BENCHMARKING & INTERNA- TIONAL COMPARISONS
CHAPTER 6: BENCHMARKING & INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
6.3 Comparison with Community Innovation Survey (CIS) 2010-2012
The national surveys of innovation (NSI) carried out by MASTIC since the mid-1990s have closely followed the methodology adopted by the CIS. It is then possible to compare the extent and nature of innovation in Malaysian �irms with those in EU. This section compares the results from the NSI-7 and the latest available CIS data, obtained from CIS-8 report, published in 2016.
The data in this survey is for the period 2012-2014 whereas the data from CIS-8 covered the period 2010-2012. Although the periods do not match directly, these are the latest available data for direct comparisons of Malaysian innovations to the EU.
Table 6.1 shows the percentage of innovative companies in EU compared to Malaysia. The table also breaks down the innovation to speci�ic types namely product, process, organisational and marketing innovations.
101
Table 6.1 Percentage of Innovative Companies by Types of Innovations
No Countries Innovative enterprises
(%)
Product innovative enterprises (%)
Process innovative enterprises (%)
Organisational innovative enterprises (%)
Marketing innovative enterprises (%)
1 Germany 66.9 35.8 25.5 32.2 34.4
2 Luxembourg 66.1 30.3 32.8 46.8 32.4
3 Ireland 58.7 27.8 25.9 21.8 35.7
4 Italy 56.1 29.1 30.4 33.5 31.0
5 Sweden 55.9 31.5 23.9 25.3 30.4
6 Belgium 55.6 31.5 31.1 29.3 21.9
7 Portugal 54.6 26.0 33.5 32.8 32.8
8 Austria 54.4 26.6 28.7 36.4 29.5
9 France 53.4 24.2 24.1 34.2 25.4
10 Finland 52.6 31.0 29.3 29.7 26.5
11 Greece 52.3 19.5 25.6 30.2 36.8
12 Netherlands 51.4 31.9 25.9 27.3 23.2
13 Malta 51.1 23.9 26.4 34.7 32.6
14 Denmark 51.1 24.8 22.9 32.2 29.4
15 United Kingdom 50.3 24.0 14.1 34.2 16.8
16 Turkey 48.5 17.7 20.4 31.7 34.7
17 Estonia 47.6 20.7 23.8 21.7 21.9
18 Serbia 47.5 24.5 22.0 32.6 32.2
19 Slovenia 46.5 23.6 22.5 26.3 28.5
20 Norway 44.7 19.1 11.9 21.7 23.2
21 Czech Republic 43.9 25.3 24.0 20.5 22.4
22 Cyprus 42.1 20.9 28.2 26.2 29.5
23 Croatia 37.9 16.4 19.0 22.9 23.5
24 Slovakia 34.0 14.4 13.5 18.6 19.3
25 Spain 33.6 10.5 15.1 19.4 13.2
26 Lithuania 32.9 11.6 13.1 17.5 19.3
27 Hungary 32.5 10.6 8.3 16.5 19.7
28 Latvia 30.4 10.4 12.7 16.9 16.5
29 Bulgaria 27.4 10.8 9.3 12.4 14.2
30 Poland 23.0 9.4 11.0 10.4 10.6
31 Malaysia 22.7 22.8 27.9 25.4 23.9
32 Romania 20.7 3.4 4.6 14.1 13.8
Source: Community Innovation Survey, 2016
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014
CHAPTER 6: BENCHMARKING & INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
101
Table 6.1 Percentage of Innovative Companies by Types of Innovations
No Countries Innovative enterprises
(%)
Product innovative enterprises (%)
Process innovative enterprises (%)
Organisational innovative enterprises (%)
Marketing innovative enterprises (%)
1 Germany 66.9 35.8 25.5 32.2 34.4
2 Luxembourg 66.1 30.3 32.8 46.8 32.4
3 Ireland 58.7 27.8 25.9 21.8 35.7
4 Italy 56.1 29.1 30.4 33.5 31.0
5 Sweden 55.9 31.5 23.9 25.3 30.4
6 Belgium 55.6 31.5 31.1 29.3 21.9
7 Portugal 54.6 26.0 33.5 32.8 32.8
8 Austria 54.4 26.6 28.7 36.4 29.5
9 France 53.4 24.2 24.1 34.2 25.4
10 Finland 52.6 31.0 29.3 29.7 26.5
11 Greece 52.3 19.5 25.6 30.2 36.8
12 Netherlands 51.4 31.9 25.9 27.3 23.2
13 Malta 51.1 23.9 26.4 34.7 32.6
14 Denmark 51.1 24.8 22.9 32.2 29.4
15 United Kingdom 50.3 24.0 14.1 34.2 16.8
16 Turkey 48.5 17.7 20.4 31.7 34.7
17 Estonia 47.6 20.7 23.8 21.7 21.9
18 Serbia 47.5 24.5 22.0 32.6 32.2
19 Slovenia 46.5 23.6 22.5 26.3 28.5
20 Norway 44.7 19.1 11.9 21.7 23.2
21 Czech Republic 43.9 25.3 24.0 20.5 22.4
22 Cyprus 42.1 20.9 28.2 26.2 29.5
23 Croatia 37.9 16.4 19.0 22.9 23.5
24 Slovakia 34.0 14.4 13.5 18.6 19.3
25 Spain 33.6 10.5 15.1 19.4 13.2
26 Lithuania 32.9 11.6 13.1 17.5 19.3
27 Hungary 32.5 10.6 8.3 16.5 19.7
28 Latvia 30.4 10.4 12.7 16.9 16.5
29 Bulgaria 27.4 10.8 9.3 12.4 14.2
30 Poland 23.0 9.4 11.0 10.4 10.6
31 Malaysia 22.7 22.8 27.9 25.4 23.9
32 Romania 20.7 3.4 4.6 14.1 13.8
Source: Community Innovation Survey, 2016
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014
CHAPTER 6: BENCHMARKING & INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
102
NATIONAL SURVEY OF INNOVATION 2015
Figure 6.2 shows Malaysia position in innovation in comparison to the EU countries. Malaysia is placed in 31st position for innovation ranking of companies with a score of 22.7%.
