Declan Jordan (p), Justin Doran

A key motivation and explanation for spatial concentration of economic activity is the potential for knowledge spillovers. However, there is only a recent (though growing) interest in how these factors work in peripheral locations. The analysis presented here seeks to shed light on the impact of peripherality on the effectiveness of R&D and cooperation on innovation. This analysis questions whether R&D and cooperation for business innovation in businesses is conditioned by the degree of geographic peripherality. The analysis uses data on innovation outputs and activity from the European Regional Innovation Scorecard and regional-level human capital and demographic data from Eurostat Regional Data. Peripherality is measured by constructing construct an index which takes into account geographic distance and economic weight. A value is created for each region which is the weighted average of the GDP of all surrounding regions with the weighting decreasing as distance increases.

The paper analyses the impact of R&D and cooperation on innovation at a regional level and assesses the impact of being in the core versus the periphery on innovation at a regional level. The econometric model is estimated using a random effects panel estimation technique. Once the model is estimated we obtain the marginal effects of the impact of R&D and cooperation on innovation conditional upon the peripherality index. We then obtain two further impacts, the marginal effects of R&D on innovation conditional upon the centrality index and cooperation, and the marginal effects of cooperation on innovation conditional upon the centrality index and R&D.

The analysis finds that the effectiveness of R&D for innovation diminishes as regions become more peripheral, but remains positive for all regions. The effectiveness of cooperation for innovation diminishes as regions become more peripheral and is negative for approximately 30% of the most peripheral regions. R&D is most effective in central regions, particularly in regions with higher levels of cooperation. R&D is least effective in peripheral regions which also exhibit high levels of cooperation. Cooperation for innovation is most effective in core regions with high levels of R&D and in peripheral regions that exhibit relatively lower levels of R&D. Cooperation for innovation is least effective in peripheral regions that exhibit relatively higher levels of R&D. The analysis suggests that in central regions R&D and cooperation are complements for innovation, while in peripheral regions R&D and cooperation are substitutes.

Konstantina Ragazou (p)

The importance of strategic planning for companies is particularly important as it helps to define their vision, mission and goals. Its implementation's success is inextricably linked to the choice of the most appropriate strategic tool (Ansoff:1965;Mintzberg, 1993:107; Andersen, 2000:185-186).
In the international literature is reported a variety of tools, which are widely used for the proper decision making from the executives in order to deal with strategic corporate strategic issues. Given that the business environment is constantly changing and the existing strategic tools often provide general formula solutions, there is an urgent need to create a new one (Mintzberg,1994).
The tool "The Goals Grid" (Nickols,2011;Nickols2015) is an alternative method of implementing strategic planning. Its versatility, its ability to guide the executives and its graspable structure, can make it the most suitable choice for business to design an integrated strategic plan. It is about a 2x2 grid which is divided into four quadrants. Each of them represents a different thematic target category (Achieve, Preserve, Avoid, Eliminate) and is complemented by executives.
The subject of this research is the systematic presentation of the innovative strategic tool "The Goals Grid", as the existing literature is very limited. The purpose of the presentation is to highlight it or not, as an alternative option to businesses which is may be capable of replacing the classic methods.
In this context, is presented an extended comparative analysis of the tool with the Swot Analysis, which is distinguished by its multi-annual experience in the field of strategic planning, by analyzing the company's external and internal environment. In contrast, although “The Goals Grid” tool has a short track record in both the scientific and business community, it is characterized by simplicity and usability and it is conformed to the new trends of the market which arose especially due to the economic crisis. In particular, the contribution of its specially formed grid guides managers in the right decision making.

Daniel Coronado, Manuel Acosta (p), Esther Ferrandiz, María Dolores León

Much of the empirical research suggests that spillovers from scientific knowledge tend to be geographically concentrated. However, spillovers are far from being automatic; along with geographical proximity, there are other factors that might explain why some firms are capable of capturing scientific knowledge from nearby universities better than others. This paper uses a new dataset on firm-patent citations of university-scientific publications to study the factors affecting the acquisition of public scientific knowledge by firms in Spain. We follow the conventional approach of using patent citations to trace knowledge spillovers, but in contrast to previous studies, we combine firms’ characteristics with the regional environment and distance to explain why some firms benefit from academic knowledge produced in their own regions and others do not. With a regionalized sample of 5,218 patents applied for by 1,717 firms, we have gathered the number of scientific citations in those patents, which have been classified by scientific field, and identified their origin (regional or external). With this information, we address the following research questions: Where does the scientific knowledge acquired by Spanish firms come from? Are there differences in the quality of the absorbed science according to the region from which it comes? Which regions are the main producers and which are the main users of science? Are there differences according to scientific fields? What are the microeconomic factors affecting the absorption of scientific knowledge by firms? The methodology combines the presentation of the main facts through some descriptive tables and statistics, along with a gravity equation to identify the factors affecting the scientific knowledge acquisition by Spanish firms. Our preliminary results show that 38% of scientific knowledge used in patents applied for by Spanish firms stems from the U.S., and only 7% is generated by Spanish universities. The regional analysis of the Spanish origin of science shows great disparity among regions. Before considering the microeconomic and regional factors, the data support the hypothesis of proximity: firms cite more scientific papers from universities in their own region than papers from other regions.