Differences Between High-Growth and Low-Growth ICT Firms in Germany

Chapter

Abstract

The information and communication technology (ICT) is a cross-section technology. ICT accelerates structural change and has a revitalizing effect especially in advanced economies. For Germany, it is therefore important not to leave behind on the fast-growing ICT market and to produce a high number of fast-growing ICT companies itself. In this analysis, 200 ICT companies based in Germany were interviewed to find out which company-specific factors have a measurable direct impact on corporate growth. Also, regional determinants were included. The analysis found that firm age and size, export ratio, expenditure on research and development, product innovation, venture capital, and concrete cooperation between companies have a directly positive effect on the growth of ICT companies. Surprisingly, active participation in an ICT cluster has a negative impact on company growth, or, to be more precise, it appears that predominant low-growth ICT companies operating active in clusters. This leads to interesting implications for policymakers, which see the active support of cluster development as an adequate instrument to stimulate innovations.

Keywords

Venture Capital Knowledge Spillover Venture Capital Investor Innovative Enterprise Cluster Initiative 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adams, J.; Jaffe, A.B. (1996), Bounding the Effects of R&D: An Investigation Using Matched Establishment-Firm Data, NBER Working Papers 5544.Google Scholar
  2. Aghion, P.; Howitt, P. (1992), A model of growth through creative destruction, Econometrica, 60, 323–351.Google Scholar
  3. Aghion, P.; Howitt, P. (1997), A Schumpeterian perspective on growth and competition, in Creps, D.; Wallis, K.F. (eds), Advances in Economics and Economietrics: Theory and Appkications, 2, 279–317, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  4. Almeida, P. Kogut, B. (1997), The exploration of technological diversity and geographic localization of innovation, Small Business Economy 9, 21–31.Google Scholar
  5. Armington, C.; Acs, Z.J. (2002), The determinants of regional variation in new firm formation, Regional Studies, 36 (1), 33–45.Google Scholar
  6. Audretsch, D.; Feldman, M. (1996), R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production, American Economic Review, 86, 630–640.Google Scholar
  7. Audretsch, D.B.; Thurik, A.R. (2000), Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century: From the managed to the entrepreneurial economy, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 267–315.Google Scholar
  8. Audretsch D. B.; Lehmann E.; Warning S. (2005), University Spillovers: Strategic Location and New Firm Performance, Research Policy, 34, 1113–1122.Google Scholar
  9. Audretsch, D.B.; Klomp, L.; Santarelli, E.; Thurik, A.R. (2004), Gibrat’s Law: Are the Services Different?, Review of Industrial Organization, 24 (3), 301–324.Google Scholar
  10. Audretsch, D.B.; Lehmann, E. (2005), Mansfield’s Missing Link: The Impact of Knowledge Spillovers on Firm Growth, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30 (1–2), 207–210.Google Scholar
  11. Baptista, R. (2000), Do innovations diffuse faster within geographical clusters? International Journal of Industrial Organization 18, 515–35.Google Scholar
  12. Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) (2010a), http://www.kompetenznetze.de/initiative/die-geschaftsstelle (03.08.2010)
  13. Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) (2010b), Aufnahmenkriterien , Initiative Kompetenznetze Deutschland, http://www.kompetenznetze.de/initiative/die-aufnahme/aufnahmekriterien_initiativekompetenznetzedeutschland.pdf(23.08.2010)
  14. Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) (2009), Monitoring-Report Deutschland Digital, Der deutsche IKT Standort im internationalen Vergleich, document online available: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Redaktion/PDF/I/it-gipfel-monitoring-deutschland-digital-langfassung,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf
  15. Canina, L.; Enz, C.; Harrison, J. (2005), Agglomeration effects and strategic orientations: evidence from the U.S. lodging industry, Academy of Management Journal 48, 565–581.Google Scholar
  16. Capello, R. (2002), Entrepreneurship and spatial externalities: theory and measurement, The Annals of Regional Science, 36, 387–402.Google Scholar
  17. Carlino, J. (2001), Knowledge Spillovers: Cities’ Role in the New Economy, Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Issue Q4, 17–26.Google Scholar
  18. Caselli, S.; Gatti, S.; Perrini, F. (2008), Are Venture Capitalists a Catalyst for Innovation?, European Financial Management 15 (1), 92–111.Google Scholar
  19. Cassia, L.; Colombelli, A. (2009), Growth factors in medium-sized enterprises: the case of an Italian region, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, DOI  10.1007/s11365-009-0129-0, published online.
  20. Chung, W.; Kanins, A. (2001), Agglomeration effects and performance: a test of the Texas lodging industry, Strategic Management Journal 22, 969–988.Google Scholar
  21. Czarnitzki, D.; Hottenrott, H. (2009), R&D Investment and Financing Constraints of Small and Medium-Sized Firms, Small Business Economics, DOI:  10.1007/s11187-009-9189-3.
  22. Davidsson, P.; Achtenhagen, L.; Naldi, L. (2007), What Do We Know About Small Firm Growth?, Parker, Simon (eds.), The Life Cycle of Entrepreneurial Ventures, Springer: New York.Google Scholar
  23. De Rassenfosse G; Van Pottelsberghe De La Potterie D. (2011) On the price elasticity of demand for patents, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  24. Deeds, D.L.; Decarolis, D.; Coombs, J.E. (1997), The impact of firm-specific capabilities on the amount of capital raised in an initial public offering: evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of Business Venturing 12, 31–46.Google Scholar
  25. Engel, D.; Keilbach, M. (2007), Firm Level Implications of Early Stage Venture Capital Investment-An Empirical Investigation, Journal of Empirical Finance 14 (2), 150–167.Google Scholar
  26. Evans, D.S. (1987), Tests of Alternative Theories of Firm Growth, The Journal of Political Economy, 95, (4), 657–674.Google Scholar
  27. Folta, T. B.; Cooper A. C.; Baik Y. S. (2006), Geographic cluster size and firm performance; Journal of Business Venturing 21 (2), 217–242.Google Scholar
  28. Gibrat, R. (1931), Les Inegalités economiques: applications aux inégalités des richesses, à la concentration des entreprises, aux populations des villes, aux statistiques des familles, etc., d'une loi nouvelle: la loi de l'effect proportionnel. Paris: Sirey.Google Scholar
  29. Gilbert, B. A.; Mcdougall, P. P.; Audretsch, D. B. (2008), Clusters, knowledge spillovers and new venture performance: An empirical examination, Journal of Business Venturing, 23 (4), 405–422.Google Scholar
  30. Giuliani, E. (2005), The Structure of Cluster Knowledge Networks: Uneven and Selective, not Pervasive and Collective, Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics, Working Paper No. 05–11.Google Scholar
  31. Glaeser, E.; Kallal, H.; Scheinkman, J.; Shleifer, A. (1992) Growth in cities, Journal of Political Economy, 100, 1126–1152.Google Scholar
  32. Gorter, J.; Kok, S. (2009), Agglomeration Economies in the Netherlands, CPB Discussion Papers 124, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.Google Scholar
  33. Hall, B. H. (1992), Investment and Research and Development at the Firm Level: Does the Source of Financing Matter, NBER Discussionpaper 4096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  34. Harhoff, D. (1997), Are There Financing Constraints for R&D and Investment in German Manufacturing Firms?, FS IV 97–45, Wissenschaftszentrum für Sozialforschung, Berlin.Google Scholar
  35. Hellman, T.; Puri, M. (2000), The Interaction Between Product Market and Financing Strategy: The Role of Venture Capital, The Review of Financial Studies 13 (4), 959–984.Google Scholar
  36. Howitt, P.; Aghion (1998), Capital accumulation and innovation as complementary factors in long-run growth, Journal of Economic Growth, 3, 111–130.Google Scholar
  37. Hyytinen, A.; Pajarinen, M. (2004), Financing of technology-intensive small businesses: some evidence on the uniqueness of the ICT sector, Information Economics and Policy, 17 (1), 115–132.Google Scholar
  38. Jaffe, A.; Trajtenberg; M., Henderson, R. (1993), Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers, as evidence by patent citations, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 863–911.Google Scholar
  39. Jonas, M. (2006), Brauchen regionale Wirtschaftscluster lebendige ‚Kooperation’? Ein Überblick anhand einer Auswahl empirischer Studien zu europäischen Hochtechnologieclustern, Institut für Höhere Studien (IHS), Wien, Reihe Soziologie 79.Google Scholar
  40. Jovanovic, B. (1982), Selection and the Evolution of Industry, Econometrica, 50 (3), 649–670.Google Scholar
