, P.D. (1997), ‘New and Small Firms in Expanding Markets’, Small Business
Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 78-84.


Roper, S. and J.H. Love (2001), Innovation and export performance: Evidence from the
UK and German manufacturing plants, NIERC, Belfast.

Rothwell, R. (1989), ‘Small Firms, Innovation and Industrial Change’, Small Business
Economics, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 51-64.

Rothwell, R. (1991), ‘External networking and innovation in small and medium-sized
manufacturing firms in Europe’, Technovation, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 93-112.
Rothwell, R. abd M. Dodgson (1994), ‘Innovation and Size of Firm’. In: Dodgson M. and


R. Rothwell (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation, Edward Elgar,
Aldershot, pp. 310-324.
Sterlacchini, A (1999) ‘Do innovative activities matter to small firms in nonR&
Dintensive industries? An application to export performance’, Research
Policy, Vol. 28, No. 8, pp. 819-832.

Stern, R.M. and K. E. Maskus (1981), ‘Determinants of the structure of U.S. foreign
trade, 1958-76’, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 11, pp. 207-224.

Thurik, A.R., Wennekers, A.R.M. and Uhlaner, L.M. (2002) ‘Entrepreneurship and
economic performance: a macro perspective’, International Journal of
Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 1, pp.157–179.

Van de Graaff, C.C. and J.P.J. de Jong (2004), Innovatie in het MKB. De voedings- en
genotmiddelenindustrie (Innovation within SMEs. The food and beverages
industry), EIM, Zoetermeer.

Van de Graaff, C.C. and M.J. Overweel (2002), Het belang van importen voor het MKB
(The importance of importing for SMEs), EIM, Zoetermeer.

Vestal, J.E. (1989), ‘Evidence on the determinants and factor content characteristics of
Japanese technology trade, 1977-1982’, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.
71, pp. 565-571.

Vermeulen, P.A.M., O’Shaughnessy K.C. and J.P.J. De Jong (2003), Innovation in
SMEs: An Empirical Investigation of the Input-Throughput-Output-Performance
Model, EIM, Zoetermeer.

Wakelin, K (1998) ‘Innovation and Export Behaviour at the Firm Level’,
Research
Policy, Vol. 26, Nos. 7-8, pp. 829-841.
Zhao, H. and H. Li (1997), ‘R&D and export: an empirical analysis of Chinese
manufacturing firms’, Journal of High Technology Management, Vol. 8, pp. 89


106.

The results of EIM's Research Programme on SMEs and Entrepreneurship are published in the following series:
Research Reports and Publieksrapportages. The most recent publications of both series may be downloaded at:
www.eim.net.

Recent Research Reports and Scales Papers

H200605 27-6-2006 Uncertainty avoidance and the rate of business ownership across 21 OECD
countries, 1976-2004
H200604 22-6-2006 The Impact of New Firm Formation on Regional Development in the Netherlands
H200603 21-6-2006 An Ambition to Grow
H200602 21-6-2006 Exploring the informal capital market in the Netherlands: characteristics,
mismatches and causes
H200601 22-5-2006 SMEs as job engine of the Dutch provate economy
N200520 7-3-2006 High Performance Work Systems, Performance and Innovativeness in Small Firms
N200519 1-2-2006 Entrepreneurial Culture as Determinant of Nascent Entrepreneurship
N200518 26-1-2006 Social security arrangements and early-stage entrepreneurial activity; an empirical
analysis
N200517 23-1-2006 Determinants of Growth of Start-ups in the Netherlands
N200516 23-1-2006 Entrepreneurship in the old en new Europe
N200515 23-1-2006 Entrepreneurial engagement levels in the European Union
N200514 23-1-2006 Latent and actual entrepreneurship in Europe and the US: some recent
developments
N200513 20-1-2006 Determinants of self-employment preference and realisation of women and men
in Europe and the United States
N200512 20-1-2006 PRISMA-K: een bedrijfstakkenmodel voor de korte termijn
N200511 19-1-2006 Strategic Decision-Making in Small Firms: Towards a Taxonomy of Entrepreneurial
Decision-Makers
N200510 11-1-2006 Explaining female and male entrepreneurship at the country level
N200509 11-1-2006 The link between family orientation, strategy and innovation in Dutch SMEs: a
longitudinal study
N200508 11-1-2006 From nascent to actual entrepreneurship: the effect of entry barriers
N200507 11-1-2006 Do entry barriers, perceived by SMEs, affect real antry? Some evidence from the
Netherlands
H200503 6-12-2005 The Impact of New Firm Formation on Regional Development in the Netherlands
N200506 5-9-2005 Entrepreneurial intentions subsequent to firm exit
N200505 5-9-2005 The relationship between successor and planning characteristics and the success
of business transfer in Dutch SMEs
H200502 31-8-2005 Product introduction by SMEs
H200501 12-5-2005 Kosten van inhoudelijke verplichtingen voor het bedrijfsleven
N200504 21-4-2005 Does Self-Employment Reduce Unemployment?
N200503 7-4-2005 Zipf's Law in Economics
N200502 31-3-2005 Early-stage entrepreneurial activity in the European Union: some issues and
challenges
N200501 31-3-2005 Scale effects in HRM Research
H200408 23-12-2004 Aantallen ondernemers en ondernemingen
H200409 22-12-2004 Armoede onder zelfstandige ondernemers


H200407 9-12-2004 How do firms innovate?
H200406 9-11-2004 Perception of competition : A measurement of competition from the perspective
of the firm
H200405 27-10-2004 Arbeidsproductiviteit in de Nederlandse dienstensector
H200402 4-10-2004 Verklaren en voorspellen van naleving: uitwerking van een ex ante
schattingsmethode
H200401 4-10-2004 Explaining variation in nascent entrepreneurship
H200404 3-9-2004 Academic entrepreneurship : a source of competitive advantage
H200403 14-6-2004 How can leaders trigger bottom-up innovation?
H200311 29-4-2004 Transforming an idea into a strategic decision in SMEs
H200310 16-3-2004 Business dynamics and employment growth: A cross-country analysis
H200309 3-3-2004 The National Systems of Innovation Approach and Innovation by SMEs
H200308 3-3-2004 Understanding the Role of Willingness to Cannibalize in New Service
Development
H200307 3-3-2004 Factors influencing export development of Dutch manufactured products