Abstract
Assessing resource allocation in R&D organizations is an important issue that requires a comprehensive measure to characterize it. To provide a greater picture, we first construct a dynamic three-stage network DEA model, which evaluates the R&D efficiency, technology-diffusion efficiency, and value-creation efficiency of Taiwanese R&D organizations over the period 2005–2009. Before integrating window analysis and network data envelopment analysis (DEA) to estimate dynamic efficiencies, we apply Analytic Network Process (ANP) to determine the relative importance of each stage. Subsequently, we employ panel data regression to examine whether the capital stock of patents, quality of human resources, and capability of service support affect the dynamic efficiencies of the R&D organizations. Our findings show that the mean R&D efficiency score is greater than that of the technology-diffusion efficiency, with the value-creation efficiency score being the lowest, suggesting that R&D organizations have to firstly work on improving the technology-diffusion inefficiency, and finally improving the value-creation inefficiency. Our panel data regression analysis indicates that the capital stock of patents do affect the efficiencies of the R&D organizations, even including the quality of human resources and capability of service support. That is, managers should focus on technological development and innovation to improve their corporate performance.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Banker, R. D., & Natarajan, R. (2008). Evaluating contextual variables affecting productivity using data envelopment analysis. Operations Research, 56(1), 48–58.
Chakravarty, S., Feinberg, R., & Widdows, R. (1995). What do consumers want from banks? Journal of Retail Banking, 12, 15–19.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.
Chen, Y., & Zhu, J. (2004). Measuring information technology’s indirect impact on firm performance. Information Technology and Management, 5(1), 9–22.
Cherchye, L., & Abeele, P. V. (2005). On research efficiency: A micro-analysis of Dutch university research in Economics and Business Management. Research Policy, 34(4), 495–516.
Co, H., & Chew, K. (1997). Performance and R&D expenditures in American and Japanese manufacturing firms. International Journal of Production Research, 35(12), 3333–3348.
Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2006). Introduction to data envelopment analysis and its uses: With DEA-solver software and references. New York: Springer Science.
Deeds, D. L., & Hill, C. W. (1996). Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(1), 41–55.
Edquist, C. (1997). Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions, and organizations. London: Pinter Publishers/Cassell Academic.
Efrat, K. (2014). The direct and indirect impact of culture on innovation. Technovation, 34(1), 12–20.
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M., & Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. American Economic Review, 84(1), 66–83.
Golany, B., & Roll, Y. (1989). An application procedure for DEA. Omega, 17(3), 237–250.
González, E., & Gascón, F. (2004). Sources of productivity growth in the Spanish pharmaceutical industry (1994–2000). Research Policy, 33(5), 735–745.
Griliches, Z. (1988). Productivity puzzles and R&D: Another nonexplanation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(4), 9–21.
Griliches, Z. (2007). R&D, Patents and Productivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guan, J., & Chen, K. (2012). Modeling the relative efficiency of national innovation systems. Research Policy, 41(1), 102–115.
Guellec, D., & Bruno, V. P. P. (2004). From R&D to productivity growth: Do the institutional settings and the source of funds of R&D matter? Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 66(3), 353–378.
Hall, L. A., & Bagchi-Sen, S. (2007). An analysis of firm-level innovation strategies in the US biotechnology industry. Technovation, 27(1), 4–14.
Hartmann, G. C. (2003). Linking R&D spending to revenue growth. Research-Technology Management, 46(1), 39–46.
Hsu, K. H. (2005). Using balanced scorecard and fuzzy data envelopment analysis for multinational R&D project performance assessment. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(1), 189–196.
Hung, C.-L., Kuo, S.-J., & Dong, T.-P. (2013). The relationship between team communication, structure, and academic R&D performance: Empirical evidence of the national telecommunication program in Taiwan. R&D Management, 43(2), 121–135.
Klopp, G. (1985). The analysis of the efficiency of productive systems with multiple inputs and outputs. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, IL, USA. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/303474777?accountid=15184, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I database.
