Ownership Structure and Innovation Quality:  Evidence from Patenting Activities

Tingqian Pu

doi:10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.19.1.2025.41-53

Tingqian Pu Guizhou University of Commerce, Guiyang, China https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6618-5891

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.19.1.2025.41-53

Keywords: ownership structure, ownership concentration, state ownership, institutional ownership, managerial ownership, innovation quality

Abstract

High-quality innovation can provide companies with a competitive advantage in the market, enabling them to become leaders and effectively respond to challenges from competitors. This paper aims to offer recommendations to Chinese policymakers on enhancing innovation quality. It adopts a corporate governance perspective to examine the impact of ownership structure (ownership concentration, state ownership, institutional ownership, and managerial ownership) on innovation quality. Using patent data from Chinese listed companies from 2012 to 2021, the study reveals that innovation quality is influenced by different ownership structures. State ownership, institutional ownership, and managerial ownership positively affect innovation quality. Contrary to expectations, ownership concentration leads to a decline in innovation quality. This approach differs from previous research in two key aspects. First, it identifies ownership factors that enhance innovation quality, addressing the limitations of earlier studies that focused solely on single ownership types. Second, by focusing on invention patent information, it captures innovation quality, providing a more accurate assessment of firms’ true innovative capabilities in a transitional economy.

Downloads

References

. Su C., Yuan X., Umar M., et al. Does technological innovation bring destruction or creation to the labor market? Technology in Society. 2022;68:101905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101905

Valášková K., Gavurová B., Ďurana P., et al. Alter ego only four times? The case study of business profits in the Visegrad Group. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2020;23(3):101–119. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2020-3-007

Raj R., Kumar V., Ranjana J., et al. Existing and forthcoming obstacles in adopting technological advances in vulnerable supply chains. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2024;27(3):88–103. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2024-3-006

Huang Y., Li K., Li P. Innovation ecosystems and national talent competitiveness: A country-based comparison using fsQCA. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2023;194:122733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122733

Stankevičienė J., Nikanorova M., Gentjan, Ç. Analysis of green Economy dimension in the context of circular economy: The case of Baltic Sea Region. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2020;23(1):4–18. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2020-1-001

Le P.B., Lei H. The effects of innovation speed and quality on differentiation and low-cost competitive advantage. Chinese Management Studies. 2018;12(2):305–322. https://doi.org/10.1108/cms-10-2016-0195

Rapacz A., Gryszel P., Walesiak M., et al. Innovative activity of restaurants operating in the largest polish cities. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2022;25(2):168–182. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2022-2-011

Petrů N., Kramoliš J., Stuchlik, P. Marketing tools in the era of digitization and their Use in Practice by Family and other Businesses. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2020;23(1):199–214. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2020-1-014

Virglerová Z., Homolka L., Smrčka L., et al. Key determinants of the quality of business environment of SMEs in the Czech Republic. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2017;20(2):87–101. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2017-2-007

Belás, J., Demjan, V., Habánik, J., et al. The business environment of small and medium-sized enterprises in selected regions of the Czech Republic and Slovakia. E+M Ekonomie a Management.2015;18(1):95–110. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2015-1-008

Rajnoha, R., Štefko, R., Merková, M., & Dobrovič, J. Business intelligence as a key information and knowledge tool for strategic business performance management. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2016;19(1), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2016-1-013

Taques F.H., López M.G., Basso L.F., et al. Indicators used to measure service innovation and manufacturing innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2021;6(1):11–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.12.001

Stoian I.C., Clipa R.I., Ifrim M., et al. Perception regarding European Green Deal challenges: From environment to competition and economic costs. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2023;26(3):4–19. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2023-3-001

Kitanovic J. The applicability of the concept of national innovation systems to transition economies. Innovation. 2007;9(1):28–45. https://doi.org/10.5172/impp.2007.9.1.28

Pu T., Zulkafli A.H. How does digital transformation affect innovation quality? E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2024;27(4):16-32. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2024-5-021

Chatterjee M., Bhattacharjee T. Ownership concentration, innovation and firm performance: empirical study in Indian technology SME context. South Asian Journal of Business Studies. 2020;10(2):149–170.

Choi S.B., Lee S.H., Williams C. Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: Evidence from China. Research Policy. 2011;40(3):441–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.004

Jiang L., Waller D.S., Cai S. Does ownership type matter for innovation? Evidence from China. Journal of Business Research. 2013;66(12):2473–2478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.037

Kim J., Mahoney J.T. Property rights theory, transaction costs theory, and agency theory: an organizational economics approach to strategic management. Managerial and Decision Economics. 2005;26(4):223–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.1218

Jensen M.C., Meckling W.H. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. In Rochester studies in economics and policy issues. 1979:163–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9257-3_8

Pu T. Do Financing Constraints Moderate the Effect of Digital Transformation on Corporate Cash Holdings? Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance Research.2024; 2073-0438, 18(3), 49-61.

Waterman R.W., Meier K.J. Principal-Agent models: an expansion? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 1998;8(2):173–202. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024377

Islam E., Rahman L. Shades of grey: Risk-related agency conflicts and corporate innovation. Journal of Corporate Finance. 2023;83:102475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2023.102475

Pu T., Zulkafli A. H. Global minds, local impact: exploring the effect of foreign directors on corporate R&D expenditure. Strategic Management. 2024: Online first. https://doi.org/10.5937/StraMan2400007P

Kuruppuge R.H., Gregar A. Survival and longevity of family businesses: a case of Eastern business culture. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2018;21(4):159–174. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2018-4-011

Maček A., Ovin R. Does economic interventionism help strategic industries? Evidence from Europe. E+M Ekonomie a Management.2014;17(3):4–14. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2014-3-001

Dacin M.T., Goodstein J., Scott W.R. Institutional Theory and Institutional Change: Introduction to the Special Research Forum. Academy of Management Journal. 2022;45(1):45–56.

