CATEGORIAS DE ANALISIS
6. INTERPRETACIÓN Y DISCUSIÓN DE RESULTADOS
6.2 MOTIVOS QUE GENERAN VIOLENCIA ESCOLAR
6.2.2 Agentes Endógenos.
Technology as a barrier to entry
Technological change can represent an entry barrier for SMEs. Entry barriers arise from high capital costs, high R&D investment, patenting, costs of scanning technology, licensing agreements, firm-specific learning processes (learning-by-
1 A.H. Kleinknecht, J.O.N. Reijnen, W. Smits, ’Innovatie-indicatoren: vernieuwing in het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven’ (Innovation indicators in Dutch industry), in: J.W.A. van Dijk, Technologie met open grenzen, Alphen aan den Rijn ,1992, 103, 104; Robert Howard, 'Can Small Business Help Countries Compete?’, in: Harvard Business Review Paperback, Boston, s.a., 55, 56; Eric H. van Kooij, Technology transfer in the Japanese electronics industry; analysis of interorganizational networks supporting small and medium-sized enterprises, EIM, Zoetermeer, 1990, 33-47. See for conclusions that mainly large firms do cooperate e.g. Jos Hagedoorn and Jos Schakenraad, Alliances and partnerships in Biotechnology and Information Technologies, Beleidsstudies Technologie Economie nr. 10, Den Haag, 1991. Luc Soete, 'National Support Policies for Strategic Industries: The International Implications', in: OECD, Strategic Industries in a Global Economy; policy issues for the 1990s, Paris, 1991, 59, 67-75. 2 Andrea Fumagalli, The Evolution of Flexible Specialization System: some Italian Experiences,
Paper for the International Conference 'Autonomy and Independent Work', Nijmegen, The Netherlands, November 30 and December 1, 1992, mimeo. See also: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Making Things Better; Competing in Manufactucturing, OTA-ITE- 443, W ashington DC, 1990, 61, 168.
doing, learning-by-using, learning-by-interacting), protective R&D and excess capacity used when a firm’s position is challenged, marketing power, reputa tion, brand loyalty and access to sales channels1. In some fields of technology and in some sectors economies of scale in production are an extra barrier to entry. This is the case of the pharmaceutical sectors, bio-technology and the production of memory chips.
In other words, when the type of technology is very capital intensive and R&D- expenditures are large there is little room for small firms. Also in other markets and technology fields SMEs may be locked out from new technologies. As technology increases the sophistication of products and processes, so the scientific, technological and industrial resources and skills for development and production become more costly and complex.
Small innovating firms may be excluded by rising R&D thresholds and have difficulty in obtaining licenses from larger firms. In industrial sectors like phar maceuticals where small enterprises were able in the past to play a significant role, they are increasingly squeezed out by rising R&D thresholds and techno logical complexity. A similar trend is underway in the machine-tool sector, while in telecommunications equipment some larger firms are also beginning to face the problems caused by rapid technological change and escalating R&D and investment costs. Small firms also face a disadvantage in the relation to the suppliers of high-technology components (e.g. semi-conductors). The evidence is that large suppliers give priority to larger firms and are not interested to supply SMEs which may purchase volumes of only 10,000 pieces annually2. The answer to overcoming these entry barriers is for SMEs to join forces with large firms or with other small firms. The creativity, flexibility and innovativeness of small firms may make a happy marriage with the economies of scale and scope (in R&D and in marketing) and with the strategic global planning of large firms.
R&D-expenditures are increasing for all firms
In certain sectors and fields of technology SMEs are playing a minor role because of increasing R&D-expenditures and increasing investment require ments in production equipment.
1 Paul Stoneman, op. cit., 240-242.
2 Vivien Walsh, ’Technology and the Competitiveness of Small Countries: Review', in: Christopher Freeman and Bengt-Ake Lundvall, Small Countries Facing the Technological Revolution, London, 1988, 50, 51.
A clear example can be found in the R&D-expenditures needed to develop each new generation of memory chips1. Moreover, there are several other sectors and fields of technology where for each new generation of products the R&D- expenditure is increasing considerably, e.g. chemicals, pharmaceutical prod ucts, aeroplanes, telecommunication equipment and defence material. There is also a tendency for complexity to increase within the medium and low- technology industries, often the domain of SMEs. The technology of today’s car production is approaching the complex characteristics of yesterday’s aircraft industry. The low technology, low complexity area of food-processing is likely to become more complex and more science-based as a result of the impact of biotechnology. One aspect of this development is that for the effective exploitation of these technologies in industry a much broader spectrum of R&D capability is required,
even
in medium-technology sectors, and consequently a much greater expenditure of human and financial resources2.SMEs lagging behind in R&D-efforts
The generation of technology and the diffusion and application of new techno logies are highly interlinked. To adequately scan, evaluate and adopt new technologies it is important that firms perform R&D on their own3. Most of SMEs are either unaware of the importance of R&D or are not able to carry out R&D.
The innovativeness of SMEs is not well represented by R&D activities alone and is better measured by innovative output. Several studies4 indicate that a large number of SMEs are engaged in traditional activities rather than in activities at the forefront of technological development. In most SMEs strategic manage ment practices are absent and they devote insufficient attention to the necessity of permanent upgrading. Because of general technological trends these SMEs will not survive in an increasingly competitive market place and they will be
1 Business Week, 'Talk about your dream team; Can IBM, Siemens, and Toshiba design the next big chip? Maybe’, July 27, 1992, 33.
2 Vivien Walsh, op. cit., 50.
3 See Wesley M. Cohen and Daniel A. Leventhal, ’Innovation and Learning; the two faces of R&D’, in: The Economic Journal, vol. 99, September 1989, 569-596.
4 A.H. Kleinknecht, J.O.N. Reijnen, J.J. Verweij, Innovatie in de Nederlandse industrie en Dienst- verlening; een enquete-onderzoek (Innovation in Dutch manufacturing and services; a survey), Beleidsstudies TechnologieEconomie.no. 6, The Hague, 1990,17; E. Santarelli and A. Sterlac- chini, ’Innovation, Formal vs. Informal R&D, and Firm Size: Some Evidence from Italian Manufacturing Firms’, in: Small Business Economics, 1990, no. 2, 223-228.
replaced by new entrepreneurs more aware of the necessity for permanent upgrading.
In certain regions and countries of Europe this ’gale of destruction’ of SMEs will be more dominant than in other regions and countries. In the least devel oped regions and countries a dynamic entrepreneurial spirit with an open mind for the opportunities of new technologies is as yet not well developed and strong interfirm linkages within which knowledge is exchanged are missing. If national R&D statistics are used as a proxy for the innovative behaviour of SMEs in different countries in Europe, large differences between countries are apparent (see Table 4.9).
Table 4.9 Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D as a percentage of GDP, 1989 (index total __________ EC =100)__________________________________________________________________ in % of EC average Belgium 85 Denmark 77 France 118 Germany 145 Greece 24 Ireland 43 Italy 62 Luxembourg n.a. Netherlands 109 Portugal 25* Spain 38 United Kingdom 113 Total EC 100 * 1988.
Source: OECD, Main Science and Technology Indicators 1992, Paris, 1992/2, p. 18.