Innovation in large versus small companies: insights from the US wood products industry

Author(s):

Ernesto R. Wagner (SAIL LLC, Santiago, Chile)

Eric N. Hansen (Department of Wood Science and Engineering, College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA)

Citation:

Ernesto R. Wagner, Eric N. Hansen, (2005) "Innovation in large versus small companies: insights from the US wood products industry", Management Decision, Vol. 43 Issue: 6, pp.837-850, https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510603592

Downloads:

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2812 times since 2006

Abstract:

Purpose

– Aims to explain the effect of firm size on company innovation inside one industry context: the wood products industry.

Design/methodology/approach

– The strategic issues under study (innovation, corporate strategy) are typically managed by the firm's top executives. Also important is the fact that the response rates of questionnaires targeting this group are generally very low. Consistently, the data for the project were obtained from 43 in‐person interviews with top executives of wood products companies of different sizes in two countries, i.e. the USA and Chile.

Findings

– Finds that firm size does impact the innovation type pursued by companies, at least in the wood products industry. Indeed, large companies of this study clearly outrun smaller companies in process innovation. However, our analysis also shows that small companies level the field with larger companies when considering all three innovation types (process, product, business systems).

Practical implications

– The capital enjoyed by large companies allows them to excel in process innovation. This article suggests that managers of small companies should compete in a different arena from large companies and emphasize product and business systems innovation, as they can do very well in these areas even with limited resources.

Originality/value

– There is very little research about innovation in the wood products industry. This article contributes to the knowledge in this area, also providing new insights about the validity of Schumpeter's assertions regarding the role of company size in innovation.

Keywords:

Innovation, Product innovation, Process management, Wood products, United States of America, Chile

Type:

Research paper

Publisher:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright:

© Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2005
Published by Emerald Group Publishing Limited

References

Citation:

Ernesto R. Wagner, Eric N. Hansen, (2005) "Innovation in large versus small companies: insights from the US wood products industry", Management Decision, Vol. 43 Issue: 6, pp.837-850, https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510603592

Downloads:

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2812 times since 2006

Keywords:

Innovation, Product innovation, Process management, Wood products, United States of America, Chile

Type:

Research paper

Publisher:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright:

© Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2005
Published by Emerald Group Publishing Limited

References

1.

Acs, Z.J. and Audretsch, D.B. (1987), “Innovation, market structure, and firm size”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 567‐74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

2.

Amato, L., Ryan, J.M. and Wilder, R.P. (1981), “Market structure and dynamic performance in US manufacturing”, Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 1105‐10. [Google Scholar][Crossref] [Infotrieve]

3.

Anderson, R. and Hansen, E. (2003), An Assessment of Innovation in the North American Forest Industries, Summary Report for Respondents, Forest Business Solutions, Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, p. 15. [Google Scholar]

4.

Audretsch, D.B. and Acs, Z.J. (1991), “Innovation and size at the firm level”, Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 739‐44. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

5.

Bertschek, I. and Entorf, H. (1996), “On nonparametric estimation of the Schumpeterian link between innovation and firm size: evidence from Belgium, France, and Germany”, Empirical Economics, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 401‐26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

6.

Boer, H. and During, W.E. (2001), “Innovation, what innovation? A comparison between product, process, and organizational innovation”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 22 Nos 1‐3, pp. 83‐107. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

7.

Brown, S. and Eisenhardt, K. (1995), “Product development: past research, present findings, and future directions”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 343‐78. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

8.

Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T. and Zhao, Y. (2002), “Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 31, pp. 515‐24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9.

Capon, N., Farley, J.U. and Hulbert, J.M. (1994), “Strategic planning and financial performance: more evidence”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 85‐111. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

10.

Cohen, L. (1995), Quality Function Deployment: How to Make QFD Work for You, Addison‐Wesley, Reading, MA, p. 348. [Google Scholar]

11.

Cohen, D. and Sinclair, S. (1989), “An inventory of innovative technology use in North American processing of wood structural panels and softwood lumber”, Canadian Journal of Forest Resources, Vol. 19, pp. 1629‐33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12.

Cohen, W.M. and Klepper, S. (1996), “Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: the case of process and product R&D”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 78 No. 2, pp. 232‐43. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

13.

Cohen, W.M., Levin, R.C. and Mowery, D.C. (1987), “Firm size and R&D intensity: a re‐examination”, The Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 543‐65. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

14.

Cooper, R.G. (1996), “Overhauling the new product process”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 465‐82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

15.

Cooper, R.G. (2000), “Doing it right: winning with new products”, IVEY Business Journal, Vol. 64 No. 6, pp. 54‐60. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

16.

Cumming, B.S. (1998), “Innovation overview and future challenges”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 21‐9. [Google Scholar] [Link] [Infotrieve]

17.

Damanpour, F. (1987), “The adoption of technological, administrative, and ancillary innovations: impact of organizational factors”, Journal of Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 675‐88. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

18.

Damanpour, F. (1991), “Organizational innovation: a meta‐analysis of effects of determinants and moderators”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 555‐90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

19.

Damanpour, F. (1996), “Organizational complexity and innovation: developing and testing multiple contingency models”, Management Science, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 693‐716. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

20.

Damanpour, F. and Gopalakrishnan, S. (2001), “The dynamics of the adoption of product and process innovation in organizations”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 45‐65. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

21.

