@article{BaumannKritikos2016,
  author    = {Baumann, Julian and Kritikos, Alexander},
  title     = {The link between R\&D, innovation and productivity: Are micro firms different?},
  series = {Research Policy},
  volume    = {45},
  journal   = {Research Policy},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0048-7333},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.008},
  pages     = {1263 -- 1274},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {We analyze the link between R\&D, innovation, and productivity in MSMEs with a special focus on micro firms with fewer than 10 employees; usually constituting the majority of firms in industrialized economies. Using the German KfW SME-panel, we examine to what extent micro firms are different from other firms in terms of innovativeness. We find that while firms engage in innovative activities with smaller probability, the smaller they are, for those firms that do make such investment, R\&D intensity is larger the smaller firms are. For all MSMEs, the predicted R\&D intensity is positively correlated with the probability of reporting innovation, with a larger effect size for product than for process innovations. Moreover, micro firms benefit in a comparable way from innovation processes as larger firms, as they are similarly able to increase their labor productivity. Overall, the link between R\&D, innovation, and productivity in micro firms does not largely differ from their larger counterparts. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{AudretschHafensteinKritikosetal.2019,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Audretsch, David B. and Hafenstein, Marian and Kritikos, Alexander and Schiersch, Alexander},
  title     = {Firm Size and Innovation in the Service Sector},
  series = {CEPA Discussion Papers},
  journal   = {CEPA Discussion Papers},
  number    = {4},
  issn      = {2628-653X},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42767},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-427670},
  pages     = {46},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {A rich literature links knowledge inputs with innovative outputs. However, most of what is known is restricted to manufacturing. This paper analyzes whether the three aspects involving innovative activity - R\&D; innovative output; and productivity - hold for knowledge intensive services. Combining the models of Crepon et al. (1998) and of Ackerberg et al. (2015), allows for causal interpretation of the relationship between innovation output and labor productivity. We find that knowledge intensive services benefit from innovation activities in the sense that these activities causally increase their labor productivity. Moreover, the firm size advantage found for manufacturing in previous studies nearly disappears for knowledge intensive services.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AudretschKritikosSchiersch2020,
  author    = {Audretsch, David B. and Kritikos, Alexander and Schiersch, Alexander},
  title     = {Microfirms and innovation in the service sector},
  series = {Small business economics},
  volume    = {55},
  journal   = {Small business economics},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Springer Science + Business Media B.V.},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {0921-898X},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11187-020-00366-4},
  pages     = {997 -- 1018},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {In the context of microfirms, this paper analyzes whether the link between the three aspects involving innovative activities—R\&D, innovative output, and productivity—hold for knowledge-intensive services. With especially high start-up rates and the majority of employees in microfirms, knowledge-intensive services (KIS) have a starkly different profile from manufacturing. Results from our structural models indicate that KIS firms benefit from innovation activities through increased labor productivity with highly skilled employees being similarly important compared to R\&D for creating innovation output in microfirms. Moreover, the firm size advantage of large firms found for manufacturing almost disappears in KIS, with start-ups and young firms having a higher probability of initiating innovation activities and of successfully turning knowledge into innovation output than mature firms.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BounckenRatzmannTiberiusetal.2022,
  author    = {Bouncken, Ricarda B. and Ratzmann, Martin and Tiberius, Victor and Brem, Alexander},
  title     = {Pioneering strategy in supply chain relationships},
  series = {IEEE transactions on engineering management},
  volume    = {69},
  journal   = {IEEE transactions on engineering management},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {IEEE},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0018-9391},
  doi       = {10.1109/TEM.2020.3019965},
  pages     = {2826 -- 2841},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Today, firms pursuing a pioneering strategy are often engaged in supply chain relationships to benefit from external resources and to improve their innovation. However, this effort can be impeded by power asymmetries in such relationships and especially by the execution of coercive power by their partner firm. Contracts could potentially reduce this risk of opportunistic behavior. Our survey study on 778 small to medium-sized enterprises in the European packaging and medical equipment industries examines how coercive power of the partner and the contractual arrangement between firms moderate the pioneering strategy's innovation outcomes in the short and long run. Our results confirm the negative effect of coercive power on innovation performance in both the short and long term. However, the compensating effect of rather complete contracts differs temporally. Whereas, contract completeness protects against higher dependence at the beginning of the collaboration, their effect diminishes over time. In contrast, rather incomplete contracts enhance the innovation performance in the long term, possibly complemented with trust.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{GiotopoulosKritikosTsakanikas2022,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Giotopoulos, Ioannis and Kritikos, Alexander and Tsakanikas, Aggelos},
  title     = {A Lasting Crisis affects R\&D decisions of smaller firms},
  series = {CEPA Discussion Papers},
  journal   = {CEPA Discussion Papers},
  number    = {49},
  issn      = {2628-653X},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-55844},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-558442},
  pages     = {23},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {We use the prolonged Greek crisis as a case study to understand how a lasting economic shock affects the innovation strategies of firms in economies with moderate innovation activities. Adopting the 3-stage CDM model, we explore the link between R\&D, innovation, and productivity for different size groups of Greek manufacturing firms during the prolonged crisis. At the first stage, we find that the continuation of the crisis is harmful for the R\&D engagement of smaller firms while it increased the willingness for R\&D activities among the larger ones. At the second stage, among smaller firms the knowledge production remains unaffected by R\&D investments, while among larger firms the R\&D decision is positively correlated with the probability of producing innovation, albeit the relationship is weakened as the crisis continues. At the third stage, innovation output benefits only larger firms in terms of labor productivity, while the innovation-productivity nexus is insignificant for smaller firms during the lasting crisis.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GiotopoulosKritikosTsakanikas2022,
  author    = {Giotopoulos, Ioannis and Kritikos, Alexander and Tsakanikas, Aggelos},
  title     = {A lasting crisis affects R\&D decisions of smaller firms},
  series = {The Journal of technology transfer},
  journal   = {The Journal of technology transfer},
  number    = {48},
  publisher = {Springer Science+Business Media},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {0892-9912},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10961-022-09957-7},
  pages     = {1161 -- 1175},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {We use the prolonged Greek crisis as a case study to understand how a lasting economic shock affects the innovation strategies of firms in economies with moderate innovation activities. Adopting the 3-stage CDM model, we explore the link between R\&D, innovation, and productivity for different size groups of Greek manufacturing firms during the prolonged crisis. At the first stage, we find that the continuation of the crisis is harmful for the R\&D engagement of smaller firms while it increased the willingness for R\&D activities among the larger ones. At the second stage, among smaller firms the knowledge production remains unaffected by R\&D investments, while among larger firms the R\&D decision is positively correlated with the probability of producing innovation, albeit the relationship is weakened as the crisis continues. At the third stage, innovation output benefits only larger firms in terms of labor productivity, while the innovation-productivity nexus is insignificant for smaller firms during the lasting crisis.},
  language  = {en}
}