sábado, setembro 03, 2011
5 anos para a investigação e desenvolvimento começar a dar frutos
Recordo este postal de Janeiro de 2007 "Subir na escala de valor" onde comentei a evolução competitiva de uma empresa, a Suleva, desde o negócio do preço primeiro, para o negócio do serviço depois, e para o negócio da inovação por fim.
.
Recordo este artigo de David Norton "Building Strategy Maps: The Importance of Time-Phasing the Strategy" de onde retiro estes sublinhados:
.
"Operational Effectiveness strategies (preço) have near-term impacts, usually within 12 to 24 months. Product Innovation strategies show results in the long-term; depending on the industry, that could be two to three years for service companies, three to five years for manufacturing, and up to 10 years for pharmaceuticals. Customer Management strategies generally fall somewhere in between."
.
Tudo isto por causa de mais um interessante artigo de um finlandês, o já nosso conhecido Mika Maliranta, acerca da produtiovidade: "IMPACT OF R&D ON PRODUCTIVITY – FIRM-LEVEL EVIDENCE FROM FINLAND" onde se pode ler:
.
"In this paper, we analysed the impact of R&D on firms’ productivity using a large panel data of Finnish firms over a nine‐year period from 1996 to 2004. As a robustness test, we also used another database of Finnish firms to confirm our results. We studied the productivity effect of R&D by employing a dynamic production function approach.
.
Our results are two‐fold. First, in the short run (in 1‐2 years) we find no productivity impact of R&D that is statistically significant. This result was echoed when the model was estimated separately in high tech and low tech industries. Second, R&D does have an economically and statistically significant impact when we took into account R&D efforts made 3‐5 years before. Hence, a window of almost 5 years was needed to capture the full impact of R&D."
.
Estão a ver a vantagem das empresas familiares face às cotadas, nos EUA. Em Portugal claro, como ontem à noite discutíamos num jantar, vem o Estado e come uma fatia colossal do lucro... lá se vai a acumulação de capital para poder testar vôos mais altos.
.
Recordo este artigo de David Norton "Building Strategy Maps: The Importance of Time-Phasing the Strategy" de onde retiro estes sublinhados:
.
"Operational Effectiveness strategies (preço) have near-term impacts, usually within 12 to 24 months. Product Innovation strategies show results in the long-term; depending on the industry, that could be two to three years for service companies, three to five years for manufacturing, and up to 10 years for pharmaceuticals. Customer Management strategies generally fall somewhere in between."
.
Tudo isto por causa de mais um interessante artigo de um finlandês, o já nosso conhecido Mika Maliranta, acerca da produtiovidade: "IMPACT OF R&D ON PRODUCTIVITY – FIRM-LEVEL EVIDENCE FROM FINLAND" onde se pode ler:
.
"In this paper, we analysed the impact of R&D on firms’ productivity using a large panel data of Finnish firms over a nine‐year period from 1996 to 2004. As a robustness test, we also used another database of Finnish firms to confirm our results. We studied the productivity effect of R&D by employing a dynamic production function approach.
.
Our results are two‐fold. First, in the short run (in 1‐2 years) we find no productivity impact of R&D that is statistically significant. This result was echoed when the model was estimated separately in high tech and low tech industries. Second, R&D does have an economically and statistically significant impact when we took into account R&D efforts made 3‐5 years before. Hence, a window of almost 5 years was needed to capture the full impact of R&D."
.
Estão a ver a vantagem das empresas familiares face às cotadas, nos EUA. Em Portugal claro, como ontem à noite discutíamos num jantar, vem o Estado e come uma fatia colossal do lucro... lá se vai a acumulação de capital para poder testar vôos mais altos.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário