The survival of a firm in the modern day competitive globalized world is a knife-edge phenomenon. The scope for continuing to stay in a profitable business with obsolete and under-informed technical know-how is low as ever. Modern day firms need to evolve continually in light of up-to-date localized research and development in order to stay profitably in the competitive business environment. The current study is a novel attempt to contextualize the firm specific research and development process in India, using the latest available Annual Survey of Industries data. The study, using various descriptive statistics, confirms the low levels of localized research and development process at the firm level pan-India. Being the first empirical attempt in this direction of research, the current study proposes certain policy recommendations. It also raises some important research questions that are to be addressed by empirical analysis in order to place the industrialization process in India at a better place to compete in the global market.
BakhtiariS., & BreunigR. (2018). The role of spillovers in research and development expenditure in Australian industries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 27(1), 14–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2017.1290898
2.
BiswasM., & VernekarA. (2019). An empirical study on problems and prospects of micro small and medium enterprises in Bengaluru, Karnataka. AMBER—ABBS Management Business and Entrepreneurship Review, 10(1), 15–20.
3.
ChanL. K. C., LakonishokJ., & SougiannisT. (2001). The stock market valuation of research and development expenditures. Journal of Finance, 56(6), 2431–2456. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00411
4.
ChanF. T. S., NayakA., RajR., ChongA. Y. L., & ManojT. (2014). An innovative supply chain performance measurement system incorporating research and development (R&D) and marketing policy. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 69(1), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2013.12.015
5.
CohenW. M., FloridaR. W., & RandazzeseJ. W. (1998). Industry and the academy: Uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance. Challenges to Research Universities, 171(200), 59.
6.
CohenW. M., NelsonR. R., & WalshJ. P. (2003). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R &D. Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance, 48(1), 109–146. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781950241.00017
7.
CollinsJ. D., & ReutzelC. R. (2017). The role of top managers in determining investment in innovation: The case of small and medium-sized enterprises in India. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 35(5), 618–638. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242616658507
8.
CooperA. C., & BrunoA. V. (1977). Success among high-technology firms. Business Horizons, 20(2), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(77)90096-9
FriedenJ. A., & KruegerA. O. (2020). Government failures in development. Modern Political Economy and Latin America, 4(3), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429498893-3
11.
GibsonM., ArnottD., JagielskaI., & MelbourneA. (2004). Evaluating the intangible benefits of business intelligence: Review and research agenda. In R. Meredith, G. Shanks, D. Arnott, & S. Carlsson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 IFIP International Conference on Decision Support Systems (DSS2004): Decision Support in an Uncertain and Complex World (pp. 295–305). Monash University Publishing.
12.
HallB. H. (2002). The financing of research and development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/18.1.35
13.
HungS. W. (2009). Development and innovation in the IT industries of India and China. Technology in Society, 31(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.12.009
14.
JaffeA. B., NewellR. G., & StavinsR. N. (2005). A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy. Ecological Economics, 54(2–3), 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.027
15.
JonesM. V. (1999). The internationalization of small high-technology firms. Journal of International Marketing, 7(4), 15–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031x9900700403
16.
JonesB. F. (2021). The rise of research teams: Benefits and costs in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 35(2), 191–216.
17.
JosephK. J., & AbrahamV. (2009). University-Industry Interactions and Innovation in India: Patterns. Seoul Journal of Economics, 22(4), 467. http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/67710/1/sje_22_4_467.pdf
18.
JoshiK. (2018). Managing information asymmetry risks using deal syndication and domain specialization: An Indian context. Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, 7(1), 150–177.
19.
KatrakH. (1985). Imported Technology, enterprise size and R&D in a newly industrializing country: The Indian Experience. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 47(3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.1985.mp47003003.x
20.
KnouseS. B., & FontenotG. (2008). Benefits of the business college internship: A research review. Journal of Employment Counseling, 45(2), 61–66.
21.
KumarN. (1987). Technology imports and local research and development in Indian manufacturing. The Developing Economies, 25(3), 220–233.
22.
KumarV., SezersanI., Garza-ReyesJ. A., GonzalezE. D. R. S., AnwerMoh’d A.-S. (2019). Circular economy in the manufacturing sector: Benefits, opportunities and barriers. Management Decision, 57(4), 1067.
23.
MajeedM., KhanJ. I., MushtaqS. O., & RatherZ. G. (2021). The industrial research and development profile of the MSMEs Sector in India. Management & Extension Journal, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/09708464211043391
24.
MansfieldE. (1964). Industrial research and development expenditures: Determinants, prospects, and relation to size of firm and inventive output. The Journal of Political Economy, LXXII(4), 319–340.
25.
McAlisterL., SrinivasanR., & KimM. C. (2007). Advertising, research and development, and systematic risk of the firm. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.1.35
26.
MoweryD. C., & RosenbergN. (1993). The US national innovation system. National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, 29–75.
27.
OakeyR. P. (1984). Innovation and regional growth in small high technology firms: Evidence from Britain and the USA. Regional Studies, 18(3), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/09595238400185231
28.
OakeyR. P. (2013). Open innovation and its relevance to industrial research and development: The case of high-technology small firms. International Small Business Journal, 31(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242612458942
29.
PachouriA., & SharmaS. (2016). Barriers to innovation in Indian Small and medium-sized enterprises. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2838109
30.
PintoJ. K., & MantelS. J. (1990). The causes of project failure. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 37(4), 269–276. https://doi.org/10.1109/17.62322
31.
RadjouN., & PrabhuJ. (2012). Mobilizing for growth in emerging markets. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(3), 81.
32.
RapleyJ. (2007). The progress of development D. In Understanding Development: Theory and Practice in the Third World (Vol. 45, Issue 05, pp. 45-2724–45-2724). https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.45-2724
33.
ReichR. (1991). The work of nations: Preparing ourselves for 21st century capitalis. Vintage.
34.
ReinganumJ. F. (1989). The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion. Handbook of Industrial Organization, 1, 849–908.
35.
SahooP., & DashR. K. (2009). Infrastructure development and economic growth in India. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 14(4), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/13547860903169340
36.
SalterA. J., & MartinB. R. (2001). The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: A critical review. Research Policy, 30(3), 509–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00091-3
37.
Sanchez-SeguraM.-I., Ruiz-RoblesA., Medina-DominguezF., & Dugarte-PeñaG.-L. (2017). Strategic characterization of process assets based on asset quality and business impact. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117, 1720–1737.
38.
SikkaP. (1998). Analysis of in-house R&D centres of innovative firms in India. Research Policy, 27(4), 429–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00075-4
39.
SlaughterS., & RhoadesG. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science Technology and Human Values, 21(3), 303–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399602100303
40.
SpencerJ. W. (2001). How relevant is university-based scientific research to private high-technology firms? A United States–Japan comparison. The Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 432–440.
41.
SpillerR. (2000). Ethical business and investment: A model for business and society. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1/2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006445915026
42.
ThingoC., & SarkarS. S. (2013). Growth and development of MSME in North-East India. Chief Patron Chief Patron.
43.
TynanB. R., & GarbettD. L. (2007). Negotiating the university research culture: Collaborative voices of new academics. Higher Education Research and Development, 26(4), 411–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360701658617
44.
UcbasaranD., ShepherdD. A., LockettA., & LyonS. J. (2013). Life after business failure: The process and consequences of business failure for entrepreneurs. Journal of Management, 39(1), 163–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312457823
45.
VavakovaB. (1998). The new social contract between governments, universities and society: Has the old one failed? Minerva, 36(3), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004384519396
46.
VeluC., & KhannaM. (2013). Business model innovation in India. Journal of Indian Business Research, 5(3), 156–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIBR-08-2012-0068
47.
WillisonJ. W. (2012). When academics integrate research skill development in the curriculum. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(6), 905–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.658760
48.
WilsonD. (1997). Paradoxes of tourism in Goa. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(1), 52–75.