Denton, D.K. (1999), “Gaining competitiveness through innovation”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 82‐5. [Google Scholar] [Link] [Infotrieve]

22.

Dillman, D.A. (2000), Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, NY, p. 464. [Google Scholar]

23.

Fombrun, C. and Shanley, M. (1990), “What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 233‐58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

24.

Guth, W.D. and MacMillan, I.C. (1986), “Strategy implementation versus middle management self‐interest”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 7, pp. 313‐27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25.

Han, J.K., Kim, N. and Srivastava, R.K. (1998), “Market orientation and organizational performance: is innovation a missing link?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, October, pp. 30‐45. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

26.

Hansen, E., Seppälä, J. and Juslin, H. (2002), “Marketing strategies in the Western softwood sawmill industry”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 52 No. 10, pp. 19‐25. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

27.

Hovgaard, A. and Hansen, E. (2003), “Innovativeness in the forest products industry”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 26‐33. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

28.

Johne, A. (1999), “Successful market innovation”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 6‐11. [Google Scholar] [Link] [Infotrieve]

29.

Juslin, H. and Hansen, E. (2003), Strategic Marketing in the Global Forest Industries, Academic Press, Corvallis, OR, p. 610. [Google Scholar]

30.

Kamien, M.I. and Schwartz, N.L. (1975), “Market structure and innovation: a survey”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1‐37. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

31.

Kärnä, J., Hansen, E., Juslin, H. and Seppälä, J. (2002a), “Green marketing of softwood lumber in Western North America and Nordic Europe”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 52 No. 5, pp. 34‐40. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

32.

Kärnä, J., Juslin, H., Ahonen, V. and Hansen, E. (2002b), “Green advertising – greenwash or a true reflection of marketing strategies?”, Greener Management International, Vol. 33, Spring, pp. 59‐70. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

33.

Lee, L., Cohen, D. and Maness, T. (1999), “Markets and technology in Western Canadian sawmills”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 49 No. 7/8, pp. 36‐42. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

34.

Lunn, J. (1982), “Research and development and the Schumpeterian hypothesis: alternate approach”, Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 209‐17. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

35.

McKee, D.O., Varadarajan, P.R. and Pride, W.M. (1989), “Strategic adaptability and firm performance: A market‐contingent perspective”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53, July, pp. 21‐35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

36.

McNulty, P.J. (1974), “On firm size and innovation in the Schumpeterian system”, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 627‐32. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

37.

Motwani, J., Dandridge, T., Jian, J. and Soderquist, K. (1999), “Managing innovation in French small and medium‐sized enterprises”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 106‐14. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

38.

Niemilä, J. (1993), Acta Forestalia Fennica 240, The Society of Forestry in Finland, The Finnish Forest Research Institute, Helsinki. [Google Scholar]

39.

North, D. and Smallbone, D. (2000), “The innovativeness and growth of rural SMEs during the 1990s”, Regional Studies, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 145‐57. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] [Infotrieve]

40.

Porter, M.E. (1996), “What is strategy?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 6, pp. 61‐78. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

41.

Rich, S. (1986), “Recent shifts in competitive marketing strategies in the US forest products firms and the increased importance of key marketing functions”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 36 No. 7/8, pp. 34‐44. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

42.

Rogers, E.M. (1995), Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed., The Free Press, New York, NY, p. 519. [Google Scholar]

43.

Scarborough, N. and Zimmerer, T. (2002), Effective Small Business Management: An Entrepreneurial Approach, Prentice‐Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, p. 752. [Google Scholar]

44.

Schumpeter, J. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper, New York, NY, p. 381. [Google Scholar]

45.

Snow, C. and Hambrick, D. (1980), “Measuring organizational strategies: Some theoretical and methodological problems”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 527‐38. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

46.

Stock, G.N., Noel, N.P. and Fischer, W.A. (1996), “Firm size and technological innovation in the computer modem industry”, Academy of Management Proceedings, Vol. 56, pp. 383‐7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47.

Thomas, R. (1995), New Product Success Stories: Lessons from Leading Innovators, Wiley, New York, NY, p. 352. [Google Scholar]

48.

US Department of Commerce (2003), State of the Nation, US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, available at: www.stat‐usa.gov/econtest.nsf (accessed March 15, 2003). [Google Scholar]

49.

Utterback, J.M. (1994), Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation: How Companies Can Seize Opportunities in the Face of Technological Change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, p. 253. [Google Scholar]

50.

Vlosky, R.P., Westbrook, T. and Kofi, P. (2002), “An exploratory study of internet adoption by primary wood products manufacturers in the Western United States”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 52 No. 6, pp. 35‐43. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

51.

Wagner, E.R. and Hansen, E.N. (2002), “Methodology for evaluating green advertising of forest products in the United States: a content analysis”, Forest Products Journal, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 17‐23. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

52.

West, C.D. and Sinclair, S.A. (1992), “A measure of innovativeness for a sample of firms in the wood household furniture industry”, Forest Science, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 509‐24. [Google Scholar] [Infotrieve]

53.

Winer, R.S. (1999), Marketing Management, Prentice‐Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, p. 551. [Google Scholar]

54.

Yip, G.S. (1995), Total Global Strategy: Managing for Worldwide Competitive Advantage, Prentice‐Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, p. 318. [Google Scholar]

Further Reading

1.

Crow's Forest Industry Journal (2002), Vol. 57, January/February. [Google Scholar]

For further details logon website :
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/00251740510603592