|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
For this study, a double blind Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) will be conducted in the funding scheme "Impact Innovation" to test if a set of complementary and easily scalable support measures, specifically innovation management software and online mentoring platform, can increase innovation capacity in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).
Background:
“Impact Innovation” supports non-technical innovation projects of SMEs in order to improve products and/or services through the systematic use of innovation methodologies with a strong focus on the innovation management of funded projects, of which internal resources and team capacity are highly relevant to the success of the project. A wide range of barriers inhibits SMEs from optimizing external advice and information in adopting proven technologies and better business practices, however there is evidence that SMEs are more likely to develop new and innovative products and services due to their agility and lean decision-making processes, thus SMEs are a suitable candidates.
Many funded projects in Impact Innovation present an immature methodological approach to innovation and half of them present a clear deficit in innovation know-how, pointing towards a need for extra support. Numerous support schemes on national and European level have been implemented to facilitate innovation activities in SMEs, yet there is very limited evidence on whether public support has positive benefits and what forms of support are most effective. The RCT will thus provide insights into the potential our form of support (intervention) will have in fostering successful implementation of innovation methodologies in non-technical innovation projects of SMEs, and ultimately completing the funded innovation project more successfully, in the short term, while observing if there is a lagged effect in overall business growth in the long term (measured some years after project end).
Experiment:
The sample for the RCT will consist of non-technical innovation projects by SMEs funded through Impact Innovation over the course of two years. Impact Innovation will be run as usual, however the the treatment group will additionally receive access to innovation management software and online mentoring software as the intervention. The primary outcome we will observe is the overall success of the funded project evaluated by internal experts (blind to the assignment of the projects).
|
After
Many Start Ups and Small & Medium Enterprises (SME) an immature methodological approach to innovation and half of them present a clear deficit in innovation know-how, pointing towards a need for extra support.
The efficacy of two approaches to building knowledge and increasing awareness of non-technical innovation among Start Ups and Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) will be tested.
Background:
A wide range of barriers inhibits SMEs from optimizing external advice and information in adopting proven technologies and better business practices, however there is evidence that SMEs are more likely to develop new and innovative products and services due to their agility and lean decision-making processes, thus SMEs are a suitable candidates.
Numerous support schemes on national and European level have been implemented to facilitate innovation activities in SMEs, yet there is very limited evidence on whether public support has positive benefits and what forms of support are most effective. The RCT will thus provide insights into the potential our form of support (intervention) will have in fostering successful implementation of innovation methodologies in non-technical innovation projects of SMEs.
Experiment:
The sample for the RCT are firms who are either considering starting innovation activities or already in the preparation phase of innovation
projects, specifically for Impact Innovation. Two interventions will be tested. The first intervention is an expert led and peer-learning workshop in which experts from Impact Innovation provide input on essential aspects of the innovation process and experienced peers (previously funded Impact Innovation projects) share examples of how this might look in a project. The second intervention is a short guide highlighting important aspects of the innovation process and information on additional support resources, reflecting the content taught in the workshop. In addition, these firms will receive a voucher to an online expert platform, where they can link up with experts in a topic of their choice to assist them in development and implementation of a non-technical innovation project.
The primary outcomes of the RCT are Knowledge of Innovation Process, Perceived Ability, and Attitude towards Innovation, specifically whether there has been changes since the intervention. As a secondary outcome, we are interested in Innovation Activities, specifically whether there has been an increase in innovation activities since the intervention.
|
|
Field
Trial Start Date
|
Before
January 22, 2020
|
After
January 01, 2022
|
|
Field
Trial End Date
|
Before
August 01, 2024
|
After
June 30, 2023
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
March 02, 2020 03:46 PM
|
After
July 27, 2022 01:06 PM
|
|
Field
Intervention Start Date
|
Before
March 09, 2020
|
After
February 23, 2022
|
|
Field
Intervention End Date
|
Before
April 21, 2021
|
After
June 30, 2022
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
1) Immediate outcome objective: Improve overall project execution (Hypothesis 1)
Measured by: (1) goal achievement variable in final evaluation; (2) delay of project finalization
When: approx. 3 - 6 months after project end and immediately at project end, respectively.
2) Positive effect on innovation methods employed in each project (Hypothesis 2).
Measured by: (1) Evaluation of implementation of innovation methods from project end report by innovation methods experts from external organization (evaluation scheme is to be created)
When: approx. 3 months after project end.
3)Ultimate outcome objective: Improve the project outcomes (products/services) (Hypothesis 3)
Measured by: Higher revenues and number of clients served, increased company growth, and products/services have a faster time to market
When: approx. 4 years after project end (outside of EU project scope)
|
After
1) Improve Attitude and Perceived Ability towards and Knowledge of innovation projects
Measured by: KAP surveys – baseline and follow up
When: Baseline measured prior to randomisation/ intervention distribution, follow up measured closely after the intervention
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
We are conducting a randomized, double-blind two-arm trial. Our sample participants are SMEs who are funded in the funding program Impact Innovation at the Austrian Research Agency over the next 2 years. In line with the funding decisions in Impact Innovation, our sample will be selected in 14 rounds over 2 years ("trickle sampling"). The number of applicants and funded projects per batch cannot be determined in advance as applications are accepted on a rolling basis. Random allocation of the newly funded projects will take place following each funding decision, and will take place on the firm level. The allocation ratio will be 1:1 – half control, half treatment. The method of allocation will be simple block randomisation - as it ensures a higher likelihood of even trial arms in the context of our sampling - however, the program has been written and the actual allocation will be done by external researchers to ensure no bias enters the randomisation.
