Competition, Innovation and Technology Gap

KRČÁL, Ondřej. Competition, Innovation and Technology Gap. In Mathematical Methods in Economics 2010, part II. České Budějovice: University of South Bohemia, Faculty of Economics, 2010, s. 359-364. ISBN 978-80-7394-218-2.

Základní údaje

Originální název

Competition, Innovation and Technology Gap

Název česky

Konkurence, inovace a technologická mezera

Autoři

KRČÁL, Ondřej (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí)

Vydání

České Budějovice, Mathematical Methods in Economics 2010, part II, od s. 359-364, 6 s. 2010

Nakladatel

University of South Bohemia, Faculty of Economics

---

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Stať ve sborníku

Obor

50200 5.2 Economics and Business

Stát vydavatele

Česká republika

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Forma vydání

tištěná verze "print"

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14560/10:00044870

Organizační jednotka

Ekonomicko-správní fakulta

ISBN

978-80-7394-218-2

UT WoS

000287979900061

Klíčová slova česky

konkurence; inovace; vztah ve tvaru obráceného U; kompoziční efekt

Klíčová slova anglicky

competition; innovation; inverted-U relationship; composition effect

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

---

Anotace

V originále

In this paper, we present a prospect theoretical model of managerial decision that explains the inverted-U relationship between competition and innovation, and the negative relationship between competition and technology gap (composition effect). If competition is high, managers prefer small innovations because they are afraid of loss (loss aversion). If competition is low, managers choose small innovations because of low value attributed to additional increase in their incomes due to successful innovation (diminishing sensitivity). Firms facing intermediate levels of competition choose larger innovations. Composition effect is a consequence of the inverted-U relationship. If competition is intense (industry firms have low profit ex-pectations), technology leaders innovate more than laggards because they are less afraid of loss, and the resulting technology gap is high. As competition decreases, laggards are increasingly more active and finally, along the decreasing part of the inverted-U curve, start to innovate more.