  41. Kogut, B.; Zander, U. (1992), Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology, Organization Science, 3, 383–397.Google Scholar
  42. Kortum, S.; J. Lerner (2000), Assessing the impact of venture capital on innovation, Rand Journal of Economics, 31 (4), 674–692.Google Scholar
  43. Lasch, F.; Le Roy, F.; Yami, S. (2005), Survival and growth of start-ups in innovation and knowledge-based branches: an empirical analysis of the French ICT sector”, in Vinig, G.T.; Van der Voort, R.C.W. (eds), The Emergence of Entrepreneurial Economics, Research on Technological Innovation and Management, 9, 101–29.Google Scholar
  44. Lawson C; Lorenz E. (1999), Collective learning, tacit knowledge and regional innovative capacity. Regional Studies 33 (4), 305–317.Google Scholar
  45. Link, A.N.; Rees, J. (1990), Firm size, university based research, and the returns to R&D, Small Business Economics, 2 (1), 25–31.Google Scholar
  46. Lucas, R.E. (1988), On the Mechanics of Economic Development, Journal of Monetary Economics 22, 3–42.Google Scholar
  47. Malmberg, A.; Sölvell, Ö.; Zander, I. (1996), Spatial Clustering, Local Accumulation of Knowledge and Firm Competitiveness, Geografiska Annaler, Series B. 78B (2).Google Scholar
  48. Mansfield, E. (1962), Entry, Gibrat’s law, innovation, and the growth of firms. American Economic Review 52, 1023–51.Google Scholar
  49. Mansfield, E. (1995), Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations: Sources, Characteristics and Financing, Review of Economics & Statistics, 77 (1), 55–65.Google Scholar
  50. Marshall, A. (1920), Principles of Economics, Macmillan: London.Google Scholar
  51. Maskell, P. (2001), Towards a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Geographical Cluster, Industrial & Corporate Change, 10 (4), 921–943.Google Scholar
  52. Munroe T.; Craft, G.; Hutton, D. (2002), A Critical Analysis of the Local biotechnology Industry Cluster — Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, & Solano in California, Research Monograph prepared for a Consortium of Bay Area Organizations.Google Scholar
  53. Myers, S.; Majluf, N. (1984), Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions. When Firms Have Information Investors Do Not Have, Journal of Financial Economics, 13 (2), 187–221.Google Scholar
  54. Peretto, P.F. (1998), Technological change, market rivalry, and the evolution of the capitalist engine of growth, Journal of Economic Growth, 3, 53–80.Google Scholar
  55. Peretto, P.F. (1999a), Firm size, rivalry and the extent of the market in endogenous technological change, European Economic Review, 43, 1747–1773.Google Scholar
  56. Peretto, P.F. (1999b), Industrial development, technological change, and long-run growth, Journal of Development Economics, 59, 389–417.Google Scholar
  57. Romer, P.M. (1986), Increasing returns and long-run growth, Journal of Political Economy, 94, 1002–1037.Google Scholar
  58. Santarelli, E. Klomp, L. Thurik, A. (2006), Gibrat´s Law: An Overview of the Empirical Literature, in Santarelli, E. (eds.) (2006), Entrepreneurship, Growth, and Innovation, The Dynamics of Firms and Industries, Springer: New York.Google Scholar
  59. Schmitz, JR. J.A. (1989), Imitation, entrepreneurship, and long-run growth, Journal of Political Economy, 97, 721–739.Google Scholar
  60. Schumpeter, A. (1911), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma.Google Scholar
  61. Sorenson, O.; Audia P. G. (2000), The social structure of entrepreneurial activity: geographic concentration of footwear production in the United States, 1940–1989, The American Journal of Sociology, 106 (2), 424–462.Google Scholar
  62. Stiglitz, J.; Weiss, A. (1981), Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information, American Economic Review 71 (3), 393 – 410.Google Scholar
  63. Stuart, T. E.; Sorenson O. (2003), The geography of opportunity: Spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms, Research Policy 32, 229–253.Google Scholar
  64. Van Oort, F.; O. Atzema (2004), On the conceptualization of agglomeration economies: The case of new firm formation in the Dutch ICT sector, The annals of Regional Science, 38, 263–290.Google Scholar
  65. Wagner, J. (2002), The Causal effects of exports on firm size, Economic Letters, 77, 287–292.Google Scholar
  66. Winker, P. (1999), Causes and Effects of Financing Constraints at the Firm Level, Small Business Economics, 12 (2), 169–181.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Institute for International Economic RelationsUniversity of WuppertalWuppertalGermany

Personalised recommendations