Innovation performance measurement: research into Czech business practice

Figures & data

Table 1. Overall statistics of the questionnaire surveys.

	Research 2009	Research 2010	Research 2011	Research 2013–2015
Target population	Manufacturing enterprises in the Czech Republic
Research sample	Innovative manufacturing enterprises in the Czech Republic
Number of enterprises addressed	250	800	650	2,877
By e-mail	230	750	650	2,807
By personal visit	30	50	0	70
Number of undelivered e-mails	13	35	27	98
Number of partially-completed questionnaires	4	9	13	153
Number of completed questionnaires	53	139	212	354
Real return	21.2%	17.4%	34.1%	12.30%

Source: Author’s research.

Table 2. Distribution of enterprises engaged in research surveys.

Category/year	Research 2009	Research 2010	Research 2011	Research 2013–2015
	n = 53	n = 139	n = 212	n = 354
Employees
Micro	16%	43%	24%	7%
Small	9%	32%	36%	29%
Medium	45%	13%	24%	46%
Large	30%	12%	16%	18%
Turnover
Micro	15%	67%	44%	21%
Small	26%	15%	24%	23%
Medium	38%	11%	17%	41%
Large	21%	7%	11%	15%

Source: Author’s research.

Figure 1. The ratio of innovative enterprises in the total number of enterprises engaged in CZSO surveys by size (CZSO, 2010, 2012, 2014) (Source: Data are retrieved from Czech Statistical Office).

Table 3. Implemented innovations.

Innovation/Frequency	Research 2009	Research 2010	Research 2011	Research 2013–2015
	n = 53	n = 139	n = 212	n = 354
Product innovation	32%	28%	33%	38%
Process innovation	30%	25%	27%	29%
Organisation innovation	17%	22%	19%	12%
Marketing innovation	20%	23%	21%	21%
None	1%	2%	0%	0%

Source: Author’s research.

Table 4. Importance of particular innovation types for enterprises.

	Average	Standard deviation	Modus	Evaluation 1–5 (%)					Σ 1 + 2 (%)
				1	2	3	4	5
2010 (n = 139)
Product innovation	2.2857	1.0302	2	18	29	14	12	27	47
Process innovation	2.2419	0.9619	2	18	28	16	10	28	46
Organisational innovation	2.3485	0.9127	2	15	28	26	8	23	43
Marketing innovation	2.3226	0.9801	2	16	27	19	10	28	43
No innovation	2.3125	0.8455	3	4	7	7	1	81	11
2011 (n = 212)
Product innovation	2.1845	1.2101	1	37	33	16	7	7	70
Process innovation	2.2000	0.8623	2	22	43	27	6	2	65
Organisational innovation	2.4379	1.1762	2	25	34	21	14	6	59
Marketing innovation	2.4426	1.0167	2	18	35	30	12	5	53
2013–2015 (n = 354)
Product innovation	2.5426	1.4769	2	32	33	21	11	3	65
Process innovation	2.4442	0.9926	2	33	27	19	15	6	60
Marketing innovation	2.5077	0.9024	2	24	25	31	14	6	49
Organisational innovation	2.6220	0.9256	2	19	28	26	17	10	47

Source: Author’s research.

Figure 2. Innovation expenditures (n = 354, Source: Research 2013–2015).

Figure 3. Evaluation of innovative projects (Source: Research 2009, 2010, 2013–2015).

Figure 4. Responsibility for innovative projects (n = 53; Source: Research 2009).

Table 5. Performance measurement methods (n = 281).

Category (Number of employees)	Micro (1–9)	Small (10–49)	Medium (50–249)	Large (>250)
Balanced Scorecard	0.00%	2.38%	10.95%	33.91%
Budget	67.45%	72.46%	84.27%	100.00%
Cost accounting (with cost centres)	11.33%	19.31%	35.13%	42.67%
Cost accounting (without cost centres)	20.38%	25.19%	22.54%	14.17%
EBITDA, EBIT	28.16%	30.45%	36.19%	34.85%
Economic value added EVA	0.00%	2.14%	17.50%	20.15%
Payback period	3.15%	17.23%	24.49%	36.84%
Profitability (ROI, ROE, ROA, ROS)	23.70%	20.13%	13.52%	7.92%
Revenues from innovation	59.19%	74.28%	83.45%	100.00%
Cannibalisation of existing products by innovation	4.12%	5.26%	6.43%	16.24%
Customer satisfaction indicators	23.45%	17.33%	22.50%	26.67%
Growth of market share	8.69%	13.17%	18.36%	36.13%
Innovativeness	2.70%	2.56%	7.12%	13.41%
Number of new customers	34.33%	32.73%	47.20%	52.48%
Patents	7.81%	10.47%	28.49%	36.96%
Productivity and quality indicators (lead time, etc.)	3.43%	6.81%	15.70%	32.76%

Source: Research 2013–2015.

Table 6. Relations research of innovative activities evaluation and markets forecasts (n = 139).

Innovative activities evaluation/markets forecasts	No	Yes	ni
No	26	8	34
Yes	37	68	105
nj	63	76	139

Source: Author’s research 2010.

Figure 5. Chi-Square test output from Minitab (n = 139; Source: Author’s research 2010).

Table 7. Exploration of the relations between the introduction of a system of evaluation of innovative activities and faster decision-making (n = 212).

Innovative activities evaluation/faster decision-making	No	Yes	ni
No	107	37	114
Yes	0	68	98
nj	107	105	212

Source: Research 2011.

Figure 6. Fisher’s exact test output from Minitab (n = 212; Source: Author’s research 2011).