Suddaby R. Challenges for institutional theory. Journal of Management Inquiry. 2010;19(1):14–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492609347564

Fauzi A.A., Sheng M.L. The digitalization of micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs): An institutional theory perspective. Journal of Small Business Management. 2020;60(6):1288–1313. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2020.1745536

Zhou K.Z., Gao G.Y., Zhao H. State Ownership and firm innovation in China: An Integrated view of institutional and efficiency logics. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2016;62(2):375–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216674457

Pan X., Chen X., Sinha P., et al. Are firms with state ownership greener? An institutional complexity view. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2019;29(1):197–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2358

Pu T., Zulkafli A.H. State Ownership Heterogeneity and Corporate Innovation: New Evidence from a Hierarchical Perspective. Journal of Corporate Finance Research. 2024;18(1):20-36. https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073-0438.18.1.2024.20-36

Liu G., Cao H., Zhu G. Competitive pricing and innovation investment strategies of green products considering firms’ farsightedness and myopia. International Transactions in Operational Research. 2020;28(2):839–871. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12858

Setia‐Atmaja, L.Y. Governance mechanisms and firm value: the impact of ownership concentration and dividends. Corporate Governance an International Review. 2009;17(6):694–709. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2009.00768.x

Beyer M.L.P., Czarnitzki D., Kraft K. Managerial ownership, entrenchment and innovation. Economics of Innovation and New Technology. 2012;21(7):679–699. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2011.639978

Jia N. Corporate innovation strategy and stock price crash risk. Journal of Corporate Finance. 2018;53:155–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2018.10.006

Radonić M., Milosavljević M., Knežević S. Intangible Assets as Financial Performance Drivers of IT Industry: Evidence from an Emerging Market. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2021;24(2):119–135. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2021-2-008

Grzeszczyk T.A., Izdebski W., Izdebski M., et al. Socio-economic factors influencing the development of renewable energy production sector in Poland. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2021;24(1):38–54. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2021-1-003

Angielsky M., Copus L., Madzik P., et al. Navigating the human element: Unveiling insights into workforce dynamics in supply chain automation through smart bibliometric analysis. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2024;27(3):72–87. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2024-5-011

Alam A., Uddin M., Yazdifar H. Institutional determinants of R&D investment: Evidence from emerging markets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2019;138:34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.007

Lundvall B. National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry and Innovation. 2007;14(1):95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662710601130863

Luo Y., Junkunc M. How private enterprises respond to government bureaucracy in emerging economies: the effects of entrepreneurial type and governance. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. 2008;2(2):133–153. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.46

Li Z., Yamad, T. Political and economic incentives of government in partial privatization. Journal of Corporate Finance. 2015;32:169–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2014.04.008

Zivkov D., Kuzman B., Papic-Blagojevic N. Multiscale non-linear tale risk spillover effect from oil to stocks – The case of East European emerging markets. E+M Ekonomie a Management. 2024;27(3):186–200. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2024-5-015

Velte P. Institutional ownership and board governance. A structured literature review on the heterogeneous monitoring role of institutional investors. Corporate Governance. 2023;24(2):225–263. https://doi.org/10.1108/cg-10-2022-0414

Lewellen J., Lewellen K. Institutional investors and corporate governance: the incentive to be engaged. The Journal of Finance. 2021;77(1):213–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.13085

Harrison J.S., St John C.H. Managing and partnering with external stakeholders. Academy of Management Perspectives. 1996;10(2):46–60. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1996.9606161554

Li X., Vermeulen F. High risk, low return (and vice versa): the effect of product innovation on firm performance in a transition economy. Academy of Management Journal. 2021;64(5):1383–1418. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1311

Pu T., Zulkafli A.H. Managerial ownership and corporate innovation: evidence of patenting activity from Chinese listed manufacturing firms. Cogent Business & Management. 2024;11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2289202

DesJardine M.R., Zhang M., Shi W. How Shareholders Impact Stakeholder Interests: A review and map for future research. Journal of Management. 2022;49(1):400–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063221126707

Hu J., Pan X., Huang Q. Quantity or quality? The impacts of environmental regulation on firms’ innovation–Quasi-natural experiment based on China’s carbon emissions trading pilot. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2020;158:120122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120122

Shleifer A., Vishny R.W. Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of political economy. 1986;94(3, Part 1):461-488.

Aoki K., Balaban C., Fiorini M., et al. OECD trade policy papers. OECD Trade Policy Working Papers. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1787/18166873

Aghion P., Van Reenen J., Zingales L. Innovation and institutional ownership. American Economic Review. 2013;103(1):277–304. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.1.277

Karácsony P., Metzker Z., Vasic T., et al. Employee attitude to organisational change in small and medium-sized enterprises. E+M Ekonomie a Management.2023;26(1):94–110. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2023-1-006

Herrera L., Sánchez-González G. Firm size and innovation policy. International Small Business Journal Researching Entrepreneurship. 2012;31(2):137–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242611405553

Coad A., Segarra A., Teruel M. Innovation and firm growth: Does firm age play a role? Research Policy. 2015;45(2):387–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.015

Iqbal N., Xu J.F., Fareed Z., et al. Financial leverage and corporate innovation in Chinese public-listed firms. European Journal of Innovation Management. 2020;25(1):299–323. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejim-04-2020-0161

Zona F., Zattoni A., Minichilli A.A contingency model of boards of directors and firm innovation: the moderating role of firm size. British Journal of Management. 2012;24(3):299–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00805.x

Chen Z., Zhang J. Types of patents and driving forces behind the patent growth in China. Economic Modelling. 2019;80:294–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.11.015