Interpreting Empirical Research
Doing and interpreting empirical research in order to develop research designs, which can provide a way to discuss the issues mentioned earlier, such as radical versus incremental.
Having chosen a firm or industry, the researcher wants to know in which dimensions the firm ‘exit’ or had access to ‘new’ or ‘old’ activities, knowledge, and resources in order to innovate in technological domains. For example, the question might be ‘which types, and why, of knowledge can be reused within the firm and lead to better firm performance, including higher firm growth?’
Obviously, to answer such a question, there are many types of issues that need to be resolved, including definitions of concepts. One relevant definition here may be to state that old knowledge, which is used in a new technical domain or product application may be considered to be knowledge reuse. This may be analysed or measured through whether the same individuals (skilled labor) worked on several projects or at the firm level, by indicators of market and technological diversification.
Another set of choices is how to operationalize the idea of ‘innovation’. After all, what does ‘innovating’ mean in this case? Many definitions and indicators are possible. Based on existing research praxis such as the Community Innovation Surveys (CIS), the researcher decides that innovation in the firm includes something new with economic value, and may be differentiated in terms of categories such as goods, services, and organization. Innovation may therefore be defined as products, whether goods or services or as process innovations, including technological, and organizational routines.