关于国家创新技术效率问题讨论的思考

IF 0.4 Q4 MANAGEMENT
W. Nasierowski
{"title":"关于国家创新技术效率问题讨论的思考","authors":"W. Nasierowski","doi":"10.2478/fman-2019-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The objective of this article is to outline various drawbacks of the studies on technical efficiency of pro-innovation activities at a national level. A better awareness of existing constraints may assist the readers and reviewers of the relative reports in a more critical assessment of the presented results and help in planning the research. This article outlines several methodological problems faced with conducting research on the technical efficiency of innovations. On the basis of the review of the subject-related literature, as well as press releases, numerous restraints prevailing in the currently used research approaches are presented. Some of these precincts are evidenced in the used methods: other may be rooted in the non-scientifically related intentions of the authors. Frequently, observations may drive the audience to the incorrect conclusions and opinions. The awareness of the consequences of these limitations may serve as a warning about the reliability of the results, their applicability for crafting policies, and country-to-country comparisons. However, various limitations originate from the very nature of the theme. Several propositions are specified about items to be kept in mind in order to minimize the negative impact caused by existing drawbacks. These may serve as a guide to formulate research questions and hypotheses for verification in further studies. While each of the propositions stated independently may be labeled obvious, their simultaneous review many contribute to the streamlining further research and in the improvement of the quality of suggestions arrived at. The conclusions from the article may also pinpoint to these methodological issues that cause some of the publications on the subject to be of questionable value.","PeriodicalId":43250,"journal":{"name":"Foundations of Management","volume":"37 5","pages":"165 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on Discussions About Technical Efficiency of Innovativeness of Countries\",\"authors\":\"W. Nasierowski\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/fman-2019-0014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The objective of this article is to outline various drawbacks of the studies on technical efficiency of pro-innovation activities at a national level. A better awareness of existing constraints may assist the readers and reviewers of the relative reports in a more critical assessment of the presented results and help in planning the research. This article outlines several methodological problems faced with conducting research on the technical efficiency of innovations. On the basis of the review of the subject-related literature, as well as press releases, numerous restraints prevailing in the currently used research approaches are presented. Some of these precincts are evidenced in the used methods: other may be rooted in the non-scientifically related intentions of the authors. Frequently, observations may drive the audience to the incorrect conclusions and opinions. The awareness of the consequences of these limitations may serve as a warning about the reliability of the results, their applicability for crafting policies, and country-to-country comparisons. However, various limitations originate from the very nature of the theme. Several propositions are specified about items to be kept in mind in order to minimize the negative impact caused by existing drawbacks. These may serve as a guide to formulate research questions and hypotheses for verification in further studies. While each of the propositions stated independently may be labeled obvious, their simultaneous review many contribute to the streamlining further research and in the improvement of the quality of suggestions arrived at. The conclusions from the article may also pinpoint to these methodological issues that cause some of the publications on the subject to be of questionable value.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foundations of Management\",\"volume\":\"37 5\",\"pages\":\"165 - 176\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foundations of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/fman-2019-0014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations of Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/fman-2019-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文的目的是概述在国家层面上支持创新活动的技术效率研究的各种弊端。更好地了解现有的限制可能有助于相关报告的读者和审稿人对所提出的结果进行更批判性的评估,并有助于规划研究。本文概述了进行创新技术效率研究所面临的几个方法论问题。在审查与主题有关的文献以及新闻稿的基础上,提出了目前使用的研究方法中普遍存在的许多限制。其中一些原则在使用的方法中得到了证明:其他可能根植于作者的非科学相关意图。观察常常会使听众得出不正确的结论和意见。认识到这些限制的后果,可以对结果的可靠性、它们对制定政策的适用性以及国与国之间的比较提出警告。然而,各种限制源于主题的本质。为了最大限度地减少现有缺陷造成的负面影响,对需要牢记的事项提出了几点建议。这些可以作为制定研究问题和假设以供进一步研究验证的指南。虽然独立陈述的每一个命题可能都是显而易见的,但它们的同时审查许多有助于简化进一步的研究,并提高所得到的建议的质量。文章的结论也可以精确地指出这些方法问题,这些问题导致一些关于该主题的出版物的价值值得怀疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reflections on Discussions About Technical Efficiency of Innovativeness of Countries
Abstract The objective of this article is to outline various drawbacks of the studies on technical efficiency of pro-innovation activities at a national level. A better awareness of existing constraints may assist the readers and reviewers of the relative reports in a more critical assessment of the presented results and help in planning the research. This article outlines several methodological problems faced with conducting research on the technical efficiency of innovations. On the basis of the review of the subject-related literature, as well as press releases, numerous restraints prevailing in the currently used research approaches are presented. Some of these precincts are evidenced in the used methods: other may be rooted in the non-scientifically related intentions of the authors. Frequently, observations may drive the audience to the incorrect conclusions and opinions. The awareness of the consequences of these limitations may serve as a warning about the reliability of the results, their applicability for crafting policies, and country-to-country comparisons. However, various limitations originate from the very nature of the theme. Several propositions are specified about items to be kept in mind in order to minimize the negative impact caused by existing drawbacks. These may serve as a guide to formulate research questions and hypotheses for verification in further studies. While each of the propositions stated independently may be labeled obvious, their simultaneous review many contribute to the streamlining further research and in the improvement of the quality of suggestions arrived at. The conclusions from the article may also pinpoint to these methodological issues that cause some of the publications on the subject to be of questionable value.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信