Firm size affecting efficiency of production and commercialization of knowledge: embedded in cluster development

References

• Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1990). The determinants of small-firm growth in US manufacturing. Applied Economics, 22(2), 143–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1993). Analysing Innovation Output Indicators: The US Experience. In New Concepts in Innovation Output Measurement (pp. 10–41). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Acs, Z., & Isberg, S. C. (1991). Innovation, firm size and corporate finance. Economics Letters, 35(3), 323–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., & Howitt, P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(2), 701–728.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albahari, A., Barge-Gil, A., Pérez-Canto, S., & Modrego, A. (2018). The influence of science and technology park characteristics on firms’ innovation results. Papers in Regional Science, 97(2), 253–279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Argyres, N., Bigelow, L., & Nickerson, J. A. (2015). Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma. Strategic Management Journal, 36(2), 216–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora, A., & Gambardella, A. (1990). Complementarity and external linkages: The strategies of the large firms in biotechnology. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 38, 361–379.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arvanitis, L. A., & Miller, B. G. (1997). Multiple fixed doses of “seroquel” (quetiapine) in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: A comparison with haloperidol and placebo. Biological Psychiatry, 42(4), 233–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babalola, Y. A. (2013). The effect of firm size on firms profitability in Nigeria. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 4(5), 90–94.
   Google Scholar
• Banker, R. D., & Natarajan, R. (2008). Evaluating contextual variables affecting productivity using data envelopment analysis. Operations Research, 56(1), 48–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camisón, C., Forés, B., & Boronat-Navarro, M. (2017). Cluster and firm-specific antecedents of organizational innovation. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(6), 617–646.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., Holmén, M., & Rickne, A. (2002). Innovation systems: Analytical and methodological issues. Research Policy, 31(2), 233–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., & Seiford, L. M. (2013). Data Envelopment Analysis Theory, Methodology and Applications. In A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper, A. Y. Lewin, & L. M. Seiford (Eds.), Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology, and Applications. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1979). Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 3(4), 339–338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatterji, A., Glaeser, E., & Kerr, W. (2014). Clusters of entrepreneurship and innovation. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 14(1), 129–166.
   Google Scholar
• Chun, D., Chung, Y., & Bang, S. (2015). Impact of firm size and industry type on R&D efficiency throughout innovation and commercialisation stages: Evidence from Korean manufacturing firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(8), 895–909.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crook, T. R., Todd, S. Y., Combs, J. G., Woehr, D. J., & Ketchen Jr, D. J. (2011). Does human capital matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 443–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, M. S., & Pedersen, CØ. (2004). Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: Myth or reality? Research Policy, 33(10), 1673–1686.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, L. H., Lerner, J., & Wu, C. (2017). Intellectual property rights protection, ownership, and innovation: Evidence from China. The Review of Financial Studies, 30(7), 2446–2477.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrell, M. J., & Pearson, E. S. (1957). SERIES a (GENERAL). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120(3), 253–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fritsch, M., & Meschede, M. (2001). Product innovation, process innovation, and size. Review of Industrial Organization, 19(3), 335–350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher, D. R., Ignatieva, K., & McCulloch, J. (2015). Industry concentration, excess returns and innovation in Australia. Accounting & Finance, 55(2), 443–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Benito, Ó, Muñoz-Gallego, P. A., & García-Zamora, E. (2016). Role of collaboration in innovation success: Differences for large and small businesses. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 17(4), 645–662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guan, J., & Chen, K. (2010). Measuring the innovation production process: A cross-region empirical study of China’s high-tech innovations. Technovation, 30(5-6), 348–358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guan, J., & Chen, K. (2012). Modeling the relative efficiency of national innovation systems. Research Policy, 41(1), 102–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662–676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 997–1010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hommen, L., Doloreux, D., & Larsson, E. (2006). Emergence and growth of Mjärdevi Science Park in Linköping, Sweden. European Planning Studies, 14(10), 1331–1361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jen Huang, C., & Ju Liu, C. (2005). Exploration for the relationship between innovation, IT and performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(2), 237–252.
   Google Scholar
• Josefy, M., Kuban, S., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2015). All things great and small: Organizational size, boundaries of the firm, and a changing environment. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 715–802.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamath, S., Agrawal, J., & Chase, K. (2012). Explaining geographic cluster success-The GEMS model. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 71(1), 184–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1183–1194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenney, M. (2000). Understanding Silicon Valley: The Anatomy of an Entrepreneurial Region. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. M. (2000). The Silicon Valley Edge: A Habitat for Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liangmou, G., & Mechanism, L. Y. (2009). Dynamics of inverted U relationship of firm size and technology innovation. Management World, 8, 113–123.
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1988). First-mover advantages. Strategic Management Journal, 9(S1), 41–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, N. (2017). Building a Network Theory of Social Capital. In Social Capital (pp. 3–28). Cambridge: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2004). Proximity as a resource base for competitive advantage: University–industry links for technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 311–326.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, BÅ. (2017). Is there a technological fix for the current global stagnation? Research Policy, 46(3), 544–549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okubo, T., Okazaki, T., & Tomiura, E. (2016). Industrial cluster policy and transaction networks: Evidence from firm-level data in Japan (No. 2016-019). Institute for Economics Studies, Keio University.
   Google Scholar
• Pervan, M., & Višić, J. (2012). Influence of firm size on its business success. Croatian Operational Research Review, 3(1), 213–223.
   Google Scholar
• Pham, H. T., & Takayama, S. (2017a). Firm size distribution, production efficiency, and returns to scale: A stochastic frontier approach (No. 581).
   Google Scholar
• Pham, H. T., & Takayama, S. (2017b). Revisiting the missing middle productivity analysis. Discussion Papers.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rantisi, N. M. (2002). The local innovation system as a source of variety: Openness and adaptability in New York city’s garment district. Regional Studies, 36(6), 587–602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, M. (2004). Networks, firm size and innovation. Small Business Economics, 22(2), 141–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shi, X., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Inbound open innovation and radical innovation capability. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(3), 581–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sok, P., O’Cass, A., & Sok, K. M. (2013). Achieving superior SME performance: Overarching role of marketing, innovation, and learning capabilities. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 21(3), 161–167.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, J. B., & Stuart, T. E. (2000). Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(1), 81–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, clusters, and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258–271.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan, J. (2006). Growth of industry clusters and innovation: Lessons from Beijing Zhongguancun Science Park. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(6), 827–850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tether, B. S. (1998). Small and large firms: Sources of unequal innovations? Research Policy, 27(7), 725–745.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tushman, M. L. (1996). Strategy & leadership.
   Google Scholar
• Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 35–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, E. C., & Huang, W. (2007). Relative efficiency of R&D activities: A cross-country study accounting for environmental factors in the DEA approach. Research Policy, 36(2), 260–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wennberg, K., & Lindqvist, G. (2010). The effect of clusters on the survival and performance of new firms. Small Business Economics, 34(3), 221–241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Y., & Driffield, N. (2012). Multinationality-performance relationship. Management International Review, 52(1), 23–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar