Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Innovation activity in European Union service sector: Similarities or differences?

Abstract

Objective: The article aimed to identify and assess the degree of homogeneity and differentiation of European Union countries regarding innovation activity in individual sections of the service sector.

Research Design & Methods: I developed the research objective using three specific objectives formulated as auxiliary questions. I designed the research in three stages directly correlated with the particular objectives. The research hypothesis assumed that we might group EU countries into internally homogeneous clusters and, simultaneously, externally different in terms of innovation activity in the service sector industries. Firstly, I verified whether innovation activity is homogeneous in individual service sector industries (Levene’s test). I considered homogeneous service industries, demonstrating homogeneity in at least eight indicators. In the second step, I identified homogeneous clusters of EU countries in each service industry (cluster analysis). In the last step, I differentiated between clusters of countries (the T-student test). I used the analysis and logical construction method with its inherent analysis and synthesis.

Findings: In the scope of service sector industries, we may group EU countries into clusters that are internally homogeneous and, at the same time, externally diversified in terms of innovation activity. I identified clusters of internally homogeneous countries in four out of five analysed service sections (except for the transportation and storage industry). The highest degree of homogeneity (100%) was characteristic of innovative activity conducted by enterprises in the scientific and technical activities section. The most significant differentiation between the identified clusters of countries was the characteristic of wholesale and retail trade, as well as the repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles industry (G). Regarding innovation activity in each industry, the defined groups of countries were much more internally homogeneous than significantly differentiated. In industry G, both of the phenomena were at an almost identical level.

Implications & Recommendations: Based on the presented research results, it is possible to develop uniform tools and instruments of pro-innovation policy dedicated to countries aggregated within a specific, internally homogeneous cluster of countries. On the one hand, this policy would be universal for countries aggregated in a given cluster. On the other hand, it could contain instruments and tools specific to a given industry. Such a diversified form of pro-innovation policy would contribute, firstly, to increasing coherence in the scope of the implemented assumptions of the EU innovation policy. Secondly, it would ensure that the instruments used in its scope would be targeted and dedicated to specific groups of enterprises. Therefore, the study may constitute a set of information that policy-makers could use. Moreover, the research results and analyses constitute a source for deepening knowledge on the construction of independent strategies by individual countries as part of innovation activities carried out at the level of various service industries.

Contribution & Value Added: The study is consistent with the currently applicable scientific paradigms and strategic assumptions of the EU countries regarding the cohesion of its members, as well as development based on innovation and related activities. To characterise the issue of innovativeness, I used a methodological approach that integrates extensive tools in the field of research methods.

Keywords

Innovation activity, services sector, EU countries, Ward’s agglomerative method

(PDF) Save

Author Biography

Kamil Decyk

Assistant Professor, University of Warmia and Mazury, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Department of Competitiveness of Economics. He received a PhD in economics at the Faculty of Economics in 2017, University of Warmia and Mazury. His research interests include innovativeness, quality management, innovations and innovation activity in the economy. He is engaged in cooperation with the Center for Cooperation with the Social and Economic Environment at the University of Warmia and Mazury. He issues expert opinions about the innovativeness of enterprises, which apply for funding of the innovative ideas. He was a member of the team that audited quality management in public and private organisations.


References

  1. Alan, H., & Köker, A.R. (2021). The Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on Service Sector Branding Tendency: Evidence from Turkey. Ege Academic Review, 21(3), 227-245. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.959927
  2. Albors‑Garrigos, J., & de Miguel Molina, M. (2023). The servitization of innovation in the retail grocery sector: The case of Mercadona. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 21, 245-270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-023-00336-3
  3. Baranskaitė, E., Abanauskaitė, D., & Župerkienė, E. (2022). Expression and Economic Impact of Innovativeness in the Tourism Sector. 12th International Scientific Conference Business and Management, May 12-13, 2022, Vilnius, Lithuania. https://doi.org/10.3846/bm.2022.887
  4. Bazhal, I. (2017). The political economy of innovation development: Breaking the vicious cycle of economic theory. Springer Nature. Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54852-4
  5. Bielińska-Dusza, E., & Hamerska, M. (2021). Innovative activity of Polish enterprises – a strategic aspect. The similarity of NACE divisions. Journal of Entrepreneurship Management and Innovation, 17(2), 53-98. https://doi.org/10.7341/20211723
  6. Buckley, P., & Majumdar, R. (2018). The services powerhouse. Increasingly vital to world economic growth. Deloitte Insights, Canada.
  7. Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jajja, M.S.S., Lecuna, A., & Fynes, B. (2020). Can entrepreneurial orientation improve sustainable development through leveraging internal lean practices?. Business Strategy and The Environment, 29(6), 2211-2225. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2496
  8. Churski, P., Dolata, M., Dominiak, J., Hauke, J., Herodowicz, T., Konecka-Szydłowska, B., Nowak, A., Perdał, R., & Woźniak, M. (2018). Współczesne przemiany czynników rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego. Studia Komitetu Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania Kraju PAN, 183, 67-88. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325767164_Wspolczesne_przemiany_czynnikow_rozwoju_spoleczno-gospodarczego on November 29, 2023.
  9. Decyk, K. (2024). Innovation Activities in the Services Sector Across EU States: Similarities or Differences?. Argumenta Oeconomica, 1(52), 221-239. https://doi.org/10.15611/aoe.2024.1.13
  10. De Mey, N. (2020). Experiments & pivots that kept Emirates Airlines alive in COVID times. Board of Innovation. Retrieved from https://www.boardofinnovation.com/blog/experiments-pivotsthat-kept-emirates-airlines-alive-in-covid-times on July 14, 2021.
  11. Dominiak, J. (2021). Specificity of innovation in the service sector: the example of Poland. Studies of the Industrial Geography Commission of the Polish Geographical Society, 35(2), 27-37. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9497-8322
  12. Dworak, E. (2022). The innovation gap between the new members of the European Union and the average level of EU innovation. Ekonomia Międzynarodowa, 39, 132-142. https://doi.org/10.18778/2082-4440.39.01
  13. Elliott, R., Greenaway, D., & Hine, R. (2000). Tests for factor homogeneity and industry classification. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 136(2), 355-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02707692
  14. European Innovation Scoreboard 2023. (2023). European Commission, Brussels. Retrieved from https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/knowledge-publications-tools-and-data/publications/all-publications/european-innovation-scoreboard-2023_en on July 18, 2024.
  15. Gopalakrishnan, S., & Kovoor-Misra, S. (2021). Understanding the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic through the lens of innovation. Business Research Quarterly, 24(3), 224-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444211013357
  16. Gopinath, G. (2020). Limiting the economic fallout of the coronavirus with large targeted policies In R. Baldwin & B. Weder di Maure (Eds.). Mitigating the COVID Economic Crisis: Act Fast and Do Whatever It Takes (pp. 41-48). London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Press. Retrieved from https://cepr.org/publications/books-and-reports/mitigating-covid-economic-crisis-act-fast-and-do-whatever-it-takes on May 3, 2023.
  17. Guevara-Rosero, G., Carrion-Cauja, C., Simbana-Landeta, L., & Camino-Mogro, S. (2023). Productivity determinants in the service industry: differences between high and low knowledge intensive sectors. Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración, 36(1), 63-84. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-05-2022-0121
  18. Habel, J., Alavi, S., Schmitz, C., Schneider, J.V., & Wieseke, J. (2016). When do customers get what they expect? Understanding the ambivalent effects of customers’ service expectations on satisfaction. Journal of Service Research, 19(4), 361-379. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670516662350
  19. Hausman, A., & Johnston, W.J. (2014). The role of innovation in driving the economy. Lessons from the global financial crisis. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2720-2726.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.021
  20. Hirsch-Kreisen, H., Hahn, K., & Jacobson, D. (2008). The low-tech issue. In H. Hirsch-Kreisen, & D. Jacobson (Eds.), Innovation in Low-Tech Firms and Industries (pp. 3-85). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  21. Hsieh, Y.H., & Yuan, S.T. (2019). Toward a theoretical framework of service experience: Perspectives from customer expectation and customer emotion. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 32(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1596021
  22. Huang, Y., Lin, C., Wang. P., & Xu, Z. (2020). Saving China from the coronavirus and economic meltdown: Experiences and lessons. In R. Baldwin & B. Weder di Maure (Eds.) Mitigating the COVID Economic Crisis: Act Fast and Do Whatever It Takes (pp. 77-92). London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Press. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3570696
  23. Imran, M., Jian, Z., Lekshmi, S., & Nair, S. (2018). Determinants of Firm’s Export Performance in China’s Automobile Industry. Sustainability, 10(11), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114078
  24. Jahanshahi, A.A., Nawaser, K., & Brem, A. (2019). The Effects of Customer Capital on Customer Response Speed and Innovativeness: The Mediating Role of Marketing Capability. International Journal of Innovation Management, 23(6), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919619500580
  25. Jakimowicz, A., & Rzeczkowski, D. (2019). Diversification of innovation strategies of Polish industrial processing enterprises depending on their size after the global financial crisis. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 15(4), 35-76. https://doi.org/10.7341/20191542
  26. Kasprzyk, B., & Wojnar, J. (2021). An Evaluation of the Implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy. Economic and Regional Studies, 14(2), 146-157. https://doi.org/10.2478/ers-2021-0011
  27. Khan, A., Bibi, S., Lyu, J., Garavelli, A.C., Pontrandolfo, P., & de Angeles Perez Sanchez, M. (2020). Uncovering Innovativeness in Spanish Tourism Firms: The Role of Transformational Leadership, OCB, Firm Size, and Age. Sustainability, 12(10), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12103989
  28. Koeze, E., & Popper, N. (2020). The virus changed the way we internet. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/07/technology/coronavirus-internet-use.html on July, 21, 2021.
  29. Lin, S., Xiao, L., & Wang, X. (2020). Does air pollution hinder technological innovation in China? A perspective of innovation value chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123326
  30. Llerena, P., & Oltra, V. (2002). Diversity of innovative strategy as a source of technological performance. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 13(2), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0954-349X(01)00036-4
  31. Łukiewska, K. (2019). Metodologiczne aspekty pomiaru międzynarodowej konkurencyjności branży na przykładzie przemysłu spożywczego. Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego.
  32. Maier, A., & Maier, D. (2018). Management ulinovării. Bucharest: Editura Matrix.
  33. Maier, D. (2018). The Romanian National Innovation Performance in the EU Context. International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management Research, 3(6), 123-131. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330834499_THE_ROMANIAN_NATIONAL_INNOVATION_PERFORMANCE_IN_THE_EU_CONTEXT on November 15, 2023.
  34. Manohar, S., Paul, J., Strong, C., & Mittal, A. (2023). Innoserv: Generalized scale for perceived service innovation. Journal of Business Research, 160, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113723
  35. Mendoza-Silva, A. (2021). Innovation capability: A sociometric approach. Social Networks, 64, 72-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2020.08.004
  36. Nair, S.R. (2018). Analyzing the relationship between store attributes, satisfaction, patronage-intention and lifestyle in food and grocery store choice behavior. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 46(1), 70-89. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-06-2016-0102
  37. Osiadacz, J. (2012). Innowacje w sektorze usług – przewodnik po systematyce oraz przykłady dobrych praktyk. Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości.
  38. Oslo Manual (2005). Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation 3rd ed. (2005). OECD and Eurostat.
  39. Oslo Manual (2018). Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation 4th ed. (2018). OECD and Eurostat.
  40. Polluveer, K. (2023). Polityka innowacyjności, 11. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/erpl-app-public/factsheets/pdf/pl/FTU_2.4.6.pdf on December 27, 2023.
  41. Ramelli S., & Wagner, A. (2020). What the stock market tells us about the consequences of COVID-19. In R. Baldwin, B. Weder di Maure (Eds.), Mitigating the COVID Economic Crisis: Act Fast and Do Whatever It Takes. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Press. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3570696
  42. Sandvik, I.L., Duhan, D.F., & Sandvik, K. (2014). Innovativeness and profitability: An empirical investigation in the Norwegian hotel industry. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55(2), 165-185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965514520963
  43. Sarmah, B., Kamboj, S., & Rahman, Z. (2017). Co-creation in hotel service innovation using smart phone apps: an empirical study”. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(10), 2647-2667. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-12-2015-0681
  44. Serbulova, N., Morgunova, T., & Persiyanova, G. (2020). Innovations during COVID-19 pandemic: trends, technologies, prospects. E3S Web of Conferences, 210, 02005, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202021002005
  45. Srholec, M., & Verspagen, B. (2008). The voyage of the beagle in innovation system land. Explorations on sectors innovation, heterogeneity and selection, MERIT Working Papers, 008. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24134964 on October 3, 2023.
  46. Steinley, D., & Brusco, M. (2007). Initializing k-means batch clustering: A critical evaluation of several techniques. Journal of Classification, 24, 99-121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-007-0003-0
  47. Szymańska, E. (2017). User-Driven Innovation – the Concept and Research Results. Procedia Engineering, 182, 694-700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.182
  48. Urbankova, E., & Krizek, D. (2020). Homogeneity of determinants in the financial sector and investment in EU countries. Economies, 8(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies8010014
  49. Wahyudi, S., Yogia, M.A., & Amrillah, M.F. (2023). Unlocking User-driven Innovation and Sustainable Competitive Advantage through Partnership: An Open Innovation Perspective. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 31(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.46585/sp31011650
  50. Williams, C., & van Triest, S. (2021). Innovativeness in the Professional Services Industry: A Practice Level Analysis. European Management Review, 18(3), 263-276. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12450
  51. World Trade Statistical Review (2017). World Trade Organization.
  52. Wosiek, R. (2018). Innowacje w usługach: nowy paradygmat w dobie obecnej rewolucji technologicznej. Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach, 352, 278-286. Retrieved from https://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.cejsh-4ee63191-d3f2-4085-822f-d155f4929d8f on December 18, 2023.
  53. Zervas, G., Proserpio, D., & Byers, J.W. (2017). The rise of the sharing economy: Estimating the impact of Airbnb on the hotel industry. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(5), 687-705. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0204

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 236

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.