Figure 6.2 Percentage of Innovative Companies by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
Figures 6.3 to 6.6 show Malaysia’s position in specific types of innovations compared to the EU countries. In product innovation, Malaysia rank 18th with a score of 22.8%, placed in between Slovenia and Cyprus. In process innovation, Malaysia rank 8th with a score of 27.9%, placed in between Cyprus and Malta. In organisational innovation, Malaysia rank 18th with a score of 25.4%, placed after Cyprus but ahead of Sweden. Finally in marketing innovation, Malaysia ranked 17th with a score of 23.9%, placed before Croatia and after France.
103
Figure 6.3 Percentage of Innovative Companies in Product Innovation by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
Figure 6.4 Percentage of Innovative Companies in Process Innovation by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
CHAPTER 6: BENCHMARKING & INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
103
Figure 6.3 Percentage of Innovative Companies in Product Innovation by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
Figure 6.4 Percentage of Innovative Companies in Process Innovation by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
CHAPTER 6: BENCHMARKING & INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
104
NATIONAL SURVEY OF INNOVATION 2015
Figure 6.5 Percentage of Innovative Companies in Organisational Innovation by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
Figure 6.6 Percentage of Innovative Companies in Marketing Innovation by Countries
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
105
Table 6.2 shows the percentage of innovative companies based on process innovation in EU compared to Malaysia. The table also breaks down the process innovation to specific types.
Overall, Malaysia rank 27th with a score of 12.1% and placed between Latvia and Norway.
Table 6.2 Percentage of Process Innovative Companies by Implementation Types
No Countries Process Innovative enterprises
(%)
Process Innovation New or improved
logistics, delivery or distribution
methods (%)
New or improved methods to manufacture
or produce goods or services (%)
New or improved supporting activities for processes (%)
1 Portugal 33.5 37.2 60.7 72.2
2 Luxembourg 32.8 41.7 59.1 64.9
3 Belgium 31.1 35.2 60.3 53.3
4 Italy 30.4 31.3 61.3 66.8
5 Finland 29.3 33.9 64.0 62.9
6 Austria 28.7 32.5 55.4 72.8
7 Cyprus 28.2 95.7 57.8 84.7
8 Malta 26.4 52.4 57.8 74.8
9 Netherlands 25.9 32.7 62.1 55.4
10 Ireland 25.9 40.5 59.9 70.0
11 Greece 25.6 28.3 59.7 63.3
12 Germany 25.5 44.1 74.9 53.3
13 France 24.1 35.9 72.4 48.0
14 Czech Republic 24.0 39.6 68.0 59.2
15 Sweden 23.9 32.0 57.2 61.2
16 Estonia 23.8 25.4 65.9 48.4
17 Denmark 22.9 37.7 41.9 77.8
18 Slovenia 22.5 34.1 68.2 66.6
19 Serbia 22.0 40.9 49.9 74.8
20 Turkey 20.4 45.3 79.9 58.4
21 Croatia 19.0 40.8 65.3 69.0
22 Spain 15.1 20.3 61.8 56.1
23 United Kingdom 14.1 n/a n/a n/a
24 Slovakia 13.5 38.6 62.9 64.4
25 Lithuania 13.1 25.4 70.1 58.3
26 Latvia 12.7 32.6 71.9 42.3
27 Malaysia 12.1 30.4 33.0 36.7
28 Norway 11.9 25.4 60.8 47.4
29 Poland 11.0 29.2 61.7 54.1
30 Bulgaria 9.3 28.1 61.7 48.7
31 Hungary 8.3 19.6 58.9 55.1
32 Romania 4.6 31.6 69.3 34.9
Source: Community Innovation Survey, 2016
Notes: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
: n/a – data not available
CHAPTER 6: BENCHMARKING & INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
106
NATIONAL SURVEY OF INNOVATION 2015
Figure 6.7 show the methods that are used by the enterprises used to increase the competitiveness of their product offerings in the market. Generally Malaysian companies indicated higher degree of importance in design, copyright, patent and trademark registrations compared to their European counterparts. But the European enterprises indicated higher importance to gaining competitive advantage through offering higher complexity in their products or processes. On employing trade secret to gain competitive advantage, Malaysian and European enterprises showed equal preference.
Figure 6.7 Methods for Maintaining or Increasing Competitiveness in Product and/or Process Innovative Companies by Degree of Importance
Source: Community Innovation Survey, 2016
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.
Figure 6.8 shows the sources of innovation that were used by respondents. These were organised such that for any source of innovation given (9 Sources), the companies would indicate if the source is important or otherwise to their innovation efforts. The figure shows that for sources from within the enterprise or enterprise groups (Source 2), Scientific journals and trade and technical publications (Source 5) and commercial labs and institutes(Source 6) the European countries and Malaysia rated them equally important. As for all other sources, Malaysian companies find them more important compared to the European countries. This is especially so with sources from universities and higher education institutes and government, public or private research institutes (Sources 8 and 9).
107
Figure 6.8 Sources of information used for product and / or process innovations by degree of importance
Source: Community Innovation Survey, 2016
Note: EU’s data is from 2010-2012, Malaysia’s data is from 2012-2014.