Abstract
This paper analyses innovation patterns of Austrian Low- and Medium Tech (LMT-) SMEs and how these companies are supported by public policy. It adds evidence to the claim that Low-Tech SMEs are actually more innovative than commonly thought and that supporting these industries might yield positive effects. The Austrian innovation system is diversified, yet programmes that aim at LMT innovations are scarce. LMT SMEs are surprisingly innovative, but rarely use available support measures, indicating that these measures may be too High-Tech-oriented. Relatively high additionality effects and impacts can be achieved, if innovative LMT projects are fostered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
PILOT = Policy and Innovation in LOw-Tech; see also http://www.pilot-project.org.
Hirsch-Kreinsen (Hirsch-Kreinsen, 2004: 7) assumes that single Low-Tech firms and companies do not necessarily fall behind companies from High-Tech sectors in terms of innovative activities. However, Hirsch-Kreinsen does not backup this claim with numbers.
Care has to be taken when interpreting the results, though. Because of requirements set by the sponsors of the study, the wording for the question is slightly different from that of the CIS 3 study. In addition, a number of activities were included on the questionnaire as “innovations” which are not innovations in the strict sense of the Oslo manual. However, where aspects would fall under the Oslo definition and where they would have counterparts to the CIS 3 questionnaire, it is nonetheless possible to compare the figures. Only such aspects are drawn upon in this paper.
Again, this does not mean that the High-Tech oriented support programmes are of no use, but that the aspect of Low-Tech innovation and its support has been largely left out.
HTLs are a type of high school special to the Austrian education system. Fifteen year old graduates from a middle school can enroll in such a school, which takes 5 years (1 year more than a regular high school) to complete and which has a strong focus on engineering subjects. Graduates from a HTL are entitled to hold the degree of an “engineer” (not to be confused with a chartered engineer who graduated from university) and have a basic knowledge in certain technological fields, such as mechanical engineering.
The methodology applied for the evaluation consisted of a telephone survey using a standardized questionnaire for all project participants, 12 open qualitative interviews (with programme stakeholders as well as with external experts for R&D policy in Tyrol) and a document analysis. Due to the fact that some companies worked on more than one TIC-Net project, a total of 67 completed questionnaires were aimed for on a per project base. Fifty four interviews were eventually conducted, leading to a response rate of 81%. All of the 24 participants of the training schemes were interviewed.
References
Austrian Institute for SME Research (2005). Regional and balance sheet database. Vienna, Austria: Austrian Institute for SME Research.
Bender, G. (2005). Innovation in Low-Tech companies—Towards a conceptualisation of non-science-based innovation. In H. Hirsch-Kreinsen, D. Jacobsen, & S. Laestadius (Eds.), Low-Tech innovation in the knowledge economy (pp. 85–98). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
Bornett, W., & Radauer, A. (2005). Innovation—Erfolgsfaktor für KMU. (“Innovation—Success factor for SMEs.”). (Press release). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Institute for SME Research.
Bornett, G., & Sheikh, S. (2005). FFG—Bereich Basisprogramme—Projektevaluierung 2005. (“FFG—General Programmes—Evaluation 2005”). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Institute for SME Research.
Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. N., & Vonortas, N. S. (2000). Research partnerships. Research Policy, 29, 567–586.
Hagedoorn, J., & Schakenraad, J. (1994). The effect of strategic technology alliances on company performance. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 291–309.
Herbig, P., & Kramer, H. (1993). Low tech innovation: Resurveying the basic meaning of innovation. Management Decision, 31(3) (MCB University Press Limited).
Hirsch-Kreinsen, H. (2004). Low-Technology: Ein innovationspolitisch vergessener Sektor (“Low-Technology: A sector forgotten in innovation policy”).Working paper no. 2. University of Dortmund, Germany: Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences.
Hirsch-Kreinsen, H., Jacobsen, D., Laestadius, S., & Smith, K. (2005). Low and medium technology industries in the knowledge economy: The analytical issue. In H. Hirsch-Kreinsen, D. Jacobson & S. Laestadius (Eds.), Low-Tech innovation in the knowledge economy (pp. 11–30). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
Klette, J. T., Moen, J., & Griliches, Z. (2000). Do subsidies to commercial R&D reduce market failures? Microeconometric evaluation studies. Research Policy, 29, 471–495.
Messmann, K., & Schiefer, A. (2002). Innovation in österreichischen Unternehmen, 1998–2000. Ergebnisse der dritten Europäischen Innovationserhebung (“Innovation in the Austrian business sector 1998–2000. Results from the third community innovation survey”). Vienna, Austria: Statistik Austria.
Messmann, K., & Schiefer, A. (2005). Forschung und experimentelle Entwicklung (F&E) im Unternehmenssektor 2002 (“Research and development in the Austrian business enterprise sector 2002”), Statistische Nachrichten 2005(6), pp. 492–515. Vienna, Austria: Statistik Austria.
OECD (1997). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data. Oslo Manual (2nd ed.). Paris, France: OECD.
Peneder, M. (2001). Entrepreneurial competition and industrial location. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Radauer, A., Fischl, I., & Sheikh, S. (2005). Zwischenevaluierung der Intitiative TIC-NET (“Mid-term evaluation of the initiative TIC-Net”). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Institute for SME Research.
Raymond, W., Mohnen, P., Palm, F., & Schim van der Loeff, K. (2006). A classification of Dutch manufacturing based on a model of innovation. De Economist, 154, no. 1, 2006 (85–105), Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer 2006.
Sandven, T., Smith, K., & Kaloudis, A. (2005). Structural change, growth and innovation: The roles of medium and Low-Tech industries, 1980–2000. In H. Hirsch-Kreinsen, D. Jacobson & S. Laestadius (Eds.), Low-Tech innovation in the knowledge economy. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
Schibany, A., Böheim, M., Dachs, B., Falk, R., Gassler, H., Hölzl, W., et al. (2006). Österreichischer Forschungs- und Technologiebericht 2006 (“Austrian Science and Technology Report 2006”). Vienna, Austria: The Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT), the Federal Ministry for Education, Science and Culture (bm:bwk) & the Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour (BMWA).
Subrahmanya, S. M. B. (2005). Pattern of technological innovations in small enterprises: A comparative perspective of Bangalore (India) and Northeast England (UK). Technovation, 25, 269–280.
Tunzelmann, N. V., & Acha, V. (2005). Innovation in “Low-Tech” industries. In: J. Fagerberg, D. V. Mowery & R. R. Nelson, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 407–432). New York: Oxford University Press.
Weidinger, S. P., Gassler, H., Gruber, M., Polt, W., & Schibany, A. (2001). Innovationsbericht 2001 (“Report on innovation 2001”). Vienna, Austria: BMWA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Radauer, A., Streicher, J. Low-Tech, innovation and state aid: the Austrian case. Int Entrep Manag J 3, 247–261 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-006-0028-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-006-0028-6