Lee, H. Y., & Park, Y. T. (2005). An international comparison of R&D efficiency: DEA approach. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 13(2), 207–222.
Lee, H., Park, Y., & Choi, H. (2009). Comparative evaluation of performance of national R&D programs with heterogeneous objectives: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 196(3), 847–855.
Liu, J. S., & Lu, W.-M. (2010). DEA and ranking with the network-based approach: A case of R&D performance. Omega, 38(6), 453–464.
Lu, W.-M., & Hung, S.-W. (2011). Exploring the operating efficiency of technology development programs by an intellectual capital perspective—A case study of Taiwan. Technovation, 31(8), 374–383.
Lu, W.-M., Kweh, Q. L., & Huang, C.-L. (2014). Intellectual capital and national innovation systems performance. Knowledge-Based Systems, 71, 201–210.
Lu, W.-M., Wang, W.-K., Tung, W.-T., & Lin, F. (2010). Capability and efficiency of intellectual capital: The case of fabless companies in Taiwan. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(1), 546–555.
Mansfield, E. (1980). Basic research and productivity increase in manufacturing. The American Economic Review, 70(5), 863–873.
Mansfield, E. (1988). Industrial R&D in Japan and the United States: A comparative study. The American Economic Review, 78(2), 223–228.
Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77–91.
Nasierowski, W., & Arcelus, F. (2003). On the efficiency of national innovation systems. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 37(3), 215–234.
Rousseau, S., & Rousseau, R. (1997). Data Envelopment Analysis as a tool for constructing scientometric indicators. Scientometrics, 40(1), 45–56.
Rousseau, S., & Rousseau, R. (1998). The scientific wealth of European nations: Taking effectiveness into account. Scientometrics, 42(1), 75–87.
Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process (Vol. 4922). Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
Saiki, T., Akano, Y., Watanabe, C., & Tou, Y. (2006). A new dimension of potential resources in innovation: A wider scope of patent claims can lead to new functionality development. Technovation, 26(7), 796–806.
Sharma, S., & Thomas, V. (2008). Inter-country R&D efficiency analysis: An application of data envelopment analysis. Scientometrics, 76(3), 483–501.
Sipahi, S., & Timor, M. (2010). The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: An overview of applications. Management Decision, 48(5), 775–808.
Souitaris, V. (2002). Firm–specific competencies determining technological innovation: A survey in Greece. R&D Management, 32(1), 61–77.
Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(1), 243–252.
Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2010). Dynamic DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 38(3), 145–156.
Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2014). Dynamic DEA with network structure: A slacks-based measure approach. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 42(1), 124–131.
Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 21, 172–187.
Upton, D. M. (1995). What really makes factories flexible? Harvard Business Review, 73(4), 74–84.
Walwyn, D. (2007). Finland and the mobile phone industry: A case study of the return on investment from government-funded research and development. Technovation, 27(6), 335–341.
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.
Wu, W.-Y., Tsai, H.-J., Cheng, K.-Y., & Lai, M. (2006). Assessment of intellectual capital management in Taiwanese IC design companies: Using DEA and the Malmquist productivity index. R&D Management, 36(5), 531–545.
Zhang, A., Zhang, Y., & Zhao, R. (2003). A study of the R&D efficiency and productivity of Chinese firms. Journal of Comparative Economics, 31(3), 444–464.
Zhu, J. (2009). Quantitative models for performance evaluation and benchmarking: DEA with spreadsheets. Boston: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wu, YC., Kweh, Q.L., Lu, WM., Hung, SW., Chang, CF. (2016). Capital Stock and Performance of R&D Organizations: A Dynamic DEA-ANP Hybrid Approach. In: Hwang, SN., Lee, HS., Zhu, J. (eds) Handbook of Operations Analytics Using Data Envelopment Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 239. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7705-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7705-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-7703-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-7705-2
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)