Advertisement

The Moderating Effect of Indulgence on the Relationships Among Global Innovation Index Indicators

  • Basak CetingucEmail author
  • Eyup Calik
  • Fethi Calisir
Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Management and Industrial Engineering book series (LNMIE)

Abstract

National level innovation has been studied prominently. Global indices are utilized while evaluating country level innovation. Global Innovation Index (GII) is one of the most commonly used indices in this context. Moreover, cultural dynamics also affect innovation level. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions (HCD) is one of the outstanding guidelines on cultural dynamics of countries. In this study, infrastructure, institutions, and human capital and research are designated input indicators of GII while knowledge and technology output and creativity output are chosen output indicators of GII. Moreover, indulgence is considered as a moderator variable from HCD. Our main aim is to examine the relationships among global innovation index factors and investigate the moderating effect of indulgence on these relationships. For this purpose, we proposed a conceptual model to explore these relationships. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was employed in order to conduct path analysis with data from official web sites. The results show that all hypotheses related to GII factors are supported, and a moderating effect of indulgence is observed on some of the relationships. These findings indicate that countries with sufficient innovation input make the transformation to innovation outputs. Furthermore, innovation leaders should be aware of societies have more indulgent score moderate several relationships.

Keywords

Global innovation index Hofstede cultural dimensions Structural equation modeling Moderating Relationships Factors 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Beugelsdijk, S., Maseland, R., & Van Hoorn, A. (2015). Are scores on Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture stable over time? A cohort analysis. Global Strategy Journal, 5(3), 223–240.  https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Edquist, C. (1997). Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organizations. London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  4. Furman, J. L., & Hayes, R. (2004). Catching up or standing still? National innovative productivity among ‘follower’ countries, 1978–1999. Research Policy, 33(9), 1329–1354.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.09.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Furman, J. L., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2002). The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy, 31, 899–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gaskin, J. (n.d). Group differences. 2016.Google Scholar
  7. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.02.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26.  https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  11. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The globe study of 62 societies. Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Minkov, M. (2009). Predictors of differences. Differences, no. 2006, 152–179.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397109332239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Minkov, M., & Hofstede, G. (2011). The evolution of Hofstede’s doctrine. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 18(1), 10–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Moonen, P. (2017). The impact of culture on the innovative strength of nations: A comprehensive review of the theories of Hofstede, Schwartz, Boisot and Cameron and Quinn Piet Moonen. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(7), 1149–1183.  https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nelson, R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Sohn, S. Y., Kim, D. H., & Jeon, S. Y. (2016). Re-evaluation of global innovation index based on a structural equation model. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 28(4), 492–505.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2015.1104412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. “The Global Innovation Index”. (2017). https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report.
  20. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2011). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Industrial Engineering Department, Engineering FacultyYalova UniversityYalovaTurkey
  2. 2.Industrial Engineering Department, Management FacultyIstanbul Technical UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options