All participants are not made aware of the experiment (however, all firms will be made aware that the program is undergoing improvements led by a team of people unrelated to the outcomes of their projects and that there will be a survey or 2 in order to boost participation in these surveys) and the project evaluators, who produce one of our outcome variables, will not know which group their projects are in or not.
The treatment and all related communication will be delivered in form of emails and phone calls from the 2 main PIs (who have no relation to Impact Innovation) with periodic reminders for inactive users. In order to not interfere with the funding program itself, use of both platforms is not mandatory but advised and encouraged.
|
After
We are conducting a randomized, two-arm trial. Our sample are firms who are either considering starting innovation activities or already in the preparation phase of innovation projects, specifically for Impact Innovation.
Two interventions will be tested. The first intervention is an expert led and peer-learning workshop in which experts from Impact Innovation provide input on essential aspects of the innovation process and experienced peers (previously funded Impact Innovation projects) share examples of how this might look in a project. The second intervention is a short guide highlighting important aspects of the innovation process and information on additional support resources, reflecting the content taught in the workshop. In addition, these firms will receive a voucher to an online expert platform, where they can link up with experts in a topic of their choice to assist them in development and implementation of a non-technical innovation project.
Random allocation takes place on the firm level. The allocation ratio will be 1:1 – half treatment 1, half treatment 2. The method of allocation is block randomisation with stratification on previous experience with Impact Innovation. In this context, previous experience with Impact Innovation is defined as having already received funding through Impact Innovation at least once. The rationale is that firms already funded by Impact Innovation have superior knowledge concerning innovation projects compared to firms with no prior experience with Impact Innovation. The program has been written and the actual allocation is done by external researchers to ensure no bias enters the randomisation.
The primary outcomes of the RCT are Knowledge of Innovation Process, Perceived Ability, and Attitude towards Innovation, specifically whether there has been changes since the intervention. As a secondary outcome, we are interested in Innovation Activities, specifically whether there has been an increase in innovation activities since the intervention.
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Clusters
|
Before
minimum of 120 projects/firms
|
After
300 projects/firms
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Observations
|
Before
120 projects/firms
|
After
300 projects/firms
|
|
Field
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
|
Before
min. 60 projects/firms control, min. 60 projects/firms treatment
|
After
150 projects treatment 1, 150 projects treatment 2
|
|
Field
Additional Keyword(s)
|
Before
Innovation, Impact, Impact Innovation
|
After
Innovation, Impact, Impact Innovation, Innovation Policy, Funding Agency, SME, Start Up, non-technical Innovation
|
|
Field
Keyword(s)
|
Before
Firms And Productivity, Other
|
After
Firms And Productivity, Other
|
|
Field
Intervention (Hidden)
|
Before
The intervention is access to innovation managament software and online mentoring software. It will be a double blind study, such that project evaluators will not know if their project(s) received the intervention or not and the projects themselves will not know that they are taking part in an experiment.
The intervention is a combination of online support measures for innovation capacity in addition to the grant funding. Specifically, these support measures will be access to (1) innovation management software platform and (2) online mentoring platform. Access to the support measures are limited to the length of funding (approximately 1 year).
1. The Innovation Management Platform (Babele) is designed to guide organizations through the innovation process – from problem analysis to bringing the product/service to market and iterations therein – while doubling as a project management platform.
2. The Online Mentoring Platform (Clarity.fm) will be a source of expertise and advice for the projects. There is a wide range of experts covering various industries and topics from which the firms can choose an expert at any time during their funding period. The expert pool is international with several located in EU as well as Austria. Each firm will receive a voucher of 1.000, - € to be used at their discretion.
|
After
The interventions are either an expert led and peer-learning workshop or a short guide highlighting important aspects of the innovation
process managament and access to a voucher for an online expert platform. It will be a double blind study, such that project evaluators will not know if their project(s) received the intervention or not and the projects themselves will not know that they are taking part in an experiment.
Two interventions will be tested:
1) The first intervention is an expert led and peer-learning workshop in which experts from Impact Innovation provide input on essential aspects of the innovation process and experienced peers (previously funded Impact Innovation projects) share examples of how this might look in a project.
2) The second intervention is a short guide highlighting important aspects of the innovation process and information on additional support resources, reflecting the content taught in the workshop. In addition, these firms will receive a voucher to an online expert platform, where they can link up with experts in a topic of their choice to assist them in development and implementation of a non-technical innovation project.
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
|
After
2) Participants in Workshop have a higher likelihood to undertake innovation activities, i.e. implement an innovation project, apply to Impact innovation, etc.
Measured by: applications to Impact Innovation and survey to applicants
When: 6 months after Intervention
3) Do support measures for innovation capacity building do have a positive effect on the execution of innovation projects?
Measured by: Evaluation of implementation of innovation methods from project interim report and Impact Innovation applications from external organization
When: up to 1 year after interventions
|
|
Field
Building on Existing Work
|
Before
|
After
No
|